Science vs Faith

[GedB]

and I add:
I'm f****** disappointed of the moderators of this forum.
It is not ok to tolerate such insultment as was done in this thread against religious people.
shame on you!

If anything should be moderated, then it is offensive language.

[Konne]

I think it's pretty dumb to argue about subjects like that because we can't really know how everything is. Event Physics and Math uses axiomes.
Therefore everyone here could be right. I think we need to respect the feeling and beliefes of other people, as long as they don't try to hurt others etc.

But what really pisses me of are people who think they are sooo important and sooo interlligent they are the only one knowing the truth.

What I beliefe in is that it doesn't really matter what we think or what we do.
It's just shifting of energie. Who cares if someone destroys the world or kills a person? Nobody.

The only problem is that I can't live this oinion so I guess I'm disloyal to my opinion. But who cares

PS I don't think they should close this Topic. If you don't want to you doin't have to read or write here.

[Derek]

These last few replies kind of sum it up, everyone has a right to their opinion and no-one has the right to put anyone down because of that opinion, but as I said in a previous post, no-one should try to push their opinion on others.

If you want to learn to drive, you go to a driving school, you don't expect them to just call on you.

If you want to learn about religion, go to a church.

I don't want people coming upto me and trying to persuade me one way or the other.

[Kaeru Gaman]

and I add:
I'm f****** disappointed of the moderators of this forum.
It is not ok to tolerate such insultment as was done in this thread against religious people.
shame on you!

If anything should be moderated, then it is offensive language.

oh yes?
and the insulting statements from before should be tolerated in silence?

I can only repeat:
I have no reason to tolerate your behavior.
if you behave like an asshole, it's just legitim to tell you that.

it seems you have a twisted scale:
some offensive language is much more harmless
than insulting and ignorant behaviour as shown here.

the way the fanatic atheists acted is much more offensive than a simple "asshole" or "fucking".

(btw: I didn't call anyone "asshole", I said they behave like assholes, that is a fine but strong difference)

I shall translate this passage into its actual meaning:

"OH NO! Someone is actually putting my beliefs under scrutiny - I can't have that! I better just say he's ignorant and then insult him. Yes. That will work. Haza!"

rediculous.
the way you and others act is indeed ignorant. and you insulted other people.

it's one thing to state your opinion.
it's something totally different to say, who has a different opinion is dumb.
reduced to the simple facts: that is what you did.
and you making fun of that instead of feeling the least pity.

[Killswitch]

I don't feel any pity, nope, and I am making fun. I quite like it really. Grow up.

[Kale]

Again, some people are still under the impression that religion is exempt from insult or questions. Understand that religion doesn't deserve respect by default, even if religious people are deluded into thinking it does.

Remember, the burden of proof is upon you to prove that a super-being exist, don't expect us to swallow it whole with absolutely no proof whatsoever.

It's like Dawkins said, 'everybody is an atheist to one god or another, its just i just go one god further'.

BTW: I live in a free country where i can disagree with people's beliefs regarding religion. Just deal with it.

[GedB]

The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.

When evening came, they went out of the city.

In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"

"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."

If there is a God who cares about your religion, then won't he hold your faith under scrutiny? Won't he judge it by the fruit it produces?

Then shouldn't you hold your faith under scrutiny too? Shouldn't you ask "what fruit does my religion produce?"

[Kaeru Gaman]

Grow up.

If you sometimes reach far enough to understand there is a duality between determinism and free decision even in quantum physics, then you can speak further.
until I tell you: grow up yourself.

... some people are still under the impression that religion is exempt from insult or questions. Understand that religion doesn't deserve respect by default...

...the burden of proof is upon you to prove that a super-being exist...

... I live in a free country where i can disagree with people's beliefs regarding religion. Just deal with it.

1) not any belief deserves respect (also not the belief in science), but the people.
if you have no respect, deal with not being respected.

2) if you want to call people who believe dumb, the burden is on you to prove them wrong.
until that, just be polite and respect their opinion and person.

3) living in a free country doesn't include having the freedom of insulting others.

If there is a God who cares about your religion, then won't he hold your faith under scrutiny? Won't he judge it by the fruit it produces?

Then shouldn't you hold your faith under scrutiny too? Shouldn't you ask "what fruit does my religion produce?"

exactly.
and please take into account that faith and belief are not necessarily produced by church and religion.
the last is an institution, the first is your personal relationship to the universe that surrounds you.


Since a lot of that things you take for granted are not really scientificly proven,
even if some "scientists" claim so, I call your believe in science a belief.

as there is no chemical evidence for outer-species mutation or other points, evolution still remains a theory, it's not a fact;
physical determinism was said to be proven wrong, until they discovered that information can be exchanged faster than light;
and there is no other "evidence" for an expanding universe than the redshift and the fitting into the theories,
wich means, it's still a theory that the universe expands, but the perceptions can also be caused by other factors.
you ask religious people to question their point of view?
well, start at yourself.

[Killswitch]

If you sometimes reach far enough to understand there is a duality between determinism and free decision even in quantum physics, then you can speak further.
until I tell you: grow up yourself.

You keep saying this - what the hell are you on about? Subatomic particles can't and don't have free will! I think you're talking about the uncertainy principle but even that doesn't represent a duality between determinism and free will.

as there is no chemical evidence for outer-species mutation or other points, evolution still remains a theory, it's not a fact;
physical determinism was said to be proven wrong, until they discovered that information can be exchanged faster than light;
and there is no other "evidence" for an expanding universe than the redshift and the fitting into the theories,
wich means, it's still a theory that the universe expands, but the perceptions can also be caused by other factors.

You've just admitted that there is evidence for an expanding universe - and there's more than you describe. Also, there is a lot of evidence for evolution. Just look at these wikipedia articles (no, wikipedia isn't always factually accurate, but its a good enough starting point):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space

Since a lot of that things you take for granted are not really scientificly proven,
even if some "scientists" claim so, I call your believe in science a belief.

Firstly I'd like you to qualify what I take for granted that hasn't been scientifically proven. Secondly I'd like to point out that it is science which actually makes an attempt to explain, describe and rationalise the universe. Yes, theories can be wrong - but that's because they're theories and we don't know everything. No one is arguing that. The point is that science can be fallable and is always attempting to reach perfection. You can't dismiss all science as belief, at least some of it has to be correct - we're arguing over the INTERNET for christs sake! Religious belief, however, is immutable and supposidly infallable - or so it claims - without any hard evidence or reasoning.

[Kaeru Gaman]

You've just admitted that there is evidence for an expanding universe - and there's more than you describe.

redshift is no evidence, just a circumstantial evidence (in german we call it "Indizien", means "just a hint") - it can also be caused by spacetime itself.

Also, there is a lot of evidence for evolution.

sorry, there are not. to repeat dogmata won't change it.
- no evidence for outer-species mutation. just the point they assume what works within species should also work above.
- no fossil remains of individuals between species, all clearly seperated.
- unsolved problems in the concept; e.g. the shell of eggs. eggs with shell need a chemical mechanism to get rid of toxic products.
no egg could survive with a shell without that mechanism, but without a shell there is no need to develop that mechanism.

that does not mean I consider evolution to be false, I just consider it a theory, not a fact.

and I don't doub't science in whole.
I just dislike faith into science like some people show who criticise beliefe in not yet scientific proven things.

it's ok if you believe in scientific theories, but do not judge about people who beliefe in philosophic theories.

not only science has changed.
most people today who beliefe in God or something are far more critical against themselves then those were in medieval times.

[Kale]

You've just admitted that there is evidence for an expanding universe - and there's more than you describe.

redshift is no evidence, just a circumstantial evidence (in german we call it "Indizien", means "just a hint") - it can also be caused by spacetime itself.

Also, there is a lot of evidence for evolution.

sorry, there are not. to repeat dogmata won't change it.
- no evidence for outer-species mutation. just the point they assume what works within species should also work above.
- no fossil remains of individuals between species, all clearly seperated.
- unsolved problems in the concept; e.g. the shell of eggs. eggs with shell need a chemical mechanism to get rid of toxic products.
no egg could survive with a shell without that mechanism, but without a shell there is no need to develop that mechanism.

that does not mean I consider evolution to be false, I just consider it a theory, not a fact.

and I don't doub't science in whole.
I just dislike faith into science like some people show who criticise beliefe in not yet scientific proven things.

it's ok if you believe in scientific theories, but do not judge about people who beliefe in philosophic theories.

not only science has changed.
most people today who beliefe in God or something are far more critical against themselves then those were in medieval times.

m8, you need to read more. Honestly everything you've just wrote is completey wrong about evolution, you obviously have no idea about how it works. If you want to understand more please read Dawin's The Origin Of The Species and Richard Dawkins' complete back catalogue, especially The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion.

[ricardo]

Again, some people are still under the impression that religion is exempt from insult or questions. Understand that religion doesn't deserve respect by default

You are wrong.

Religion, sexuallity definition, political ideas or preferences, etc. are ALL exempt from insult.

As long as their are legal, you have to deal with the idea that you have to respect it.

[Kaeru Gaman]

m8, you need to read more. Honestly everything you've just wrote is completey wrong about evolution, you obviously have no idea about how it works. If you want to understand more please read Dawin's The Origin Of The Species and Richard Dawkins' complete back catalogue, especially The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion.

LOOOOL
you are coming with a book by Darwin himself?
GO HOME!

I understood that all well, and I take my right to doubt.
perhaps I just read to much to share your unemencipated point of view.

and additionally: this is still no excuse to insult religious people.
just even more since you continue showing yourself as believing in unproved matter.

[ricardo]

and Richard Dawkins' complete back catalogue, especially The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion.

I read the selfish gene, very interesting but are speculations just, no facts.

Im not in the battle about evolution vs creationism, im not defending creationism or whatever. (Im not in the creationism 'side' of the discussion).

Just want to point that Dawkins are an excellent science divulgator and his books are much interesting, but at the end of the road, are only speculations. Very interesting and nice ones, but speculations.

However, having here in this forum some debate about evolution vs creationism are strange in my point of view, because its not the point of this forum and i guess it cant be discussed by this way, like a flamme war.

[Rings]

i vote for the nipple-god and the party-religion.