Science vs Religion

[scorpio86]

Indeed!

When i posted it was creationism's link with christianity that causes it to conflict with evolution it was with the thought that evolution is linked with the Big Bang Theory whilst creationism is linked with god just creating everything. The cause of the Universe and the cause of life on Earth as most certainly linked.

I have much more faith in Science and evolution than Religion and creationism.

[Twyla]

To me, it's like the blind men and the elephant. Religion feels the leg and declares that it's a tree, while science feels the trunk and declares that it's a snake. Both are entirely reasonable conclusions for the available evidence, but the reality is much more than either has the capacity to determine.

[Palem]

To me, it's like the blind men and the elephant. Religion feels the leg and declares that it's a tree, while science feels the trunk and declares that it's a snake. Both are entirely reasonable conclusions for the available evidence, but the reality is much more than either has the capacity to determine.

Bad metaphor for science. A snake of that size would most likely not be hanging down in such a way that it would feel like that (the way an Elephants trunk hangs down). Also the texture is different. I'm not a biologist, but the muscle structure is also prolly different. Any scientist that says the trunk is a snake is being a poor scientist and not applying proper reasoning...

[scorpio86]

I am spiritual, i beleive there is more to life than science can currently explain but i have much more faith in my book Cosmos (by Carl Sagan) than the Bible.

'The blind man and the elephant' sounds like a dirty joke.

[flutterby]

I agree with you, there is more out there than science can currently explain but I don't trust either science or religion enough to care for one over the other.

[scorpio86]

Why don't you trust science?

[flutterby]

Because I believe they push the boundary where they think that they're gods. They control so many lives. Doctors and pharmaceutical companies charge outrageous fees.
People even in third world countries can't afford life saving medications that are cheap in other countries. Then you add cloning to the mix and it's just to turn into science trying
to control lives again. Progress for the sake of progress eventually ends in greed. Which is no different from the church.

[Twyla]

One of my favorite quotes from Civ V, by Eugene McCarthy - "The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is the bureaucracy."

[Scavenger]

Think about how knowledge was transfered from generation to generation in the days before writing and you'll find out the Bible or Koran are very logical results.
It was transferred by songs and story telling. A song or story needs a theme to be remembered and to blend different areas of knowledge together. Guess what a certain generation used as a theme to blend the strories? Considder that and you'll also understand that with the interactions between tribes/civilisations it's logical that there are many similarities between the main religions. Science in that light may just as well be the continuation of the work they've layed down in the religious books. In that perspective it's also very acceptable to use those books for researce material or even venture point as it is the source of all accumulated knowledge upto the point of writing for a big region.

[scorpio86]

How does progress for the sake of progress relate to the church? The don't do anything except qoute a several millenia old book and ask people for donations.

Alot of scientists are working to help third world countries and those less fortunate. But yes a lot of them are tring to do things that might perhaps be better left alone. Regarding this thread i mean science as in teaching kids how the earth and universe operate, rather than just saying to them 'a magical man lives in the sky and controls everything, do as he says or your screwed'.

I totally disagree scavenger. Science contradicts pretty much the vast majority of things in the bible - re; virgin lady giving birth to baby with magical powers, said magical baby dying for people's sins although they are yet to be born etc. Regarding creationism the bible absolutely conflicts with scientific beleifs and regarding accumulated knowledge of humanity they really did leave a lot of stuff out. Just look at how the Bible and Koran differ in their beleifs, certainly then at least one must be wrong and in my opinion both of them are.

Whoever the generation/people were that wrote the bible i utterly beleive they bull@#$@ted their way through it, but that's just my two cents.

[Scavenger]

'virgin lady giving birth to baby with magical powers, said magical baby dying for people's sins although they are yet to be born'

= repetative big bang theory? You tell me.

[scorpio86]

Your last seven words do not make any sense at all.

[Scavenger]

To you maybe not, but what if you read the bible again and replace God wants with the laws of the universe dictate?
Suddenly it can make a whole lot of sense. I think those ancients were on to something and seem very advanced theoraticians.
Is god humanity's kick off to a unified theory?

Ow wait, or maybe the other way around. Forgot my vice versa post.

[scorpio86]

Yes the bible is written that way (that way being in that 'god' was/is responsible for everything, has a plan for your life etc...) in an attempt to say that god was responsible for the Universe and everything in it. Simply because it says it in a book does not make it true. I am spiritual but i do not beleive the stories of the bible. I prefer logic.

I really don't know what your trying to say.

[Scavenger]

That you and me may have a different interpretation of science and religion and that there is no way to tell who's right ever and that placing religion vs science is useless unless you define them both without any room for interpretation.