God and Science

Quote from vhehn:

that is funny if it were not so sad. the lengths supposedly educated men will go to pass of their superstitions as science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SblyuFUM9Q

"It appears to me (whether rightly or wrongly) that direct arguments against
christianity and theism produce hardly any effect on the public; and freedom of
thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men's minds which
follows from the advance of science." [Darwin]
More...

What a bullshit reply.

Why not address my statement.

The big bang - is is consistent with Aquinas' view of Creation or not.

At one point in history Catholics were scorned for believing something could be God and Man at once. (ask the gnostics and arians).

Now we learn light has a dual nature...
true or false?
 
Quote from vhehn:

there is progress. when i started debating religion years ago i spent most of my time showing believers the evidence that proved that the bible stories of a global flood and a talking snake and people raising from the dead and virgin birth were nothing but myths. i got a lot of resistance from people who insisted that everything in the bible was fact.
fast forward to today. i dont really run across that many inerrant bible believers anymore. that position has been rendered intellectually indefensable by science. now we have the god is before time first cause cause crowd digging in their heels because they have as believers retreated to the point where there is no where else left to put their god. there are not many gaps left in our knowledge. while it may not seem like it at times i do believe education is winning out over the forces of superstition.
More...

Vhehn, there are very few times that I disagree with you and certainly not about the myth of God and the related cult figures,

However, there are MANY gaps left in our knowledge. We are still infants in terms of 'knowledge'.
 
Quote from jem:

You must have been arguing with born agains. I remember them approaching me and insisting Jesus had brothers because it said brothers in an english translation. I was wondering once someone says tranlation how they can be so sure about the translation it could be perfect - but that has never really been answered to my satisfaction.

I do not think you could argue for inerrancy until you found the core original inspired language.

But vhehn you just read that Aquinas (one of the big two in Catholic theology) argued first cause 800 years ago. I have made that arguement here with you for years. Its not new.
More...

Jem, I'm curious: are you a Deist? The reason I ask is that some theists -- not accusing you of being one -- like to make the First Cause argument for God, which is pretty much where Deism begins and ends, but they also disingenuously pretend that First Cause provides "evidence" as well for the Grand Meddler of the traditional monotheisms.

First Cause has plausibility; everything we see on earth has a beginning. All people come from mothers, all chickens come from eggs, all plants come from seeds. It was not illogical to suppose the earth had a beginning and later to suppose the entire universe had a beginning when it was discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe.

But the First Cause of (most) theisms -- God -- is not the same as the (apparent) First Cause of science -- the Big Bang. Science does not assume the Big Bang had Intelligence and Purpose, which theisms confer on God, whether or not He (and how was masculinity established?) is also the Grand Meddler of post-creation theism.

Furthermore, as stu pointed out, God the Creator still gets slashed by Occam's Razor:
  • <s>GOD CREATED</s> THE UNIVERSE
    <s>GOD</s> JUST EXISTS
 
Quote from RangeBar:

Vhehn, there are very few times that I disagree with you and certainly not about the myth of God and the related cult figures,

However, there are MANY gaps left in our knowledge. We are still infants in terms of 'knowledge'.
More...
I'm not speaking for vhehn here but many physicists believe physics is close to completion. If a unifying theory (the Theory of Everything) can be found that combines both quantum mechanics and general relativity, then we will know basically everything about the universe except "details". Very important details to be sure remain to be discovered but knowing the fundamental basics of the physical world would be awesome.
 
If the universe just exists, then why has so much time and money been wasted on the big bang theory?

It actually takes more energy to think there is a causeless universe than to think there is a cause of the universe, simply because everything we are able to actually see has a cause...

Quote from kut2k2:

Jem, I'm curious: are you a Deist? The reason I ask is that some theists -- not accusing you of being one -- like to make the First Cause argument for God, which is pretty much where Deism begins and ends, but they also disingenuously pretend that First Cause provides "evidence" as well for the Grand Meddler of the traditional monotheisms.

First Cause has plausibility; everything we see on earth has a beginning. All people come from mothers, all chickens come from eggs, all plants come from seeds. It was not illogical to suppose the earth had a beginning and later to suppose the entire universe had a beginning when it was discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe.

But the First Cause of (most) theisms -- God -- is not the same as the (apparent) First Cause of science -- the Big Bang. Science does not assume the Big Bang had Intelligence and Purpose, which theisms confer on God, whether or not He (and how was masculinity established?) is also the Grand Meddler of post-creation theism.

Furthermore, as stu pointed out, God the Creator still gets slashed by Occam's Razor:
  • <s>GOD CREATED</s> THE UNIVERSE
    <s>GOD</s> JUST EXISTS
More...
 
The history of science is scientists thinking they have it all figured out and that they are close to completion...

They were all wrong of course...

...uhhhhhhh, but this time it is different?

LOL!!!


Quote from kut2k2:

I'm not speaking for vhehn here but many physicists believe physics is close to completion. If a unifying theory (the Theory of Everything) can be found that combines both quantum mechanics and general relativity, then we will know basically everything about the universe except "details". Very important details to be sure remain to be discovered but knowing the fundamental basics of the physical world would be awesome.
More...
 
Quote from kut2k2:

Jem, I'm curious: are you a Deist? The reason I ask is that some theists -- not accusing you of being one -- like to make the First Cause argument for God, which is pretty much where Deism begins and ends, but they also disingenuously pretend that First Cause provides "evidence" as well for the Grand Meddler of the traditional monotheisms.

First Cause has plausibility; everything we see on earth has a beginning. All people come from mothers, all chickens come from eggs, all plants come from seeds. It was not illogical to suppose the earth had a beginning and later to suppose the entire universe had a beginning when it was discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe.

But the First Cause of (most) theisms -- God -- is not the same as the (apparent) First Cause of science -- the Big Bang. Science does not assume the Big Bang had Intelligence and Purpose, which theisms confer on God, whether or not He (and how was masculinity established?) is also the Grand Meddler of post-creation theism.

Furthermore, as stu pointed out, God the Creator still gets slashed by Occam's Razor:
  • <s>GOD CREATED</s> THE UNIVERSE
    <s>GOD</s> JUST EXISTS
More...

Except the odds are about 10 to a few trillions powers against it . That indicates that Occam's Razor would disqualify it against the more plausible explanation of this Universe being intentionally put into process.
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

The history of science is scientists thinking they have it all figured out and that they are close to completion...

They were all wrong of course...

...uhhhhhhh, but this time it is different?

LOL!!!
More...
The history of science is full of fallible human beings. That is why science is not dependent on any one person or any particular group of persons. Amateur astronomers can make discoveries right along with professional astronomers.

Science is a consensus, not a dictatorship.

And what you utterly fail to realize is that science is a work in progress. It is never "finished", although certain areas may become considered finished for all practical purposes.

A scientific theory starts out as a working theory and some are still in that basic state. String theory is such a theory. Just as Hollywood has working titles for movies in production that may not be the final title of the movie release, your hang-up on "the Big Bang theory" is not a problem for science, it is merely a problem for you.
 
Scientific consensus has a history of being wrong when scientific consensus is that they have it all figured out...

Or scientists have a history of being wrong when they think they have it all figured out...

...but this time is different?

"...awesome, totally awesome...alright Hamilton!"

Quote from kut2k2:

The history of science is full of fallible human beings. That is why science is not dependent on any one person or any particular group of persons. Amateur astronomers can make discoveries right along with professional astronomers.

Science is a consensus, not a dictatorship.

And what you utterly fail to realize is that science is a work in progress. It is never "finished", although certain areas may become considered finished for all practical purposes.

A scientific theory starts out as a working theory and some are still in that basic state. String theory is such a theory. Just as Hollywood has working titles for movies in production that may not be the final title of the movie release, your hang-up on "the Big Bang theory" is not a problem for science, it is merely a problem for you.
More...
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Scientific consensus has a history of being wrong when scientific consensus is that they have it all figured out...
More...
When has that ever been the case? Be specific.

Your strawmen are very fragile. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top