Science Still Points To God [Spirituality & Religion]

@whowasthatmaskedman ^Best answer right here

It does if you’re looking. @whowasthatmaskedman

@LadyGrace I am genuinely happy for you if your faith brings you comfort. But it doesnt provide definitive answers

@whowasthatmaskedman
Science pretends to answer them with theories i.e. Big Bang

@Pfuzylogic Have you ever noticed that when you apply scientific theories to things, they actually work? Or did you just miss out on that this entire time?

It truly does, but we’ll just agree to disagree, rather than go on about it. Let’s respect each other’s beliefs. 😊👍@whowasthatmaskedman

@BlueMetalChick
Your cavalier attitude won’t work when Science has just realized that the Penrose-Hawking idea falls on its face now that Hawking is dead. Honestly I would think you would be current.

@Pfuzylogic But the Penrose-Hawking idea doesn't "fall on its face." The fuck are you talking about?

Look I do this shit on a regular basis, it's my damn job. I think I have just a little bit more authority to talk here than a hermit who thinks a 900 year old Israeli geriatric gathered every animal in the world on a fucking boat.

@BlueMetalChick
Is your pride talking?
I am saying that Science creates a lot of imaginary BS and calls it a theory I.e. Black Holes and Big Bang.

[b][big]They are both Passé[/big][/b]

@whowasthatmaskedman It's true that science asks questions, but religion does answer questions, just not the same questions that science asks (for the most part).

Science doesn't exist to tell us about the metaphysical. But when people claim that religion answers scientific questions, that can easily be tested (and often refuted, such as the claim that the earth is only 6000 years old).

@Pfuzylogic No, my intellect is talking. Your pride is talking when you flippantly deny confirmed facts because they challenge your delicate emotional beliefs.

Are you saying black holes don't exist? Really?

And it's called Expanding Universe Theory, not "the big bang." Not only that, but it's such a well established theory with so much evidence its favor that it's close to being implemented as natural law. Meanwhile you're over here stuck in the year 500 BC thinking that existence came from some bearded White dude who snapped his fingers.

@SW-User You're right that science doesn't answer metaphysical questions because science doesn't try to answer metaphysical questions. That isn't the point of science. It doesn't even attempt that. The point of science is to answer questions about the physical world around us. And it succeeds at that.

Religion attempts to answer metaphysical questions. That's the point of religion. The problem is, it fails miserably at it.

@SW-User
Science creates fiction for the physical or Natural world and many buy into it.
Science does not describe reality 100%

@Pfuzylogic [quote]Science creates fiction for the physical or Natural world and many buy into it.[/quote]
Right, which is why science has never cured a disease or invented an automobile or allowed humans to fly or put men in space or created renewable energy. Cos it's just fiction.

Oh wait...

@Pfuzylogic Science is never "complete". It is an attempt to describe reality. It's a method for describing the physical world. The scientific consensus changes constantly.

Religion cannot answer many questions about the physical world, and when it attempts to, like the world was created in 6 days or that there was a flood--these are myths that people try to frame as scientific, which is terribly mistaken in my opinion.

@BlueMetalChick
Get current in your professional field before you throw out insults. It just makes you look desperate.
Granted it is new but you should know what I am sharing here.

@SW-User
Again Science goes out of its “observation” parameter to describe the universe and it fails at the job.

@Pfuzylogic I am current in my professional field. And you're not. Because you're not in my field at all, you just made some shit up and then threw it at me because you couldn't find a way to undermine my beliefs.

Come back when you have something concrete. And there ARE concrete examples you could find. Not that you'd know, of course.

@Pfuzylogic Observations are only the starting point. You form narratives from observations. Which can change when new observations are made.

@SW-User If you're forming a narrative then you might be doing it wrong. Because that isn't what should happen.

@BlueMetalChick
You sound quite content with antiquated science. I am sure if you re-evaluated your beliefs based on science you might be in serious peril.

@BlueMetalChick [quote]You're right that science doesn't answer metaphysical questions because science doesn't try to answer metaphysical questions.[/quote]

As someone familiar with Orch-OR, I'm not so sure that's really true.

@SW-User
Science has made significant claims as far as the creation of the universe.

@Pfuzylogic I'm not using "antiquated science." And you're not using science at all. You're just making shit up and then conceitedly telling me how much more correct you are than I am.

@Pfuzylogic Some have used science to make theories about the creation of the universe, yes. To be fair, I don't really trust anyone's theories about the creation of the universe, whether it involves a deity or not. That is something that no one knows.