[digerati]

Originally Posted by OmegaRED

Did you not find it even coincidental that Christianity takes so many things from previous religions and rolled it all into one? Virgin birth, messiah, afterlife, resurrection, etc it's all been done before Christianity or Judaism existed. The fact that one religion became more popular does not make it any more factual than the hundreds that died out before it. You should know this if you've studied enough ancient cultures.

Unlike religion, which is based on archaic scriptures which never evolve, scientific knowledge is an ongoing process.

Scientific method refers to the body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation, experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

There are hundreds of thousands of drugs and medical advances which have resulted because of the scientific method. How many diseases has God eradicated? None, zip, zilch, nada...zero.

Fear of death will make people turn to anything that can save them, whether it's a scam artist selling miracle cures or the church. It won't matter whether you turn to Allah, Yahweh, God, Zeus or Thor the result will always be the same. You will get from it what you want. This may be comforting to people but it does not make it real.

Which God? Your God? My God? If there's one real God and all the rest are fake than why doesn't He come forward and reveal himself to all of humanity in ways that are undeniable? So far the best all the Gods have been able to do is some old writings. Wow...mighty impressive for the creator of the Universe

There is so much that has been previously credited to God that we now know has a scientific explanation, this puts egg in the faces of Church leaders constantly and it will always be this way.

We do not get our morals from God (thankfully!), there is tons of information on how we evolved our social skills. Go find it yourself with Google.

If God is the explanation for things of which there is no evidence whatsoever then how can I argue with this? Humanity isn't extinct...God did it! We don't rape and murder everyone...God did it! This is simply just lazy and unimaginative thinking.

Christianity does borrow a lot from all sorts of religions, but the whole virgin birth idea comes from Judaism, spoken from the prophet Isaiah, and the Jews weren't really hip to incorporating stuff from other Gods into their religion. Actually I think they put people to death for that kind of stuff o.O

Modern Christianity still hasn't accepted its own roots, they worship on the wrong scriptural day, Christmas is a joke, as well as Easter, yadda yadda. But cultures in general are like that.

Religion is based on scripture as well as experiences, personal experiences.

We all know how science works, but as I said, science requires more faith, because it always changing, it's much harder to trust your friend who keeps changing his opinions, beliefs, and habits as opposed to the one that stays constant and true.

The whole fear of death thing? Hm, I don't really fear death. Christians put the most emphasis on the afterlife, Jews not so much, we don't even have hell in our scripture, so we're not exactly afraid of burning for all eternity.

Out of curiosity, which religious scriptures or books have you actually read? I'm not talking commentaries about scripture, but the actual scriptures themselves.

And evolving social skills doesn't explain anything about a base set of morals. Why do 2 completely different cultures in different parts of the world act similarly? When one is white and the other is black. If their lives are so different that they evolved into different colors, why would their morals be similar?

And why doesn't God come forward? Simple. Because he doesn't have to, he doesn't owe us anything, we owe him. Would you rather give your son the tools to find out what's right and wrong for himself, or would you step forward at every step and go VOILA! BEHOLD I AM THE GREAT OMEGA RED AND YOU ARE WRONG! Meh.

And he clearly showed himself to the Jews of old, otherwise, how to you explain them? Their struggle through thousands of years of persecution, in belief of a God who only seems to put them trials, it makes absolutely no sense. Yet they went without a country for 2,000 years and remained a people, name me any other culture that's done that.

[Sandok]

Originally Posted by digerati

We all know how science works, but as I said, science requires more faith, because it always changing, it's much harder to trust your friend who keeps changing his opinions, beliefs, and habits as opposed to the one that stays constant and true.

And evolving social skills doesn't explain anything about a base set of morals. Why do 2 completely different cultures in different parts of the world act similarly? When one is white and the other is black. If their lives are so different that they evolved into different colors, why would their morals be similar?

I won't answer the rest since it's aimed at Omega but here are the answers to these two comments.

Firstly, science requires 0 faith. If you are using faith to believe in science, then you don't know science at all. Anything that exists in science, once proven to be a LAW (gravity for example), it will never change and that's a fact that can be PROVEN by books, calculations, etc.

Things that do change are the THEORIES that, by definition, are not laws and thus, aren't sure to be right (though a scientific theory is not understood the same way as a "theory" in everyday english. Basically, a theory is the most PROBABLE scenario out of many).

Anyways, can you give me an example of something in science, a major law or theory that has recently changed?

As for the moral thingy, did you know that over 50% of your personality is decided during the genetic makeup? I mean, before you are even born, 50% of who YOU are is already done so your parents just had the other 50% to work on? Interesting no, something as complex as personality is decided by numbers and shapes and sizes (DNA and proteins and such).

Same goes with morals, they are printed IN our genetic makeup. A few years ago, in some Asian country (Cambodia or something), a young teen was found in the woods where she had been living ever since she had been abandoned by her parents... She didn't speak any human language, didn't understand and hadn't seen a human in her life (or religion) but she didn't act animal like around other people. In fact, she was quite "humane" so even a person without ANY interraction with people for over 13-14 years had the basic morales (don't kill others, not the crap like don't eat pigs or don't masturbate or whatnot).

My point is, you missunderstand just how much we actually do know about the world around us.

[digerati]

Originally Posted by Sandok

I won't answer the rest since it's aimed at Omega but here are the answers to these two comments.

Firstly, science requires 0 faith. If you are using faith to believe in science, then you don't know science at all. Anything that exists in science, once proven to be a LAW (gravity for example), it will never change and that's a fact that can be PROVEN by books, calculations, etc.

Things that do change are the THEORIES that, by definition, are not laws and thus, aren't sure to be right (though a scientific theory is not understood the same way as a "theory" in everyday english. Basically, a theory is the most PROBABLE scenario out of many).

Anyways, can you give me an example of something in science, a major law or theory that has recently changed?

As for the moral thingy, did you know that over 50% of your personality is decided during the genetic makeup? I mean, before you are even born, 50% of who YOU are is already done so your parents just had the other 50% to work on? Interesting no, something as complex as personality is decided by numbers and shapes and sizes (DNA and proteins and such).

Same goes with morals, they are printed IN our genetic makeup. A few years ago, in some Asian country (Cambodia or something), a young teen was found in the woods where she had been living ever since she had been abandoned by her parents... She didn't speak any human language, didn't understand and hadn't seen a human in her life (or religion) but she didn't act animal like around other people. In fact, she was quite "humane" so even a person without ANY interraction with people for over 13-14 years had the basic morales (don't kill others, not the crap like don't eat pigs or don't masturbate or whatnot).

My point is, you missunderstand just how much we actually do know about the world around us.

That was my point, that morals are genetic, and that seems a little out there for me to go with it being ingrained in us due to social interactions.

You want a law that has recently been changed or replaced? Well it depends on your scope of recent, let's go with Newton's LAW of Universal Gravitation that was found to not be accurate for predicting the orbit of Mercury, it is flawed, therefore not a fact, and has been superseded by Einstein's THEORY of Relativity. But Newton's Law is still kept around because the calculations are easier if indeed flawed. So there's that.

I'm just saying I think it's pretty interesting that science changes constantly, yet no one thinks there's any faith behind it. Personally I have to give a lot of my faith when it comes time to switching asthma medications. If the medication doesn't work, then I don't breathe, so I might not survive the switch. My best friend (former member of DH) is putting a lot of faith in his new doctors. If they don't treat him correctly, he will be losing his colon in the near future. And at 22 years old, he's got a long time to live without a butthole >.<

[Sandok]

Originally Posted by digerati

That was my point, that morals are genetic, and that seems a little out there for me to go with it being ingrained in us due to social interactions.

You want a law that has recently been changed or replaced? Well it depends on your scope of recent, let's go with Newton's LAW of Universal Gravitation that was found to not be accurate for predicting the orbit of Mercury, it is flawed, therefore not a fact, and has been superseded by Einstein's THEORY of Relativity. But Newton's Law is still kept around because the calculations are easier if indeed flawed. So there's that.

I'm just saying I think it's pretty interesting that science changes constantly, yet no one thinks there's any faith behind it. Personally I have to give a lot of my faith when it comes time to switching asthma medications. If the medication doesn't work, then I don't breathe, so I might not survive the switch. My best friend (former member of DH) is putting a lot of faith in his new doctors. If they don't treat him correctly, he will be losing his colon in the near future. And at 22 years old, he's got a long time to live without a butthole >.<

Genetic doesn't mean God. It means evolution but then again, you probably don't believe in evolution (and that's another topic).

As for Newton's gravity, it's not wrong at all. If it where wrong, nuclear phsyics, our understanding of time in space and MUCH more wouldn't function and well.... they do. Newton did his experiments on Earth and didn't take into account the differences that occure in space, which Einstein did. Combined, the results are perfect (we think) though these RESULTS might change.

The LAWS or THEORIES in both cases, didn't. Text books weren't rewritten.

As for faith in science, you're putting faith in the PEOPLE who made the medicine. Not the medicine itself because you can't really see the chemical or organic reactions that help your asthma. You're hoping the PEOPLE behind it, who engineered the product made something that worked.

Same way that you don't DOUBT gravity every morning, or DOUBT that the sun is a nuclear fission reactor making heat. You accept them because they are right and these are scientific properties. Doctors and such are BASED of science but they are applying it how they want, not the same.

If you mix those two notions, then yes what you say is true... but wrong

[digerati]

Originally Posted by Sandok

Genetic doesn't mean God. It means evolution but then again, you probably don't believe in evolution (and that's another topic).

As for Newton's gravity, it's not wrong at all. If it where wrong, nuclear phsyics, our understanding of time in space and MUCH more wouldn't function and well.... they do. Newton did his experiments on Earth and didn't take into account the differences that occure in space, which Einstein did. Combined, the results are perfect (we think) though these RESULTS might change.

The LAWS or THEORIES in both cases, didn't. Text books weren't rewritten.

As for faith in science, you're putting faith in the PEOPLE who made the medicine. Not the medicine itself because you can't really see the chemical or organic reactions that help your asthma. You're hoping the PEOPLE behind it, who engineered the product made something that worked.

Same way that you don't DOUBT gravity every morning, or DOUBT that the sun is a nuclear fission reactor making heat. You accept them because they are right and these are scientific properties. Doctors and such are BASED of science but they are applying it how they want, not the same.

If you mix those two notions, then yes what you say is true... but wrong

If you were to look at my old posts, you'd find that I do believe in evolution. You can't deny evolution exists when we see it in rapid succession in diseases and viruses, we have proof of it working. That doesn't mean I think we happened exactly the same way. I'll come back and post later, I kinda gotta jam.

[Esaz666]

It is a problem, scripture.It is mainly out of date and has different meanings
to us than it did to someone, say 1000 to 2000 years ago, because language changes its meanings. Again just because scripture may or may not be relevant to our current life, it does not mean that there is no spiritual force within the universe.

We as people should trust our own experiences over all other things, written or communicated.If you cannot trust yourself , you fall into the trap of misinformation and leave yourself open to be fooled, try it for a while, keep the tv off, stop reading the bad news in the papers, experience nature, stop and be yourself, not what your told you are.

We are continually bombarded by information, nearly all of it meaningless.
There are things you can discover about the nature of life, if you give yourself time, there is potential for growth, what you can discover through your own efforts is authentic, not borrowed from elsewhere.

[Sandok]

Originally Posted by digerati

If you were to look at my old posts, you'd find that I do believe in evolution. You can't deny evolution exists when we see it in rapid succession in diseases and viruses, we have proof of it working. That doesn't mean I think we happened exactly the same way. I'll come back and post later, I kinda gotta jam.

That's like saying you believe that food feeds animals but not us? Or something along those lines...

If evolution works for bacteria (a virus is not technically a living organism if ever), it works for us all...

[OmegaRED]

This may me lol

[Sandok]

I love circular debates

[Mousey]

The bible is god's word written by man. Effectively meaning it's the author's word.

[digerati]

Originally Posted by Sandok

That's like saying you believe that food feeds animals but not us? Or something along those lines...

If evolution works for bacteria (a virus is not technically a living organism if ever), it works for us all...

No it's not, that's like saying if penicillin works for me, it should work for her, but it doesn't always work that way.

[digerati]

Originally Posted by OmegaRED

This may me lol

Yeah I hate those people. haha

[Sandok]

Originally Posted by digerati

No it's not, that's like saying if penicillin works for me, it should work for her, but it doesn't always work that way.

That's wrong, it always works... Chemically and biologically, the effects are happening but how the symptoms are healed is different.

You fail to understand this notion somehow... Okay, best example I have. You're saying something along these lines: "Gravity works in the US but not in Europe".

It's wrong

[OmegaRED]

Damn, another church shooting already!

Police: Man shot churchgoers over liberal views

That's why I don't go to Church, it's just too dangerous.

[Snow Eater]

Originally Posted by Sandok

That's wrong, it always works... Chemically and biologically, the effects are happening but how the symptoms are healed is different.

You fail to understand this notion somehow... Okay, best example I have. You're saying something along these lines: "Gravity works in the US but not in Europe".

It's wrong

Your example is bad.
What you're saying is that since gravity works everywhere, that must mean it explains everything.
By the logic you are presenting, gravity will explain all forces and movement.
That is simply not true as other forces will explain many movements that gravity is essentially a non-factor in even though gravity is always working.

[Mousey]

Originally Posted by Snow Eater

Your example is bad.
What you're saying is that since gravity works everywhere, that must mean it explains everything.
By the logic you are presenting, gravity will explain all forces and movement.
That is simply not true as other forces will explain many movements that gravity is essentially a non-factor in even though gravity is always working.

BUUUUT This is turning from a religion debate to a physics debate so back on track? Let's discuss the bible for instance. I find it quite entertaining to grill christians that stop me when i'm out doing parkour about the bible.
If you refer to my earlier post, i state;

The bible is god's word written by man. Effectively meaning it's the author's word.

And as i'm sure we're aware, the author would have been a human, a homo sapien, one of us. One of us that makes mistakes and is susceptible to greed. It's not like god decided to write it and give one to adam in the garden of eden.

To be perfectly honest i don't have a problem with religions other than christianity, the reason i have beefs with christianity is because there are very apparent holes they refuse to acknowledge and i often have their beliefs thrown in my face and have them all but drag me to the church. That's never happened with another religion, at least Jahova's Witnesses ask if i want to hear about their religion! (And the women they send are hawt. lol)
I do in fact know a girl that's a Jahova's Witness from school, she's a very pleasent and lovely girl. Christian girls i know on the other hand are often bitchy and unpleasent. But perhaps that's just puberty.

[Sandok]

Originally Posted by Snow Eater

Your example is bad.
What you're saying is that since gravity works everywhere, that must mean it explains everything.
By the logic you are presenting, gravity will explain all forces and movement.
That is simply not true as other forces will explain many movements that gravity is essentially a non-factor in even though gravity is always working.

No that's now what I'm saying. What I'm saying is, gravity is a Law that is always working, correct? I never said it explains all mouvement or something along those lines. I just said it works wherever you are on our planet (and more).

Do you float off into space when you visit Austrailia or India? No, you stick to the Earth and that is all down to gravity. It's a LAW that's applied to everyone and while it doesn't explain why cars move (and I never said it did or any other mouvement), it explains why you stick to this Earth even though it's roatating at several thousand kilomters per hour no?

[Snow Eater]

Originally Posted by Mousey

BUUUUT This is turning from a religion debate to a physics debate so back on track? Let's discuss the bible for instance. I find it quite entertaining to grill christians that stop me when i'm out doing parkour about the bible.
If you refer to my earlier post, i state;
And as i'm sure we're aware, the author would have been a human, a homo sapien, one of us. One of us that makes mistakes and is susceptible to greed. It's not like god decided to write it and give one to adam in the garden of eden.

To be perfectly honest i don't have a problem with religions other than christianity, the reason i have beefs with christianity is because there are very apparent holes they refuse to acknowledge and i often have their beliefs thrown in my face and have them all but drag me to the church. That's never happened with another religion, at least Jahova's Witnesses ask if i want to hear about their religion! (And the women they send are hawt. lol)
I do in fact know a girl that's a Jahova's Witness from school, she's a very pleasent and lovely girl. Christian girls i know on the other hand are often bitchy and unpleasent. But perhaps that's just puberty.

I'm unsure why you're directing this to me.
Is there something you'd like me to respond to here?

[Snow Eater]

Originally Posted by Sandok

No that's now what I'm saying. What I'm saying is, gravity is a Law that is always working, correct?

Sure.

Originally Posted by Sandok

I never said it explains all mouvement or something along those lines. I just said it works wherever you are on our planet (and more).

Gravity is a force, forces explain movement.
You are drawing an analogy between evolution "always working" and gravity "always working".

I'm pointing out that even though gravity is "always working" there are some things that can be described by gravity, but other things that gravity is not enough to explain.

If we then move back to the evolution question, you should be able to see the point that even though evolution may be able to explain some things, the fact that evolution happens is no reason to assume without questioning that it must therefore explain everything.

[Sandok]

Originally Posted by Snow Eater

Gravity is a force, forces explain movement.
You are drawing an analogy between evolution "always working" and gravity "always working".

I'm pointing out that even though gravity is "always working" there are some things that can be described by gravity, but other things that gravity is not enough to explain.

If we then move back to the evolution question, you should be able to see the point that even though evolution may be able to explain some things, the fact that evolution happens is no reason to assume without questioning that it must therefore explain everything.

Well tell me, what CAN'T be explained by gravity? I'm curious to know what mouvement we do (and that is not down to muscle mouvement, or anything about physical properties of objects) is not explainable? Because that would be something new...

Evolution sits in the same bag of science as The origins of the Planet / Moon / Dinosaurs / etc. Hell it has the same dilemma as the Pangea theory. If people can't see it (and all these questions and theories can only be TRUELY ANSWERED for the spectical and non specilist in the domain by going back in time... which we can't), then they can only stay a theory and never be verified!

How do we knnow the Grand Canyon was carved out by a river... We didn't see the process happen so how can it be true? Sure, we say erosion of miniscule amounts happen in ONE lifetime but maybe thats not true over ten thousand lifetimes (just replace Grand Canyon with Evolution).

[Snow Eater]

Originally Posted by Sandok

Well tell me, what CAN'T be explained by gravity? I'm curious to know what mouvement we do (and that is not down to muscle mouvement, or anything about physical properties of objects) is not explainable? Because that would be something new...

I'm not referring to anything new or unexplainable.
We are currently aware of 4 fundamental forces. Gravity is only one of them.
There are strong, electromagnetic and weak also.

Even though gravity "always works", much of what we observe in the universe can't be explained by gravity alone, even though our knowledge of these other forces was non-existant in the past.

So, to take us back to the where I pointed out the flaw in your logic, simply asking when evolution does NOT work is no proof that evolution actually explains everything. Clearly we MUST be missing something because Evolution can only explain speciation and can't offer an explanation of the actual origin of life.