⚠️ This forum has been restored as a read-only archive so the knowledge shared by the community over many years remains available. New registrations and posting are disabled.

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 715 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 48  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 18:05 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
Science does not have irrefutable answers. Any true and honest scientist is quick to acknowledge when the hyposthesis proves poorly founded. Unfortunately there are many who don't. Science, like anything else in this world, needs discernment - not just wholesale acceptance due to cultural conditioning. A true seeker will discover the truth. Most will not challenge culturally accepted ideas.

Quote:
New or Old?
Some examples of abnormal C14 results include testing of recently harvested, live mollusc shells from the Hawaiian coast that showed that they had died 2000 years ago and snail shells just killed in Nevada, USA, dated in at 27,000 years old. A freshly killed seal at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, yielded a death age of 1300 years ago.

A petrified miner’s hat and wooden fence posts were unearthed from an abandoned 19th century gold hunter’s town in Australia’s outback. Results from radiocarbon dating said that they were 6000 years old.

More Evidence Needed
These anomalies have driven archaeologists to question their earlier conclusions about archaeological sites and their respective civilizations founded on artefact dating. Many theories about societies and their cultures have been based solely on C14 dating results. The honest archaeologist can no longer propose theories and ideas without bringing a wider plate of evidences to the history table.
http://www.archaeologyexpert.co.uk/RadioCarbonDating.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
    Advertisement
 
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 18:34 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mar 12th, '06, 07:56
Posts: 17803
Images: 4
Location: Perth
Gender: Male
Blog: View Blog (1)
Ahhh, now if you want to quote Albert Einstein, there are some very interesting thoughts that I can relate to..

Quote:
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)


Quote:
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press)


Quote:
Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.
(Albert Einstein, 1936, The Human Side. Responding to a child who wrote and asked if scientists pray.)


Quote:
A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
(Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science", New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930)


Quote:
I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature. (Albert Einstein, The World as I See It)


Quote:
I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.
(Albert Einstein, responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein who had sent Einstein a cablegram bluntly demanding "Do you believe in God?" Quoted from Victor J. Stenger, Has Science Found God? 2001, chapter 3.)


Quote:
One strength of the Communist system ... is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion.
(Albert Einstein, Out Of My Later Years, 1950)


Quote:
The foundation of morality should not be made dependent on myth nor tied to any authority lest doubt about the myth or about the legitimacy of the authority imperil the foundation of sound judgment and action. (Albert Einstein)

I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it. (Albert Einstein, The Human Side)

I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being. (Albert Einstein)

What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of "humility." This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism. (Albert Einstein)

The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning. (Albert Einstein)


Strange that we both find such differing quotes... :)


Top
 Profile Personal album  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 21:35 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
earthbound wrote:
Ahhh, now if you want to quote Albert Einstein, there are some very interesting thoughts that I can relate to..
Good! Then we are in agreement that there is a God. :D This was always the basis of his scientific foundation.
Quote:
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind. EINSTEIN

The quotes that interest you ............
Quote:
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)
Perfect description of a one world religion to unite all people under a one world government. Get rid of differing dogma and establish unity "on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual" It is coming too!

BTW... did Einstein say he was a Buddhist? :D

Quote:
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press)
He is speaking of Intelligent Design. He had a deep awe for how intricately things worked together. He did not believe in God exactly as I do. Never said he did. The topic under discussion was science and religion .... are they mutually exclusive? Loved his honest approach to life. Definitely not a merely a product of his culture. Fascinating man.

Quote:
Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.
(Albert Einstein, 1936, The Human Side. Responding to a child who wrote and asked if scientists pray.)
He believed in God but not a God who was personally involved. The noted Orthodox Jewish leader in New York, Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein, sent a very direct telegram: "Do you believe in God? Stop. Answer paid. 50 words." Einstein used only about half his allotted number of words. It became the most famous version of an answer he gave often: "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."
He did not believe in the free will of man and so saw no point in prayer. God was in his heaven as far as he was concerned....... and what was designed to happen would happen.... he thought. But that impersonal God sure created some amazing things! :D And Einstein was constantly in awe of it.

Quote:
A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
(Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science", New York Times Magazine, 9 November 1930)
LOL. And man is indeed in a poor way when he needs such restraint. The law of the Old Testamant is like muzzling a dog that will not stop biting. But change the heart of the dog and no muzzle is needed. This is what God did in Jesus Christ in the New Testament.

You must note that his perspective here is about personal living. Not really relevant to the discussion.... The discussion? Are science and religion mutually exclusive? Again the quote...."The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."Einstein.
Ideas about the inherent nature of man have also advanced since 1930. Do you wonder what his observations on the holocaust were? Remember the holocaust only started in 1933........ three years after your quote EB.
http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/sound/voice2.wav This is what he was recorded saying....
Quote:
"As long as Nazi violence was unleashed only, or mainly, against the Jews, the rest of the world looked on passively and even treaties and agreements were made with the patently criminal government of the Third Reich.... The doors of Palestine were closed to Jewish immigrants, and no country could be found that would admit those forsaken people. They were left to perish like their brothers and sisters in the occupied countries. We shall never forget the heroic efforts of the small countries, of the Scandinavian, the Dutch, the Swiss nations, and of individuals in the occupied part of Europe who did all in their power to protect Jewish lives."
It is recorded that Einstein failed to reconcile the evil he saw and lived-the evil of the Jewish Holocaust-with his strongly held views of a completely determined universe.
Being a Jew and a well-known Zionist he personally encountered much anti-Semitism and when the horrors of the Holocaust were revealed, these became a great challenge to his philosophy. Here is Einstein writing to a Jewish Holocaust survivor: “When one sees how the rest of mankind treats us in view of this, one is filled with pervading disgust. I wonder if Spinoza would have found strength to rise above it without inner damage. It is good that he was spared this brutal test.” (4) The problem is simple, “Are the Nazis morally responsible?” His observations said, “Yes” (evil is real), but his theory denied it, (Nazis – not guilty). For Einstein there was no simple answer. Education and social ties do not seem to be have been enough to effect the sympathy he speaks of in 1930. People sold out others to protect their own skin.... even in families. It says in the Bible that even family members will turn on each other in the end times.

Quote:
I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts. I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend a portion, be it ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature. (Albert Einstein, The World as I See It)

Personal beliefs. What a surprise he must have had when he met his Maker! I wonder if he saw Spinoza.

Quote:
I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.
(Albert Einstein, responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein who had sent Einstein a cablegram bluntly demanding "Do you believe in God?" Quoted from Victor J. Stenger, Has Science Found God? 2001, chapter 3.)

Yes... as commented above. He did not believe in the free will of man and so saw no point in prayer. He can give me no satisfactory account to my own answers to prayer with such a perspective. Just a man finding his way.... but a very creative and intelligent scientist. Again I must point out.........Relevance of his ideas to the discussion were not his personal spiritual struggles but that one of the finest scientific minds could not divorce science and the Spirit world .........as was being suggested.

Quote:
One strength of the Communist system ... is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion.
(Albert Einstein, Out Of My Later Years, 1950)

How is that as a solution to this crazy world we have? Take away the free will of the people. (Remember Einstein does not believe in the free will of man) Take away their worldly goods to "share" it with "everyone". (The basic tenet of communism.) Tell them what to believe in........... You have it! :D A one world religion. He was more prophetic than he knew perhaps.

Quote:
The foundation of morality should not be made dependent on myth nor tied to any authority lest doubt about the myth or about the legitimacy of the authority imperil the foundation of sound judgment and action. (Albert Einstein)

Your point here EB? You saying he said God is a myth? Can't be. For he spoke of God. You saying that he is saying that everything in the Scriptures is a myth? No context given so your point is unclear.

Quote:
I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it. (Albert Einstein, The Human Side)
Personal beliefs again. Believed in an impersonal God and no immortality.

I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being. (Albert Einstein)

Jesus Himself said.... except you be as a little child you will not see the Kingdom of God.
A wise man to recognise our weakness in intellectual understanding. One day we will understand many things much better. In the meantime what God reveals is awesome! :D

Quote:
What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of "humility." This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism. (Albert Einstein)

He acknowledged his God. The same God as Spinoza. Impersonal.

Quote:
The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning. (Albert Einstein)

Relevance? Theosophy and Spiritualism have nothing to do with Christianity. Very different religions. I agree with him.....the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning. This quote just thrown in ...?

Quote:
Strange that we both find such differing quotes... :)

Strange that you think them differing EB......... :D
Same man... consistant message. Your point? I think you have showed as well that Einstein believed that science and religion are not mutually exclusive.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 22:22 
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: May 27th, '06, 04:57
Posts: 6480
Images: 0
Gender: Male
Are you human?: I'm a pleasure droid
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Quote:
True science is founded on the understanding that there is a Creator.


Um, no.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 22:31 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
Um, yes :D I will go with Einstein on that one DD.

The wonders of debate. A world of differing views. And beyond the views .... the people. Agreeable disagreement the true test.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 22:49 
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: May 27th, '06, 04:57
Posts: 6480
Images: 0
Gender: Male
Are you human?: I'm a pleasure droid
Location: Frederick, Maryland
That is nonsense, it is saying that true science is founded on the understanding that there are supernatural actors outside of nature. That is a degraded concept of what science is; science only talks about nature and does not allow supernatural cop-outs.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 23:03 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
As already debated at length.......

My findings are exactly opposite to yours DD. So one of us is indeed speaking nonsense.

Is OK. Free world....... for now. :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 21st, '09, 23:44 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Sep 4th, '07, 04:16
Posts: 2475
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Are you human?: YES
Location: Texas 75703
Quote:
So we should ignore all science because it "knowledge based on the corrupt human mind"


So we should ignore all spiritual matters because it "knowledge based on the corrupt human mind"?

Either is incomplete.

My point is science is faith as much as personally held spiritual beliefs. Theories based on evidence.

Theres so much dogma in both that the truth is often not found in either. Light does and some light does travel faster than the speed of light(300 times faster). Using Tesla's longitudinal waves, electromagnetic energy can be measured to to travel much faster than the speed of light. Does science change their text books to fit discovered reality? No! If science were only truth science they would always improve and update their 'theories'. The spiral chemical element chart is far superior to our standard chart and the one used to predict all elements even those we are just not finding. Darwin science takes the cake though(not only improbable from observation, but what probability considers 'impossible'). Go find a single transitional skeleton(or beneficial mutation); it does not exist in the fossil record. Im not talking about finding pig tooth and hundreds of feet away finding a deformed head and making up a wild story about proof that man once had teeth like "this" and lived like "that"; sounds like something a religious nut would do. There is also the fossil oil and coal theories, most all oil is vegetation derived and there are huge 200+ foot trees perfectly preserved in layers of coal (this did not happen over a long time).
Les, Ramsgate, UK wrote:
Do you know that the theory of evolution is 'in crisis'?
I would go so far as to say that it is dead and we are observing the frantic nervous twitching of the corpse :- )
Of course the essential problem is that dumping evolution leaves no alternative except 'God', and that is unacceptable.


I find the big bang theory such a laugh too. Its a theory, one that can not be proven or dis proven so it can not really be called a fact in this life time. No one has ever observed such a thing. What we observe in space now takes so long to unfold no man will live long enough to observe a complete stealer cycle so it will remain unproven for so many generations it does not warrant discussion at this time. Yet its spoken of as fact in schools. A fact that is something that can be proven or disproven.

Quote:
Whats the point in doing anything then? May as well just give up and wait till some all mighty creator comes to tell me how to acquire accurate knowledge.


That is a wild assumption. The first mans job was naming/cataloging creature and plants and his method for identifying animals is still used to this day, skin and bone. Theres no need to sit around when its our nature to discover. It is the glory of God to hide things but the glory of kings to investigate them. I can not understand why everyone thinks faith must exclude fact and intelligence or that one some how can not work with the other. You are who you are so do what drives you. Wait around.. Thats maniacial.

I love science. I would prefer to pursue an understanding of how things work without an preconceived notion as to how or why. Pure science should not exclude a thing just because it its unknown nor can it bend truth to suit a theory neither should it accept scripture without testing it; of course if science of the 1700's tried to prove that there was great heat in a split atom it would have been unable to do so.

BTW the bible is loaded with scientific understanding; things like shape and course of the earth, first law of thermodynamics, The Hydrologic Cycle, The value of Pi, Ocean Currents, Gravitational Properties of Constellations, Vast number of stars in the Universe, the "fire" stored in atoms(atomic), and at least a 100 more.

Bottom line, It seems to me both religion and science act hypocritical to their claims; as do most people for that matter.

"Truth is sought for its own sake. And those who are engaged upon the quest for anything for its own sake are not interested in other things. Finding the truth is difficult, and the road to it is rough."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 22nd, '09, 00:00 
Quote:
Modern science is founded upon a rejection of divine revelation and exultation of knowledge based on the corrupt human mind.

Rubbish... modern scence is the result of a constantly evolving process and accumulation of knowledge over many centuries...

Encompassing astrology, physics, mathmatics etc etc....

It very rarely concerns itself with matters of "theology"... unless prompted to do so by outlandish claims... or political interference by "religion"...

Come on Cyara.... even the Egyptians practised science in theform of astrology, mathematics, statistics, language etc.... well before the "jews" arrived... and way, way, way before the creation of "chritianity"....

And so did the Aztecs, Mayans, Chinese etc....

We "europens" are newcomers to the scene....

Quote:
Man has been living about 6,000 years cut off from the only source of true knowledge, the Creator God. Since man chooses to rely on his own understanding, he is bound by the limits of his carnal mind. Mankind as a whole will continue, for a little while longer, to swim in the stagnant pool of ignorance produced without God’s guiding influence. But this state of ignorance is temporary.


Rubbish.... who's "God".... the many civilisations that have flourished and died... and/or survived on earth over the millenia have it fact been closer to their "gods" than modern European peoples have every been.... remember the "inquisition... the dark ages...

Quote:
The Bible teaches us that Adam and Eve chose to make decisions for themselves when they took from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3). This means they and their offspring would create a pool of knowledge based on their own thinking and reasoning without the input of God. Since that time, that is exactly what mankind has done.


Made in the image of "god"... the all knowing, all perfect, all forgiving....

What he didn't know what he was doing... or he didn't make us in his "image"....

And the story of Adam & Eve... and all the incestuous "begatting" that supposedly started the human race... and murders, theft, coveting etc that went on...

Isn't exactly a solid recommendation that God's experiment was really planned out very well...

Quote:
In the near future, God will intervene in events on this Earth. He will cause people to realize that, without God, all human thinking is faulty. God will show the world that He is the Creator of everything and only His way of thinking and living will lead to understanding and truth. Then, for the first time in 6,000 years, all mankind will begin to acquire accurate knowledge


Who's "god" Cyara... people for well over 6000 years have all worship god or gods within their culture....

What makes your "God" the "right" God... or a "better" God than any of the others... and who said so....

A bloke wandering around the desrts of the Middle East, proclaiming himself to be the "King of Jews"... inciting sedition and rebellion among the populous... opposing the establishment and rule of law...

These days ... we'd call him a "terrorist"... place his movement on the "banned" nasties list... and proclaim him to be part of the axis of evil....

Quote:
True science is founded on the understanding that there is a Creator. There are those I admire who do not discount the Creator in their scientific searching. More trustworthy results.


No it is NOT... who says it is.... and are the results more "trustworthy" because you're prepared to believe them....

Your previous post denounced exactly that proposition ... and manipuilation of data...

Quote:
Science does not have irrefutable answers. Any true and honest scientist is quick to acknowledge when the hyposthesis proves poorly founded. Unfortunately there are many who don't. Science, like anything else in this world, needs discernment - not just wholesale acceptance due to cultural conditioning. A true seeker will discover the truth. Most will not challenge culturally accepted ideas.


Absolutely.... but a true seeker must also apply this same discernment to the knowledge that comes their way... in order to find "the" truth... not to accept "a truth"...

Especially one that requires a "faith" believe that a certain starting point must be accepted as an absolute... and therefore all else is proved by circular argument...

Quote:
"I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."
He did not believe in the free will of man and so saw no point in prayer. God was in his heaven as far as he was concerned....... and what was designed to happen would happen.... he thought.


No Cyara... that's not what he said...he in fact TOTALLY accepts mankinds freewill... as he does NOT believe in a God "who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."

And as such... the is no point in prayer... because God's not listening... he doesn't care...

And he never in that quote pronounces any "fatalism" ... that what will be, will be... because God designed it to happen...

He expressly says the opposite... that God isn't interested in the affairs of man..

Quote:
A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.


AMEN......

Quote:
Relevance of his ideas to the discussion were not his personal spiritual struggles but that one of the finest scientific minds could not divorce science and the Spirit world .........as was being suggested.


How much clearer could he state his position... and how can you interpret it in any other way... :dontknow:


And you continually come back to a narrow definition of "God" Cyara... one that is based squarely within a white caucasian framework....

And IMO... one that has perpurtrated some of the greatest evils in the last 2000 years...

The hand of "god" in western religion... has never been too far from the treasury,the bank, the military, the throne or corridors of power...

How can you ignore the last 2000 years of history... and the "churchs" involvement... and the hippocray of it's actions against peoples within not only it's own nations but against others...

The ignorance, the arrogance, the colonalisim, the racism, the paternalism, the greed, the politics....

All for the name of "your" God Cyara....

Frankly... I can find a lot of other "gods" and religions throughout hitory that are a darn sight more appealing, moral and ethical in their behavior...

And let us NEVER forget that Christianity and Islam have a common root and beginning... and common lore.... and places of worship.... look to Jureselum for many examples.... there's even a major "temple" divided down the middle with Christian prayers said on one side (or at least Hebrew prayers)... and Muslim prayers said on the other side of the wall.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 22nd, '09, 00:11 
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: May 27th, '06, 04:57
Posts: 6480
Images: 0
Gender: Male
Are you human?: I'm a pleasure droid
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Wow DDM you're going off a cliff there.

Just for one, there are many examples of transitional fossils, new ones found every year, the first hit on Google can give you many references:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html


As far as scientific theories being equivalent to faith, there is the matter that theories can be tested. The Big Bang theory predicts certain things that can be measured and observed - if physical observations don't match then the theory can be discarded for a better one. We can witness the bang through its effects on the universe, through the afterglow radiation.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 22nd, '09, 06:53 
Xtreme Contributor
Xtreme Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Aug 6th, '08, 05:14
Posts: 106
Location: Cantonment, FL
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Partially
Location: USA, Florida, Cantonment
So... if the fosilized remains of one creature, look almost like the fosilized remains of another, thats a transitional species? Wouldn't we really need DNA to see whats related to what? So IMHO the THEORY that there should be transitional speicies is great, the proof however is unobtainable. With or without religious beliefs attached.

As I understand it, true science is based upon suposition and testing, and one failed test disproves the theory. Obviously one can, and should readjust his theory and test again, but when it comes to the things of which we are speaking, evolution and such- there is no quantifiable test in which the answer changes the theory into truth. The theory, to date, still rests FIRMLY upon suposition. One might pile enough facts upon it however, its still must by scientific principles, remain a theory.

I for one do not argue the theory of evolution, I just don't accept it as fact simply based on the lack of quantifiable proof. I find it extremely interesting, after watching a few dinasaur shows that we now KNOW what a dinasaur looks like, skin tone, feather, fur, how it raised its young, how it hunted... all from bones...amazing! Now thats truely science!! :roll:

Perhaps in the future they will indeed extract COMPLETE strands of DNA from a piece of amber and quantifiably come up with some answers but for now the fact that a Neanderthal man has a larger suborbital ridge just means he was the great Nth grandfather of this girl I knew in high school with the same large forehead.

Do Bushmen, Tuseday, Aboriginal Aussies, Argentinian Indians, and American Indians all look the same? Do they all have the same lifestyle? Do they all have the same culture? Do they all have the same capacity for intelligence and learning? So why do people who look different have to be a different species. If you can do this with people- create seperate species based on cranium size- couldn't we theorise that the bones of a Chuhuahua and a Great Dane are seperate species, and that a German Shepherd is a transitional species?

Hey, I'm just saying. :geek:

I know, I know, I'm just anignorant extra chromozone religious nut who ignores the obvious. Oh well... I can live with that! :D

Tony


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 22nd, '09, 18:24 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 20th, '08, 12:07
Posts: 1409
Location: Baton Rouge Louisiana. USA
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Take me to ya leader
Location: USA, Louisiana, Baton Rouge, Gonzales.
Since the subject is this deep now in personal views of religion here's mine. Science doesn't and shouldn't need any thing to do with religion, it is all based on matter, life and energy. Religion doesn't and shouldn't need anything to do with science, it is based on faith in God. I can only reconcile the two by using the 2nd story of the creation of man in the book of Genisis. where god molded man from the dirt and blew life into his nostrils. Just exactly how would God explain the primordial soup to an early shepard prophet 6000 years ago where he could understand it. A million years is like a day to God. I believe God created the big Bang, and sowed the seeds of life. Science can explain how it grew from there. In the garden of eden man ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. When man figures out thru science how to create life where there is no life, then we will have eaten from the tree of life. Cloneing is a small step but it started with living material. Experimenting with amino acids and protiens may one day soon actually do it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 22nd, '09, 18:53 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mar 12th, '06, 07:56
Posts: 17803
Images: 4
Location: Perth
Gender: Male
Blog: View Blog (1)
Everything is based on personal perspective. The objective of science is to observe and acquire knowledge about the physical world through experimentation and observation. Of course this can lead to problems when even the action of observation alone can cause changes in what is being observed.

The position that you observe from also changes what you see. I posted quotes earlier that from my point of observation meant one thing, yet Cyara comes up with totally different observations based on her conditioning/state of mind/view point, etc..

Links provided earlier in this thread led to a website where they claim that the universe revolves around the earth and the earth stands still, and they gave all these reasons why they believed it to be true, some of them "religious", some of them "scientific". At first I thought, How crazy, what a bunch of loonies, how can you try and claim such a thing as true? On further reflection I realized that to an observer on earth, it is true. Everything does revolve around the reference point of earth. That is if you consider Earth to be the reference point to base your observations from.

However, in relation to the rest of the universe and the constant movement and expansion of all things which has been measured, we know we are not the central point of which all other things rotate around. But you can only know this by being able to have more than one refence point, by being able to measure other things.

To me, science is about trying to forget what you already think you know, to get past the preconceived notions and ideals that you alreasdy have. The Einstein quotes I posted above were in no order or for any purpose, other than pure interest. You can search for meaning behind why I might have posted particular quotes and deduce reasons why. You can even assume what I think and mean by it, but it will only ever be an assumption, observations from a different reference point, and not necessarily true.


Top
 Profile Personal album  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 23rd, '09, 03:32 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
Whew Rupe! :shock: Chill...........
The man more than the message came through loud and clear.

I'll take it we don't agree.......... :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jan 23rd, '09, 03:54 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Jul 1st, '08, 11:03
Posts: 3690
Gender: None specified
Location: Australia NSW
I like my science without religion. I am religious but in science we are looking for answers and a lot of the time more questions. You don't want ideas or questions left unanswered and placed in the God did it barrel. I'm more interested in how he did it. I think organized religion has had enough time trying to stop people thinking outside of the box. It also does not help when we as animals are hard wired for religion, or at least to look to the leader of the group. I always wondered how people could think there was a space ship behind a comet. And that white sneakers and black cloths could help in getting them there. But if you put us in a room for long enough with ZZ top playing we would all be growing our hair long and singing a different tune.

Any discussion on religion always brings out our fight or flight reaction to the group leader being threatened. Or as I like to think of it as being in a room filled with people trying to tell you how to masturbate using a hand full of razor blades. What ever way you go it not going to work out well. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 715 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 48  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Portal by phpBB3 Portal © phpBB Türkiye
[ Time : 0.153s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]