Not to beat a dead horse or whatever, and sorry i wasn’t able to respond earlier. But eugenics is DIRECTLY implied by the theory of evolution. Darwin said himself in The Decent of Man…
"At some future point, not distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world."
Evolution is what it is, you can sugar coat it as much as you like.
Yeah, but that is garbage. There are many excellent/impactful scientists that believe in god. You probably dont hear about it because it is tangential to their accomplishments. How many contemporary scientists even really break out today into the popular lexicon for their accomplishments (as opposed to their commentary? -sad).
As far as the lack of actual clergymen today making scientific advances; the process does not really favor amateurs today as it did in the past. So using this as criteria is not really fair. Neither is calling most clergymens’ open support of science hollow gamesmanship. hahaa
Hahahaa, their function are completely different? This is exactly why they dont really intersect. Another way to say what you have said is that: Religion assigns truth, while science offers an honest method toward uncovering it. Inductive reasoning is powerless in discounting the untestable (let alone assigning truth).
Oh, is the statement (Genesis?) that the earth was made before the stars really a *foundation *of the judeo-christain faith? hahaaa Or did you just make that up?
The fact that I chose not to watch the BillNye vs. debate or havent yet read the bible, is not eveidence of me being closeminded. That is insane. You are insane. hahaa
Heck,
I have even heard Dawkin’s invoke faith in an agrument in the absense of evidence, probably without even knowing it. -During a discussion about why beleif in the absense of evidence is the scourge of humnaity! Hahaa, these people are preying on others desire to feel superior. I wouldnt be surprised if most of the people here saw the interview with that comment and ate it all up anyways. hahaa.
I dont see how that quote for WikiP does anything but support what I said.
But I found it funny that you contradicted WikiP in telling me what creationism was.
did anyone even notice Nye didn’t even know how to read the bible properly. he clearly hasn’t invested anytime in reading it let alone reading it properly, I mean HOW can you be in a scientific debate and at least know how to absorb the book your fighting against???
I don’t practice religion but I have respect that people can find comfort in it. I imagined I would take the side of Nye in that debate and would feel embarrassed to hear what Ham would have to say but to be honest he had a lot of good points apart from his obsession with God.
all this debate really does is expose that if you’re a pure scientist you are ready to reject everything to do with being a human in the aim of destroying logic. the science Nye stands for is to turn into something that isn’t human, him not knowing how to take in information is a direct reflection of how he wants the future to take in information. that’s what their main aim was during the debate if anyone noticed is to gain favor over how children should approach science
both these approaches are very important; on Nye’s side there’s just pure innovation ignoring your own “flaws” and trying to push new discoveries as far as possible, obviously not knowing where we’d end up but not caring.
on Ham’s side he has broken down the process of approaching the actual science and being fully aware of the choices he is making.
both of these are different speeds, one too slow and one too fast. the future needs to know how to control both consciousnesses, but that can only happen while we have people passionate for both camps for the rest to observe and learn from it.
Did somebody mention gangbang?
I believe in god not in the sense that the bible portrays because A) The bible has been proven to be wrong on many accounts. To believe it completely would not only be stupid but would contradict many of its own teachings which most bible readers don’t get. The main one being think and don’t take things for surface value B) The entire bible isn’t even published and a good chunk of the text is sitting under the Vatican probably never to be seen again. There are some serious questions I do propose about the timeline of the bible in that time itself may not have always “flowed” at the same pace or even ran in a chronological order we do not even fully understand time yet so we couldn’t actually draw a conclusion. If this is true then there may indeed be a correlation between a perceived mere 6000 year story vs earths actual age. I’m not really trying to prove a point in saying that but it is something fascinating to think about.
My main statement about god is this. I do not believe everything is random. I do not believe that reality itself randomly appeared and all of the laws of reality perfectly assembled them selves in a way that that reality doesn’t cause itself to randomly fall apart. I don’t think something like evolution could exist where organic beings over time simply gain the tools to conquer their surroundings, without that “program” being written first. In my eyes evolution has always been the greatest evidence of God.
Wasted
227
These threads are always so fun.
@LoyalSol I too have a career in Physics but more in the field of Vehicle Dynamics. My goal is to one day bring that career in roller coaster and theme park ride development.
Like you, i also came to the belief of a god through the studying of Physics. I can’t say that I’m 100% convinced (maybe i need actual experience of the senses to come to 100%) but confident enough to say this universe could not have been some random accident. When you go into physics and learn the mathematics on how energy works it just becomes irrational to think that an accident incorporated all these laws. It’s sophisticated but accessible.
Valaris
229
To the people who Pmed me saying I needed to read this thread; Fuck you. Fuck you so hard.
specs
230
I think the thread has valuable lessons to teach.
For one, I learned that you don’t need to actually give two fucks about science to be a scientist. You can master a specific field enough to write scientific papers and host reddit discussions – the stuff of super hardcore science, no doubt – and still be unable to reason your way out of a paper bag, falling back on said papers and reddit credentials when called on bullshit. Now you don’t hear all scientists do this, as I’m sure a great many would rather be caught fucking dead than pull the most grade school level appeal to authority, but some do. Much like how some doctors actually peddle alternative medicines and some atheists make some of the dumbest statements known to man (i.e., Amazing Atheist, a surprising number of JREF forum posters).
I feel that many outspoken atheists see themselves as better people than those who don’t share their world view, coming out with condescending remarks about belief in unicorns and fairies, etc. I feel that a lot of people like this just want to be seen as intellectual or ‘different’ (especially online). A person who stands for the obliteration of all religion is no better than a person against non-belief.
I absolutely do not agree with teaching creationism as a science, but teaching all religions I am not opposed to. Placing emphasis on a religion most relevant to the corresponding culture makes sense, as knowing the basic outlines of that religion is usually seen as conventional wisdom and a part of your cultural heritage.
For many, religion provides something which nothing else can provide for them, and in my experience, this usually has nothing to do with explaining the universe or our existence.
Sorry for the tacky language, English is not my native tongue.
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/3164785920/hC56543CD/
Kromo
233
All of you are cowards. You hide your doubt with sophistry. You shamelessly deceive and lie and DENY the obvious.
You would rather speak in riddles than see the truth. You are competing in the most spiteful and hate filled petty arguments.
There is no love in your hearts. You are blind to the light of God. The true God. The one who wishes to only spread their message of love and happiness. Cast out the false idols!
Glory Unto Miku!
Valaris
234
Damnit, could’ve sworn I had closed this with my last post.
