Can Science Explain Everything? [Spirituality & Religion]
[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxtegJucVaQ]
No.
No.
61-69, M
Top | Newest First | Oldest First
View 20 more replies »
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@GodSpeed63 I am pointing out that one should look for evidence and base your idea on evidence not on feelings. It is possible to imagine the aircraft going toward or away from the camera. What is the evidence? Much the same with Christianity. The evidence is completely indicating toward God Creating not some silly idea that all this is just naturally occurring.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 Do you have a machine capable of perpetual flight?
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
LoveTriumphsOverHate · 36-40, M
I'm still waiting on evolutionists to explain how we're finding thousands of dinosaur fossils from the Mesozoic era, but haven't found any fossils of our common ancestors "missing links." There should literally be millions of fossils from transitional species. There should be hominin species walking around today.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 If you think we are just packets of meat walking about then my response would be silly. If you KNOW that this world is not our home then my statement makes perfect sense. We are here for training purposes only. Kind of like going to school. When the bell rings and it will ring for all of us at one point, class will be dismissed and we shall return to whence we came. Then we will be 'examined' on our time on earth. If we spend our time being scientifically ignorant believing that things just evolved for no reason then we shall be given the royal flush. If we are smart and realize we are here for training purposes only and accept the free gift of Eternal Life then you will have passed the Exam and be welcomed into the Fellowship with our Heavenly Father.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 Disgusting
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 Only in your tiny brain. You think we are just blobs of protoplasm rootin' and tootin' and lying and dying. I am pointing out that we have hope beyond our present circumstances. There is more to our meager existence than our bodily functions. When the bell tolls as it will for all of us no matter how much we deny it then we shall move on to the next phase. That you will be completely unprepared for it and unable to do a thing about it then can be changed now. It is up to you. The rules have been set by the One who has made us all. It is up to us to become His chosen.
QueenOfZaun · 26-30, F
Science can’t explain everything.
Sharon · F
@Human1000 Well, apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us? That said however, it's sad that such a great empire collapsed when the christians got their claws in.
Tsondru · M
@hippyjoe1955 Well. One thing we have for us regarding the radioisotopes used in dating, specifically U isotopes, is that we have huge amounts of them on hand. That allows us to measure half lives over reasonable time scales. It’s not like a heavy transuranic actinide where we might have micrograms or less. Another technique is to measure relative half lives, but that is more complex to describe.
But part of being a scientist is not only knowing how to measure uncertainties and propagate them through calculations, but understand their significance.
The half life of U238 is 4.468 billion years. What if it was 4.368 billion years? Well, the geochron one gets still gives us an earth about 4 billion years old. What if the half life is 1 billion years? Still an old earth. We’re talking a 4x uncertainty in the half life now. Possible? *shrug*. What if the half life is 400 million years? 100 million years? Still an old earth.
U238 would have to have a half life on the order of C-14 to radioisotope date the earth to Biblical claims. Now we’re talking many orders of magnitude in uncertainty in the U238 half-life.
But part of being a scientist is not only knowing how to measure uncertainties and propagate them through calculations, but understand their significance.
The half life of U238 is 4.468 billion years. What if it was 4.368 billion years? Well, the geochron one gets still gives us an earth about 4 billion years old. What if the half life is 1 billion years? Still an old earth. We’re talking a 4x uncertainty in the half life now. Possible? *shrug*. What if the half life is 400 million years? 100 million years? Still an old earth.
U238 would have to have a half life on the order of C-14 to radioisotope date the earth to Biblical claims. Now we’re talking many orders of magnitude in uncertainty in the U238 half-life.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@Tsondru Math is wonderful and not always reliable when there are unknowns that can not be known. We ran into that issue when we were doing raw research looking for the best way to extract oil from dirt. The number crunchers would spend their hours crunching numbers and extrapolating our data. Then the test would come and their extrapolations were off sometimes quite significantly. It was always fun. I was on the practical side developing new technology. It was a blast. I loved to watch the number cruncher have a conniption when his numbers didn't match reality. In theory - theory and reality are the same thing. In reality - they are not.
NerdyPotato · M
NortiusMaximus · M
@GodSpeed63 [quote]My God says otherwise.[/quote]
You mean the voices in your head. You should seek professional help for that, it could be symptomatic of neurological damage.
You mean the voices in your head. You should seek professional help for that, it could be symptomatic of neurological damage.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@NortiusMaximus [quote]You mean the voices in your head.[/quote]
my God only has one voice and it's not in my head but in my heart.
my God only has one voice and it's not in my head but in my heart.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Bushranger · 70-79, M
DudeistPriest · M
@GodSpeed63 Have you patented your KGOD radio yet that magically talks directly to God?
LeopoldBloom · M
@GodSpeed63 It just means “God is great” in Arabic.
You’d be shocked if you went to an Arabic-speaking Christian church, and heard them praying to Allah. You probably think Jesus spoke English since that’s the language of the Bible you happen to have.
You’d be shocked if you went to an Arabic-speaking Christian church, and heard them praying to Allah. You probably think Jesus spoke English since that’s the language of the Bible you happen to have.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@LeopoldBloom [quote]You probably think Jesus spoke English since that’s the language of the Bible you happen to have.[/quote]
Jesus speaks many languages being that He's the Author of them.
Jesus speaks many languages being that He's the Author of them.
jackieash · 26-30
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
SW-User
I'm reminded of an old colleague Jon Butterworth who was speaking on the BBC radio about the Large Hadron Collider and say how it recreated conditions science predicts just after the big bang. Using that scientists were trying to therefore measure particles that are predicted by science but as yet unseen.
I think a question sent in asked him "What happened just before the big bang?"
Jon instantly replied "I'm just a physicist looking at the physical universe around us now. You need a theologian to answer that one".
So can science answer everything? No. If you mean about the physical universe? Then given time it may do as models are created, considered, measured and confirmed or replaced.
But will it answer questions beyond the physical realm we're in? No
I think a question sent in asked him "What happened just before the big bang?"
Jon instantly replied "I'm just a physicist looking at the physical universe around us now. You need a theologian to answer that one".
So can science answer everything? No. If you mean about the physical universe? Then given time it may do as models are created, considered, measured and confirmed or replaced.
But will it answer questions beyond the physical realm we're in? No
SteelHands · 61-69, M
Even primates don't reproduce through what's defined as natural selection. They reproduce through (simplistic and emotionally driven) rituals of challenge and contest. The outcome can change in several non natural ways. Interference by other chimps and encouragement by a specific female in a group can inhibit contests, induce rematches, etc.
And humans are even more complicated because of the awareness of large group crises and successes.
Now that we know that genetic mutations are an unreliable predictor of evolutionary theory the mantra becomes natural selection.
Natural selection only works at a most remedial level in predator camouflage advantages or quarry defense and numerate eproductive progenisis.
Stop arguing now and come to grips with the truth that this is always going to be a mystery until you die unless you allow a stuffed shirt to mislead you otherwise.
And humans are even more complicated because of the awareness of large group crises and successes.
Now that we know that genetic mutations are an unreliable predictor of evolutionary theory the mantra becomes natural selection.
Natural selection only works at a most remedial level in predator camouflage advantages or quarry defense and numerate eproductive progenisis.
Stop arguing now and come to grips with the truth that this is always going to be a mystery until you die unless you allow a stuffed shirt to mislead you otherwise.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@Yulianna Says someone who hasn't finished high school yet. Too Funny!
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
I watched a video on quantum mechanics the other day and the big take away from the video is that the farther we go the less sense it makes. It is almost like the entire universe is 'imagined' and has no basis in Reality. Again the scientists are scaling the mountain the theologians have been sitting on top of. Thomas Aquinas came to a similar conclusion when he was trying to formulate his systemic theology. It comes down to the words of Solomon. "Meaningless meaningless everything is meaningless". Reality is not of this creation. Reality lies far beyond it. We see but through a glass darkly of the Reality that is yet to be revealed. IOW, science can not explain anything. It can simply describe what it observes if it is honest. However science like its human creators is not honest. It is full of agendas and dogmas beyond which one dare not go. I am so glad that Yahweh in His Own Glory and Grace and by His own Will called me. The despair one would feel knowing that life is but an image on a screen would be so devastating one would kill oneself. I so remember the extreme depression I was in when Yahweh revealed His name to me and how once that Name was revealed how the depression lifted and life went on.
NortiusMaximus · M
@hippyjoe1955 The fact that you always have to resort to silly insults just proves you're out of your depth. I've never seen you formulate a logical argument and I'm not expecting you to any time soon.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@hippyjoe1955 For some reason, you put in mind of Feynman’s quote:
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics"
"If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don't understand quantum mechanics"
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 So says the NZ Nutbar that thinks there was never a cell. Too Funny. Run along toots you can deny your silliness in the morning. You do it all the time. You are the queen of denial.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@Emosaur [quote]You can't talk about the Abrahamic god without talking about religion.[/quote]
According to whom?
According to whom?
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
No.
It will never be possible to know everything because the potential for new discoveries is practically infinite; the sun will burn out before we discover all that could be known.
But science has made great progress in understanding much more about our natural world than we knew 400 years ago.
It is gathering momentum in mathematics, tools of measurement, experimental design, research and analysis skills, and ethical responsibility.
I challenge people who choose not believe in science to cease using medical services when they have a health crisis.
Let them cease using mobile phones, the internet, air or mechanical forms of travel, electricity, and objects made from metals, glass, plastics or the industrial refining of natural materials.
Let them experience what life is like without the bi-products of science.
If they can still deny science after that, then they are hypocrites.
It will never be possible to know everything because the potential for new discoveries is practically infinite; the sun will burn out before we discover all that could be known.
But science has made great progress in understanding much more about our natural world than we knew 400 years ago.
It is gathering momentum in mathematics, tools of measurement, experimental design, research and analysis skills, and ethical responsibility.
I challenge people who choose not believe in science to cease using medical services when they have a health crisis.
Let them cease using mobile phones, the internet, air or mechanical forms of travel, electricity, and objects made from metals, glass, plastics or the industrial refining of natural materials.
Let them experience what life is like without the bi-products of science.
If they can still deny science after that, then they are hypocrites.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@hartfire [quote]I challenge people who choose not believe in science to cease using medical services when they have a health crisis.[/quote]
There's true science and then there's pseudo science. Yahweh is the Author of true science.
There's true science and then there's pseudo science. Yahweh is the Author of true science.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 What are the characteristics of pseudo-science?
@GodSpeed63 Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that [i]claim[/i] to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method.
Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been discredited by experiment and proof.
References:
- Cover JA, Curd M, eds. (1998), Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues, pp. 1–82
- Hansson SO (2008), "Science and Pseudoscience", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Section 2: The "science" of pseudoscience
Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been discredited by experiment and proof.
References:
- Cover JA, Curd M, eds. (1998), Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues, pp. 1–82
- Hansson SO (2008), "Science and Pseudoscience", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Section 2: The "science" of pseudoscience
JimboSaturn · 51-55, M
Carazaa · F
Nope, only Gods word can. Because science is what's measurable, but God is a spirit, and so are all the heavenly beings.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
@Harriet03 This is hilarious! It also reminds me of a story (myth, whatever), where the "first" set of laws brought down were not the 10 commandments. When Moses saw the people sinning, he broke the tablets written with the first set of laws, yelled at the people for sinning, and then went back and got a different set, which "were" the 10 commandments.
Harriet03 · 41-45, F
@DiscreetWriterMike There was initially 100s of commandments.
Sharon · F
@froggtongue [quote]not be too hard on people of faith.[/quote]
I don't really care what myths and fantasies people want to believe. I just don't like it when they try to force their beliefs on to others, especially when they target children and vulnerable adults.
I don't really care what myths and fantasies people want to believe. I just don't like it when they try to force their beliefs on to others, especially when they target children and vulnerable adults.
hippyjoe1955 · 61-69, M
@Human1000 Says someone whose religion precludes all other religions because his religion is so superior. Too funny. You don't even know your belief system is a religion. You have a mythical idol that you call science and are oblivious to the fact that science being an idol is a false god.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@NortiusMaximus [quote]If you can't prove the others don't exist you're a hypocrite as well as a liar. You can't prove that made up one you claim to believe in exists either.[/quote]
Do you believe in those false gods or not? Answer the question, yes or no.
Do you believe in those false gods or not? Answer the question, yes or no.
NortiusMaximus · M
@GodSpeed63 I don't believe in any false gods. I'm open to the possibility of some real ones, that aren't self-contradictory, existing.
So, can you prove those you don't believe in don't actually live? Answer the question, yes or no. I known it will go right against your nature but try to give a straight answer for once.
So, can you prove those you don't believe in don't actually live? Answer the question, yes or no. I known it will go right against your nature but try to give a straight answer for once.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
No, it doesn't, but if it needs to... then why do we have medical sciences???
We could save billions by closing that entire industry and just letting diseases rip through societies.
Even the Catholic Church (the one that is centuries behind all the others) accepts and teaches that medicine is just as important in maintaining health as prayer is.
We could save billions by closing that entire industry and just letting diseases rip through societies.
Even the Catholic Church (the one that is centuries behind all the others) accepts and teaches that medicine is just as important in maintaining health as prayer is.
Tsondru · M
Attempting to prove religious truths with science is problematic on both scientific and religious grounds.
It’s problematic on scientific grounds because it entails a category error. Science can only study what is testable in experiments with controls and methods of falsification. It’s not like we can study a universe A with these religious truths and then universe B without them. Or we can flip a switch and turn off the religious truths. That is a fundamental property of religious truth. It’s pervasive and eternal.
It’s problematic on religious grounds because it immediately attempts to ground religious experience in materialism— because that is the only currency of science. It’s long standing practice in most faith traditions to approach religious truths through nature and so on. And for good reason, nature is amazing and dazzling. But that’s not a proof of religious truths through science. The religious truths are still established through mechanisms of religious faith and practice. Not science.
Of course science doesn’t explain everything. Nor can it. Which is why we have metaphysics and religion. And of course religion doesn’t explain everything. Nor can it. Which is why we have science. Our own choices reveal this to be true. We don’t use religious texts to determine which blood pressure medicine to take. And we don’t read from a chemistry text at a funeral.
It’s problematic on scientific grounds because it entails a category error. Science can only study what is testable in experiments with controls and methods of falsification. It’s not like we can study a universe A with these religious truths and then universe B without them. Or we can flip a switch and turn off the religious truths. That is a fundamental property of religious truth. It’s pervasive and eternal.
It’s problematic on religious grounds because it immediately attempts to ground religious experience in materialism— because that is the only currency of science. It’s long standing practice in most faith traditions to approach religious truths through nature and so on. And for good reason, nature is amazing and dazzling. But that’s not a proof of religious truths through science. The religious truths are still established through mechanisms of religious faith and practice. Not science.
Of course science doesn’t explain everything. Nor can it. Which is why we have metaphysics and religion. And of course religion doesn’t explain everything. Nor can it. Which is why we have science. Our own choices reveal this to be true. We don’t use religious texts to determine which blood pressure medicine to take. And we don’t read from a chemistry text at a funeral.
TheWildEcho · 56-60, M
TheWildEcho · 56-60, M
@Carazaa yes they certainly do!!
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
NortiusMaximus · M
@Emosaur [quote]Considering those "atheist websites" use logic, reason,[/quote]
Unlike those idiotic creationist websites, spreading misinformation based on myths and illogical opinions that conflict with the evidence and known facts.
Unlike those idiotic creationist websites, spreading misinformation based on myths and illogical opinions that conflict with the evidence and known facts.
Carazaa · F
@Human1000
🌷Your religion might be fun but Jesus didn't die for fun or make the universe to tickle your fancy, but to save you. He created all matter, laws of the universe, and all spiritual heavenly beings, and eternal souls.
If you feel sick take an aspirin, have some hot soup, and read the Bible. You'll feel better. 🙂
🌷Your religion might be fun but Jesus didn't die for fun or make the universe to tickle your fancy, but to save you. He created all matter, laws of the universe, and all spiritual heavenly beings, and eternal souls.
If you feel sick take an aspirin, have some hot soup, and read the Bible. You'll feel better. 🙂
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@MalteseFalconPunch [quote]This is small minded nonsense. The universe doesnt work like. It isn't a crime scene.[/quote]
Obviously, you missed the comparison.
Obviously, you missed the comparison.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
MarmeeMarch · M
[big][center][b]YES Science is actually in the BIBLE - there -end of discussion.
[/b][/center][/big]
[b][c=#003BB2]Genesis 3:19 (King James Version):
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.[/c][/b]
[b][c=#BF0000]It is widely understood that the Earth as a planet will not survive the sun's expansion into a full-blown red giant star. The surface of the sun will probably reach the current orbit of Mars – and, while the Earth's orbit may also have expanded outwards slightly, it won't be enough to save it from being dragged into the surface of the sun, whereupon our planet will rapidly disintegrate.[/c][/b]
[b]Source: The Bible & PHYS.org 2/13/15[/b]
[/b][/center][/big]
[b][c=#003BB2]Genesis 3:19 (King James Version):
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.[/c][/b]
[b][c=#BF0000]It is widely understood that the Earth as a planet will not survive the sun's expansion into a full-blown red giant star. The surface of the sun will probably reach the current orbit of Mars – and, while the Earth's orbit may also have expanded outwards slightly, it won't be enough to save it from being dragged into the surface of the sun, whereupon our planet will rapidly disintegrate.[/c][/b]
[b]Source: The Bible & PHYS.org 2/13/15[/b]
LeopoldBloom · M
@MarmeeMarch You're reading meaning into the test that the original writers never intended. There's nothing in that passage that mentions the sun or its expansion into a red giant. It's merely an observation of how people work to survive, then die. It's also inaccurate if you try to apply it to the fate of the sun, as there will be no "ground" to return to.
This reminds me of how Muslims point to obscure passages in the Quran and claim that they predict modern scientific discoveries, like relativity, quantum physics, etc.
This reminds me of how Muslims point to obscure passages in the Quran and claim that they predict modern scientific discoveries, like relativity, quantum physics, etc.
MarmeeMarch · M
@LeopoldBloom My point is that everybody and everything will turn into dust. When did I say back to the ground ? That the bible
LeopoldBloom · M
@MarmeeMarch OK, so the Bible isn't correct.
It doesn't take a revelation from God to notice that living beings live for a while, then die and disintegrate. And many "scientific" observations in the Bible are incorrect, such as how insects have four legs and bats are birds. Not to mention physical impossibilities like the sun standing still.
It doesn't take a revelation from God to notice that living beings live for a while, then die and disintegrate. And many "scientific" observations in the Bible are incorrect, such as how insects have four legs and bats are birds. Not to mention physical impossibilities like the sun standing still.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
Science is based on mathematics and more fundamentally, logic. Formal logic, by its own admission, cannot derive everything. For logic and mathematics to function, they need a starting point, first principles, axioms, postulates, etc. These cannot be proven and are not proven, they fall outside of the realm of logic, mathematics, and science, but instead are their starting point. I've always thought this is the place where science and metaphysics connects nicely. I've always liked quotes like this:
"In the beginning, God said that the four dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric second rank tensor equals zero and there was light."
"In the beginning, God said that the four dimensional divergence of an antisymmetric second rank tensor equals zero and there was light."
Sharon · F
@DiscreetWriterMike What about the majority of EM radiation outside the visible part of the spectrum?
@Sharon it was just a quote I liked that at least to me shows that religion in general and science are not inherently incompatible. In this case, "light" would mean any photon / EM radiation. The sailent point of my post is the limitations of deductive logic. For the more mathematically inclined, I'd point to Godel's incompleteness theorem.
BijouPleasurette · 36-40, F
GuyWithOpinions · 31-35, M
wvcountrylady · 61-69, F
FloorGenAdm · 51-55, M
Iwillwait · M
No, it's just another construct we use to explain what we do not really know.
Heartlander · 80-89, M
Science is about evolving and opinionated certainty :)
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@Heartlander [quote]Science is about evolving and opinionated certainty[/quote]
No. It's about displaying God's creation and show how He's made it all work.
No. It's about displaying God's creation and show how He's made it all work.
Heartlander · 80-89, M
SW-User
[quote]Even the problem with evil[/quote]
I have wondered this myself actually, interesting indeed
I have wondered this myself actually, interesting indeed
GuyWithOpinions · 31-35, M
No.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
froggtongue · M
Here we go again. 👀 🍿
Grateful4you · M
@Emosaur The pot talking about the kettle again. (roll's eyes)