Help for the Atheists?

[Tenka]

And I think a scientific accepted “Almighty” is better for the civilization, than a science with the goal of Death (“life is going to end no matter what&#8221.

Why? what do religious beliefs have to do with science? How does inserting god into science do anything but hinder it's ability to investigate?

 

[tansy]

Why? what do religious beliefs have to do with science? How does inserting god into science do anything but hinder it's ability to investigate?

How does inserting God into science hinder it's ability to investigate?

 

[Tenka]

How does inserting God into science hinder it's ability to investigate?

'god' is an untestable, unpredictable supernatural source, everything can be attributed to it and nothing can be learned from it. Investigation hits a brick wall.

 

[tansy]

'god' is an untestable, unpredictable supernatural source, everything can be attributed to it and nothing can be learned from it. Investigation hits a brick wall.

I still don't really see how that hinders scientific investigation. Many Christians have been and are scientists. In fact, though I'm not a scientist, I find it even more fascinating since being a Christian.

Even if one believes in God one can still go into all the nitty gritty fof the material world.

People have even been investigating the brains of people who have religious experienences and so forth, to see if there's anything different about them.

A Christian should not allow scientific investigation to be hindered.

 

[Tenka]

Many Christians have been and are scientists. In fact, though I'm not a scientist, I find it even more fascinating since being a Christian.

Even if one believes in God one can still go into all the nitty gritty of the material world.

Sure, I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying that the scientific method only works because it involves assuming a naturalistic answer can be found. Effectively, ignoring the possibility that any unseen supernatural agents are manipulating observations in ways we cannot test or predict.

The scientific method excludes gods or fairies or demons or ghosts from being utilised in an explanation of phenomena.

A Christian should not allow scientific investigation to be hindered.

Agreed, and few mix their religion with their research conclusions these days so it isn't really an issue.

 

[tansy]

Sure, I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying that the scientific method only works because it involves assuming a naturalistic answer can be found. Effectively, ignoring the possibility that any unseen supernatural agents are manipulating observations in ways we cannot test or predict.

The scientific method excludes gods or fairies or demons or ghosts from being utilised in an explanation of phenomena.

Agreed, and few mix their religion with their research conclusions these days so it isn't really an issue.

OK I get you now Apologies for my misunderstanding

 

[GodsNet]

Tenka 13th February 2009, 04:17 PM #21
Why? what do religious beliefs have to do with science? How does inserting god into science do anything but hinder it's ability to investigate?


I am saying that an Almighty is mathematically possible according to Dr Kaku.
For the future there are two possibilities
1) The evolution will create an Almighty.
2) The universe will dilute and everything will die.

Which goal do you think we must take: 1 or 2?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Tenka 13th February 2009, 04:17 PM #21
Why? what do religious beliefs have to do with science? How does inserting god into science do anything but hinder it's ability to investigate?


I am saying that an Almighty is mathematically possible according to Dr Kaku.
For the future there are two possibilities
1) The evolution will create an Almighty.
2) The universe will dilute and everything it will die.

Which goal do you think we must take: 1 or 2?

These options are bizarre to say the least, and neither of them sound like they are within our power to change anyway.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I am saying that an Almighty is mathematically possible according to Dr Kaku.
For the future there are two possibilities
1) The evolution will create an Almighty.
2) The universe will dilute and everything will die.

Which goal do you think we must take: 1 or 2?

We don't have a choice in the matter. We must accept reality as it is, not as we might wish it to be.

My goal is to make human life as good as it can possibly be, given the universe as it really is. Science is already oriented towards life with various life-promoting areas of research, such as medical research. So, that most likely means 2, but it shall be a very good 2.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Legion.As.One]

They way some people see "god" as eternal, means we are too. Created from the tiny quarks and gluons at the beginning of the universe. We became part of the Milky Way
Galaxy, and our solar system.

We were once part of another star or planet or moon. If the universe never stops growing (omega=1 or omega is less than 1), then "god" is eternal and so am I, so why not worship me? I was a star once, AND i'm eternal.
If the universe ends (omega is more than 1), then "god" isn't eternal and neither am I, and so why do people worship something that actually isn't omni-present, when they say "he" is?

And so, getting to my point: the most evolved species is the one that realises there is no such thing as "a most evolved species", nothing stops evolving, even in 'death'.

 

[GodsNet]

I am saying that an Almighty is mathematically possible according to Dr Kaku.
For the future there are two possibilities
1) The evolution will create an Almighty.
2) The universe will dilute and everything it will die

MrGoodBytes Gnostic Atheist
These options are bizarre to say the least, and neither of them sound like they are within our power to change anyway

Eudaimonist Naked Love of Life
We don't have a choice in the matter.

Legion.As.One Libera me - Isis-mwt, Diana-mater, Kali-ma
And so, getting to my point: the most evolved species is the one that realises there is no such thing as "a most evolved species", nothing stops evolving, even in 'death'.

You guys are entitled to your own beliefs, if you check Dr. Kaku in his “the future of civilization” in Youtube he mention that a civilization type 2 is immortal, is up to you to stand in death or life

Which Ambition should have a civilization that want to have a Type 3 civilization?
a)MrGoodBytes's
b)Eudaimonist's
c)Legion.As.One's
d)non of the above

 

[The Nihilist]

No one cares about your crazy youtube scientist.

 

[GodsNet]

The Nihilist
No one cares about your crazy youtube scientist.

What Topic Do You Care About?



I will shake off the dust of my feet

 

[The Nihilist]

here is what I care about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngycU76wvoQ

 

[GodsNet]

My mistake, I am sorry!
I really do not want to interrupt you any longer.

Will someone recommends me a good philosophical forum?

 

[The Nihilist]

You'll have to do good philosophy to be able to participate in a good philosophical forum.

 

[threepeaches]

An answer from an atheist:
You might want to read some more books about evolution, because it seems you aren't clear on what exactly "evolution" means.

I'd also like to say that rallying to get the atheist signs taken off the buses is a pretty funny task for you to take on.
I see so much Christian symbolism and advertisement everywhere I go and I'm completely fine with it. If you want the atheist signs taken off, I want crosses taken off churches. Freedom of expression applies to BOTH sides, dude. Not just the side you agree with.

 

[GodsNet]

threepeaches
An answer from an atheist:
You might want to read some more books about evolution, because it seems you aren't clear on what exactly "evolution" means.
I would also like to say that rallying to get the atheist signs taken off the buses is a pretty funny task for you to take on.
I see so much Christian symbolism and advertisement everywhere I go and I am completely fine with it. If you want the atheist signs taken off, I want crosses taken off churches. Freedom of expression applies to BOTH sides, dude. Not just the side you agree with.


It is not about the side that I agree, it is about What is right and what is wrong.
The atheist sings in the buses is like saying "I do not trust civilization".
Do you have the right to write in a bus "I do not trust civilization" and be proud of it?
Yes, however it is wrong.

The atheist sings in the buses is like saying "The Browns will never win a Super Bowl ".
Do you have the right to go to Cleveland and write in the bus “The Browns will never win a Super Bowl "?
Yes, however it is wrong. If you do not believe me, go for.

Since the beginning of civilization the control of the universe has been the goal, if you think that is too hard to do, as in the “natural selection", you will be extinct.
Civilization must have in mind to succeed in the control of the universe.

 

[Tenka]

It is not about the side that I agree, it is about What is right and what is wrong.
The atheist sings in the buses is like saying "I do not trust civilization".
Do you have the right to write in a bus "I do not trust civilization" and be proud of it?

Morbid interest compels me to ask you, how this is so.

The atheist sings in the buses is like saying "The Browns will never win a Super Bowl ".
Do you have the right to go to Cleveland and write in the bus “The Browns will never win a Super Bowl "?
Yes, however it is wrong. If you do not believe me, go for.

Err, no. It is like saying "The Browns will probably not win the superbowl, so it's best to not bet the house on it".
Go for what?

Since the beginning of civilization the control of the universe has been the goal, if you think that is too hard to do, as in the “natural selection", you will be extinct.
Civilization must have in mind to succeed in the control of the universe.

What? Why?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I been trough several Atheists and science forums, and I think I create a question they do not want or are not able to answer.

I need your opinion if this question is the one really can help to once and for all turn science against atheism and [...]

May I just ask, what I, as an atheist, have even got to do with your question? I mean, I read it, and can't just help to think "Whatever." You also should realize, I think that science is descriptive, and that hence you will have problems formulating prescriptive dos and don'ts with it, AND that science should be used to describe what is, not what we would like. (But I am not really sure if that helps you.)