Religion is a hypothesis.

OPTIONAL777 · Dec 10, 2009

So natural process is a designer?

Begs the question of who designed the designer...

LOL!

Quote from stu:

Surely science has already proven that. The purpose is to reproduce by design of natural process.

CaptainObvious · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from vhehn:

and yet every possible test that the human mind can devise to test for the supernatural fails.
science ultimately proves that many things our emotions tells us are not true.

True enough, science proves many things are false, but science has the limitations of being interpeted by humans, which do have their failings. Science is only as good as the guy/gal testing the data. The conclusion is we certainly don't have enough evidence to talk in absolutes about much of anything in regard to the Universe and it's inner workings.

Ricter · Dec 10, 2009

Science proves that science is true using definitions and procedures provided by... wait for it... science!

This is not to say science isn't useful.

Gabfly1 · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from CaptainObvious:

...science has the limitations of being interpeted by humans, which do have their failings. Science is only as good as the guy/gal testing the data...

Can't the same thing be said about faith? That religious beliefs are only as valid as the flawed humans who arbitrarily choose to believe them? However, unlike science, such arbitrary beliefs don't even meet the limited cognitive tests available to us flawed humans. Therefore such arbitrary beliefs are lower on the ordinal scale of human comprehension of validity, however limited such human comprehension may be. Stated differently, blind faith is the dim-witted alternative to reason.

Free Thinker · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from CaptainObvious:

True enough, science proves many things are false, but science has the limitations of being interpeted by humans, which do have their failings. Science is only as good as the guy/gal testing the data. The conclusion is we certainly don't have enough evidence to talk in absolutes about much of anything in regard to the Universe and it's inner workings.

The scientific method is merely a formal methodology (or technqiue) concerning how to apply reason.

Free Thinker · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from Ricter:

Science proves that science is true using definitions and procedures provided by... wait for it... science!

This is not to say science isn't useful.

The scientific method works something like this:

1. Collect data by observation and/or experimentation.
2. Form a hypothesis about that.
3. Test it.
4. Predict.
5. See if your prediction pans out.

Ricter · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from vhehn:

The scientific method works something like this:

1. Collect data by observation and/or experimentation.
2. Form a hypothesis about that.
3. Test it.
4. Predict.
5. See if your prediction pans out.

Which came first, the observation or the hypothesis? ; )

Seriously, I love science.

CaptainObvious · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from Gabfly1:

Can't the same thing be said about faith? That religious beliefs are only as valid as the flawed humans who arbitrarily choose to believe them? However, unlike science, such arbitrary beliefs don't even meet the limited cognitive tests available to us flawed humans. Therefore such arbitrary beliefs are lower on the ordinal scale of human comprehension of validity, however limited such human comprehension may be. Stated differently, blind faith is the dim-witted alternative to reason.

Absolutely! I only argue that our current methods of testing things in regard to the Universe and any possibility of a Creator has it's limitations. One could conclude we've yet to develop the proper method(s) to test for such things.
After nearly 100 pages in this thread I've seen nothing that make me change my opinion expressed in my first post...pot, meet kettle. Many people with many ideas, but for one group to call the others ideas absurd is well, absurd, all things considered.

Free Thinker · Dec 10, 2009

Quote from Ricter:

Which came first, the observation or the hypothesis? ; )

Seriously, I love science.

if you love science why are you so illinformed about science? you seem not to understand anything about the scientific method.

OPTIONAL777 · Dec 10, 2009

So essentially you are saying your personal faith is superior to the personal faith of another person?

Quote from Gabfly1:

Can't the same thing be said about faith? That religious beliefs are only as valid as the flawed humans who arbitrarily choose to believe them? However, unlike science, such arbitrary beliefs don't even meet the limited cognitive tests available to us flawed humans. Therefore such arbitrary beliefs are lower on the ordinal scale of human comprehension of validity, however limited such human comprehension may be. Stated differently, blind faith is the dim-witted alternative to reason.