dogmatic and refuse to correct themselves?...do you have enough experiences to be such a judge... is the tool you use to measure/judge things, your humanity so reliable?
(For that matter its not so much what he does, but what he is.) Its man himself....fundamentally, constitutionally, and Intrinsicly.
anyway, its not religion thats the problem really is it?
Thats like saying we should help people to stop drinking by breaking bottles, without taking care of the factory that produces such...
.... What? I didn’t say anything about stopping religion. Where’d you get that?
And according to you little example... the religion WOULD be the factory, with all the followers being the alcoholics. If you change the some of the laws or taboos or whatever in a religion, people can still go make their own beliefs (or alcohol).
What we should be doing is getting through to the people.
That science tries to correct itself while religion doesn’t.
You gave a alcohol factory example of apparently why it doesn’t change which made little sense, while stating “anyway, its not religion thats the problem really is it?" as if I said something contrary....
But maybe i am missing the point no.....for me, religion and science are two things that are very related...one deals with the things seen in this life......(microbiology included), whilst the other deals with the things unseen, the supernatural, and divine...However, both are tied in many ways and even overlap at times...both fail in the mission to explain certain things in their respective fields...whilst at the same time both are magnified in the eyes of the world and said to be the only positions from which we can know ourselves. Well, I disagree..no matter how self explanatory science may make itself out to be, its weilder and proponent is man, just like religion..like I said before, because man itself is not proper, and quite corrupt and does even use all three parts of its being....unless subconciously.
Khorib wrote:
That science tries to correct itself while religion doesn’t.
You gave a alcohol factory example of apparently why it doesn’t change which made little sense, while stating “anyway, its not religion thats the problem really is it?" as if I said something contrary....
Moon splitted just like NASA and Qur’an stated..
sciences proof what Qur’an stated long time before...
---
“Great new ideas usually come from very small teams... don’t give up so easily." — John Kaster —
Watchman wrote:
you have to realise that theory of gravity and fusion is a THEORY that attempts to explain a particular circumstance and condition. The Big bang is not the catalyst to life as it does not have the ingrediants (so to speak)..why..? the most simple proof of that is that C=monkersquare}, is that there would be LIFE in nearby solar sysytems not to mention so called light years away.....As there is not, it stands to reason that so called Big Bang is nothing and I do stress nothing but a THEORY.
All of you get this straight; the Big Bang is the creation of the universe, NOT the creation of life. I can’t stress that enough. The Big Bang didn’t just happen and instantly create these planets, stars and debris floating in space like they we have now. That’s not what the theory says. The Big Bang created the energy, and it took thousands of years for the energy to cool down from the expansion enough to make atoms, and even longer to make planets with water and life.
How the fuck do you know there’s no life on other planets anyway? That sounds like a really stupid thing to say to me. We haven’t even sent a probe to Pluto yet and you think all the other 100 billion galaxies in the universe won’t have life on them... wtf.
Last edited 16 Jun 2008 08:37 pm by Sean of the Living
Watchman wrote:
you have to realise that theory of gravity and fusion is a THEORY that attempts to explain a particular circumstance and condition. The Big bang is not the catalyst to life as it does not have the ingrediants (so to speak)..why..? the most simple proof of that is that C=monkersquare}, is that there would be LIFE in nearby solar sysytems not to mention so called light years away.....As there is not, it stands to reason that so called Big Bang is nothing and I do stress nothing but a THEORY.
All of you get this straight; the Big Bang is the creation of the universe, NOT the creation of life. I can’t stress that enough. The Big Bang didn’t just happen and instantly create these planets, stars and debris floating in space like they we have now. That’s not what the theory says. The Big Bang created the energy, and it took thousands of years for the energy to cool down from the expansion enough to make atoms, and even longer to make planets with water and life.
How the fuck do you know there’s no life on other planets anyway? That sounds like a really stupid thing to say to me. We haven’t even sent a probe to Pluto yet and you think all the other 100 billion galaxies in the universe won’t have life on them... wtf.
Dude/Dudette, we cant even find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.......Look at the facts, shall we.......The basic big bang model fails to predict what we observe in the universe in three major ways. The temperature of today’s universe, the expansion of the cosmos, and even the presence of galaxies, have all had cosmologists scrambling for fixes. Every time the basic big bang model has failed to predict what we see, the solution has been to bolt on something new - inflation, dark matter and dark energy, .............
»
Religion
» Creationism losing more ground?
