Debunking Ancient Fantasy

Evo

First, why is it that when you post in S&D you write in text speak? It's a guideline violation and I notice that you don't do it in the other forums. Please stop it.

The pursuit of science has zero to do with religion. Gods, goddesses, trout that created the world, science doesn't address these beliefs. If you are talking about myths in religious writings, most people do realize they are just stories and not to be taken literally. The ones that *do* take them literally are a fringe that do not represent the mainstream believers.

Ivan Seeking

You choose to not believe the millions who claim religious experiences. That is a choice. Don't get mad at me over it.

Were it someone you trusted that claimed something like this, you might choose to believe the story. You might take them to the shrink. Your choice.

zomgwtf

All I have to say any further prior to arguement breaking out is that this is not true at all science most certainly does have something to say about religion. Even psychology/sociology/antrhopology have something to say about religions.

I think you meant to say science has no input on the concept of God, which I do agree with.

zomgwtf

Wrong. It's not a choice by my standards. Much the same way that deducing there is no cosmic tea cup is not a choice. I will get mad at you since you are a mentor and I do not believe you are conducting yourself as a Mentor should. Also, I do not like the idea of Mentors spreading blatant misinformation. "Athiesm is a choice much in the same way that theism is a choice".

I call bogus.

Ivan Seeking

Also, considering that the popular definition of a deity is that it/they operate outside of natural laws, unless God stops by the lab, there is nothing to test.

Ivan Seeking

You can call it whatever you want. But the argument stands. As you yourself stated, you are judging this by YOUR standards. QED.

zomgwtf

Also what use does this pitiful comment have to add to the matter.

Evo

What I am saying is that I have seen no scientific research done specifically to debunk any religion. I would be appalled if any serious scientist even dared to waste time and money on it.

Do you know of any serious peer reviewed research on discrediting religion?

Perhaps what you mean is that science has inadvertantly debunked the myths, such as the age of the earth, how it was formed, how life evolved, etc... It was not, however, the point of the science to debunk religious myths.

mgb_phys

It's because it's pointless.
The best science can say is there is no evidence for God - to which the obvious answer is - well there doesn't have to be.

Bashing a particular religion because it does/says X or because leader Y does bad things is politics - find your own forum for that.

zomgwtf

Lol fine. Your 'choice' that their is no cosmic teacup floating beyond Earth and Mars is exactly the same level and playing field as my choice that there is. Interesting thought process you have.

zomgwtf

Wrong again. I could cite sources if you want. Keep trying you guys. In fact I could cite sources from both playing fields. I could site sources from thiest scientist doing research to make conclusions on particular religious beliefs and I could cite non-theist or neutral works to determine the opposite.

Ivan Seeking

How we weight various arguments makes all the difference in the world. I know of no evidence for a cosmic teacup. I know of no such claims. Why would I believe such a thing?

CosmicCrunch

the limits of science are limited by our lack of intellegence, any scientist would not be a scientist if they didnt understand and accept that. The frustration is hearing people all around you convinced that the answers to life are in scriptures written by people not even as close to intelligent as us s couple thousand years ago. Your gonna trust your faith in people who didn't know meteorology or didnt have the knowledge to let people have an open mind publically cause there afraid of what might come of it. The universe wasn't even thought of until the invention of the telescope, which didnt come about until around copernicus. This is why i don't believe that religions idea of why we came about isn't accurate. It doesnt mean there isn't a god, but what you interepret as god will prolly disappoint you and make u wonder why u lived ur life to a certain degree when murders and other "sinners" end up in the same place as you, whatever that may be

zomgwtf

Exactly. You haven't made any choice. Just like you don't choose not to believe in Elves or fairy godparents. (I assume you don't). These things are not choices.

The fact that you've never heard of such a claim for a cosmic teacup leads me to believe you live a life sheltered from philosophy and debate etc..

Ivan Seeking

I'm not defending any religion, nor do we allow anyone to push their religious beliefs here. We are talking about the essence of faith -a belief really in anything not recognized by science.

Science can only really address phenomena or claims that can be tested. While much religious dogma might be contradicted by science, the essence of faith is untouchable in this regard - that is, unless a God makes a showing. But the inability to test a claim does not falsify that claim. And many claims that at one time could not be tested, later could be. Rogue waves are probably one of the best recent examples of this. The claim has been around for centuries, but science has only been able to address the claim recently through oil rig sensors, and satellite data. Sure enough, they exist!

Ivan Seeking

I could say I don't know, but if asked, I would tend to say I do not believe such a thing because I have no reason to.

You miss the point, so lose the insults. The point was the I have no reason to believe in a cosmic teacup. I do have reason to believe in a God.

zomgwtf

Ivan I was countering your claim that philosophy/logic can not deal with the concept of God. It is wrong.

Anyways I hope I got my point accross I'm in no mood to get banned so I think I'm done with this thread for now atleast.

Just a note however, I do not support 'bashing' religions. I do support critical debates though which this forum is not the place for. So I can say that I'm not siding with CosmicCrunch in that regard... or the opinion he has of science/God really. Just that I am against what you earlier claimed.