WILL SCIENCE DISPROVE GOD? [Spirituality & Religion]
[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXey0X0CxjU]
You know where I stand on this question.
You know where I stand on this question.
61-69, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Adogslife · 61-69, M
Yes, ultimately religion (theists) and science (atheists) are the same. They are both ardent believers. The non-believers are the agnostics. Although they don't believe in a God, like the atheists, they're not going to get caught in a pons asinorum (argument), "The bridge of asses."
Initially it (the bridge of asses) referred to Euclid's Fifth Theorem, the one in which geometry really gets difficult and the sheep are separated from the asses among students, and the asses can't get across the bridge at all. Now it refers to any theorem that the asses can't wrap their heads around.
Science has (admittedly) ripped religion to shreads over the past few thousand years. Polytheism took the pipe in favor of Monotheism. We had to keep one real God, right? Yet the asses are still on the bridge.
Why? Science has disproven with evidence and falsifiable hypothesis almost all that the theists contend. But, they can't prove the creation of something from nothing. Quantum physics, quantum potentiality, none can make that final leap of faith.
You can't make something from nothing. And, even if you could, you don't have the time to do it. Time doesn't exist.
As an agnostic, I'm a firm believer in uncertainty, over certainty. Here, I just happen to love the theist v atheist arguments. Neither can "know" everything, but they're simply unaware of that fact.
Initially it (the bridge of asses) referred to Euclid's Fifth Theorem, the one in which geometry really gets difficult and the sheep are separated from the asses among students, and the asses can't get across the bridge at all. Now it refers to any theorem that the asses can't wrap their heads around.
Science has (admittedly) ripped religion to shreads over the past few thousand years. Polytheism took the pipe in favor of Monotheism. We had to keep one real God, right? Yet the asses are still on the bridge.
Why? Science has disproven with evidence and falsifiable hypothesis almost all that the theists contend. But, they can't prove the creation of something from nothing. Quantum physics, quantum potentiality, none can make that final leap of faith.
You can't make something from nothing. And, even if you could, you don't have the time to do it. Time doesn't exist.
As an agnostic, I'm a firm believer in uncertainty, over certainty. Here, I just happen to love the theist v atheist arguments. Neither can "know" everything, but they're simply unaware of that fact.
1-25 of 70
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Carazaa · F
@Emosaur Those are big numbers for the hard scientists. I posted an article this year that proved even more hard scientists believe in God than the soft scientists. The more you know the more you know there must be a God who created this universe because it is impossible it happened by chance. IMPOSSIBLE! And then some of us know him personally and it is just stupid to ignore that!
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Adogslife · 61-69, M
@Pfuzylogic thats an underlying point of paragraphs 4 and 5. It’s really impossible to create something from nothing (scientifically). Put simply, science can only get you so far.
Religion gets too caught up in stories that have easily been disproven scientifically. However, no matter how adept Science is, it’s impossible to prove origin. That’s where faith comes in to fill a void.
Religion gets too caught up in stories that have easily been disproven scientifically. However, no matter how adept Science is, it’s impossible to prove origin. That’s where faith comes in to fill a void.
Pfuzylogic · M
@Adogslife
Faith is connected to someone specific.
I don’t think there is a religion in a mystery God that anyone takes seriously today.
It is sad the Sir Roger Penrose received a Nobel Prize recently for research at least 50 years old. Scientists are so political, which explains the stranglehold that hawking had for so long.
Faith is connected to someone specific.
I don’t think there is a religion in a mystery God that anyone takes seriously today.
It is sad the Sir Roger Penrose received a Nobel Prize recently for research at least 50 years old. Scientists are so political, which explains the stranglehold that hawking had for so long.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Adogslife · 61-69, M
@Carazaa “So there!” Like sticks and stones...? Really?
I never said “scientists”. I said “science”. Science is the clinical business of proof, not faith. As such, it is “atheistic” by nature.
It proves, with relative ease, that the stories in the Bible (for example) couldn’t occur as represented. What science can’t do is prove origin. That’s where it, currently, falls short.
That’s why faith exists, assuming that “faith” is not one religion or one “god”. Thus, it is logical that some scientists may have a faith that they believe to be true.
Faith and religion, however, are different. Maybe that’s where the theists get testy when challenged. Brand loyalty...
I never said “scientists”. I said “science”. Science is the clinical business of proof, not faith. As such, it is “atheistic” by nature.
It proves, with relative ease, that the stories in the Bible (for example) couldn’t occur as represented. What science can’t do is prove origin. That’s where it, currently, falls short.
That’s why faith exists, assuming that “faith” is not one religion or one “god”. Thus, it is logical that some scientists may have a faith that they believe to be true.
Faith and religion, however, are different. Maybe that’s where the theists get testy when challenged. Brand loyalty...
Pfuzylogic · M
@Adogslife Science is still “run” by humans with shortcomings. The “Big Bang” was taught as Gospel in our elementary schools because of the egos of hawking and penrose. Humans always bring limitations and errors with observation,
Sharon · F
@Adogslife [quote]You can't make something from nothing. [/quote]
That's probably true but postulating a magical "creator", of unknown origin, doesn't help, it just complicates matters further. Any explanation of its origin could simply be applied to the universe instead.
The "something from nothing" argument is a strawman invented by creationists attempting to ridicule Atheists and other non-christians.
That's probably true but postulating a magical "creator", of unknown origin, doesn't help, it just complicates matters further. Any explanation of its origin could simply be applied to the universe instead.
The "something from nothing" argument is a strawman invented by creationists attempting to ridicule Atheists and other non-christians.
Sharon · F
@Carazaa [quote]there must be a God who created this universe because it is impossible it happened by chance. IMPOSSIBLE! [/quote]
So where did this god come from? It is impossible it happened by chance. IMPOSSIBLE! Unless you can answer that your postulation is worthless. Of course, if you can answer it you then need to explain why the same answer can't be applied to the universe.
So where did this god come from? It is impossible it happened by chance. IMPOSSIBLE! Unless you can answer that your postulation is worthless. Of course, if you can answer it you then need to explain why the same answer can't be applied to the universe.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@Emosaur [quote]Wrong. [/quote]
Your chart is faulty for one thing, for another, belief doesn't count without it follow the truth.
Your chart is faulty for one thing, for another, belief doesn't count without it follow the truth.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Sharon · F
@GodSpeed63 [quote]belief doesn't count without it follow the truth.[/quote]
As your beliefs are based on nothing but unsupported opinion and supposition, you're admitting they don't count. 🤪
As your beliefs are based on nothing but unsupported opinion and supposition, you're admitting they don't count. 🤪
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Bushranger · 70-79, M
1-25 of 70