The Anti-theist Thread

[afro-elf]

And you cannot use science to explain why those ordered parameters exist.

Ok damn it. I'll dig out the info. to answere the above. it may be a few days though


and i agree with FF


think of EVERYTHING science has done in the BROAD sense of the word


and compare it to religion

we would be naked savages with out science

Since the art of making fire and creating handcrafted tools, our civilization has come a long way. Science and Technology are making advances at an amazing rate. From telephones to the Internet, calculators to computers, cars to rockets and satellites, we are submerged in a sea of discoveries and inventions made possible by Science. Fields like Medicine and communications have made inroads into our cultures and thus our lifestyles.


Every bit of food you eat, clothes you wear, the houses we live in, and anything else we know or make.

Science has done more for the development of western civilization


ALL invention and innovation

Domestication of animals
Calendars
Mathematics
Metal smelting

Irrigation
Writing
Wheeled vehicles
Draft animals

Animation
Architecture
Art
Accounting
Agriculture
Forestry
Manufacturing
Mining
Telecommunications
Transportation
Computers
Robotics
Medicine
Nutrition
Aviation
Fireworks
Astronomy
Biology
Chemistry
Earth science
Physics
Anthropology
Archeology
Economics
Cognitive science
Geography
Psychology
Sociology
Aerospace
Engineering
Metrology



Crafts
Music
Radio
Photography
Television
Theater production

Writing
Reading
Printing press for magazine and books

what had relgion done compared to that?

I'd rather have all of the above

[afro-elf]

Science does not explain science. But God does

So des ka ?


I guess so does the invisible pink unicorn. you can subsistute any fictional being and get the same result. it is indefensible. thus booty

[Rána Eressëa]

It can and does, FrodoFriend. I found out from my uncle who is into pyschology and the human mind. It's been proved, just as there is a section of the brain that must be active think, see, hear, etc., there is a section of the brain that must be active to accept illusionary and/or unseen things as fact. Humans are the only animals that can do that, unlike cats and dogs and others because of that part of the brain. Just as humans and birds have vocal cords, they can speak because of it, but other animals cannot.

But, while we're on the topic of explaining everything - who here actually wants everything explained? I'm glad we haven't figured out everything - what's the point in living if you know all the inner workings, be there any to begin with? Honestly, I can't see how anyone could want everything single question answered. Just imagine the pressure of it all.

[Elvet]

Why must science and religion be at odds? Both are creations of our mind to help us explain the unknown. Science is a tool that is used to understand the physicalness of our world. For many, religion is a tool to understand the spiritualness of our world. Our dependence on them is in direct relationship for our need for answers. We are the makers of our own universe.

[FrodoFriend]

Good info there, RE. That brings me to another point - what about mentally retarded people? Say that part of their brain doesn't work. They can't believe in God. If God exists, what does he have to say about that? And if he does, why did he create a person who physically can't believe in him? Seems like a rather cruel game, making a human who's condemned to hell unable to believe in the one thing that would save him.

For that matter, why didn't God just make us good believers to begin with? Why go through the whole spiel of giving us a chance, knowing we would fall, then condemning us as sinners and letting us live lives of misery (not that life is all THAT miserable)? I've never understood what the end goal of all that is supposed to be. Maybe God's just really bored.

God seems awfully irrational compared to science. BTW, if it wasn't for science we couldn't be here discussing this, in addition to all the scientific contributions afro-elf listed.

[FrodoFriend]

Elvet - Science and religion don't have to be at odds. Many people I know believe in both. However, science is fundamentally different from religions; science tries to establish facts, and a fact is a thing that is simply true. The scientific method is a creation of our minds, yes, but the actual facts existed long before mankind. Religion did not exist before mankind.

Also, not trying to be rude or condemnatory about stuff like my last post, but I always get confused about things like that, and never get satisfactory answers.

[Elvet]

I agree with you, Frodofriend. It's just whenever discussions of this type come up, it always seems that science is used to disprove religion. The two are apples and oranges, the laws of one cannot apply to the laws of the other.

[FrodoFriend]

Well, people often use science to try to disprove God (myself included), since those two are not exactly compatible - either God made the universe or he didn't, you know? But there are other aspects of religious faiths, like spirituality and faith and such, that science doesn't really apply to (unless you count the social sciences, but those are far more open to interpretation), and that are compatible with science in any case.

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by FrodoFriend
Elvet - Science and religion don't have to be at odds. Many people I know believe in both. However, science is fundamentally different from religions; science tries to establish facts, and a fact is a thing that is simply true. The scientific method is a creation of our minds, yes, but the actual facts existed long before mankind. Religion did not exist before mankind.

Einstein is famous for, among other things, his quote that physics and relativity explained the "mind of god". As a scientist I refuse to rule out possibilities that cannot be disproved. On a personal level I find it extremely difficult ro believe in a god as presented to me by the religions to which I have been exposed. There is no dicipline that will "explain it all". The Chaos Theory factor prevents science from predicting how a system will work, as opposed to how it has worked. I don't want a world where love is defined as a response to phermones and some Freudian mechanism beyond control. We've seen what Theocratic rule leads to; the Inquisition to the Taliban. My religion is knowledge, awareness and repect of natural systems, and chocolate! God is our collective conscience, if one needs to be defined at all.

[FrodoFriend]

Good post, Cirdan! God (and religion) could indeed be called our collective conscience.

Chocolate . . . lol.

[Cirdan]

Thanks FF. It could then be inferred that schizphenia is like having a two line phone

[afro-elf]

opjd

[afro-elf]

check these two threads out for more the theist non-theist debate



http://www.tolkientrail.com/entmoot...20&pagenumber=1



http://www.tolkientrail.com/entmoot...=&threadid=1780

I don't want a world where love is defined as a response to phermones and some Freudian mechanism beyond control.

love IS a bio-chem reaction

off the top of my head oxytocin, vasopressin, dopamine and phenolthytine

freud and jung( et al) are NOT based on hard sciences

and are just psuedo science

Cirdan what is your field as a scientist?

also there is a "GOD Part of the brain"

yes I'll post the info

but not now

if you guys and wayfarer could remind me if I don't do it by wed

[FrodoFriend]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Thanks FF. It could then be inferred that schizphenia is like having a two line phone

LOL! And multiple personality disorder is a conference call!

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by afro-elf

love IS a bio-chem reaction

off the top of my head oxytocin, vasopressin, dopamine and phenolthytine

freud and jung( et al) are NOT based on hard sciences

and are just psuedo science

Cirdan what is your field as a scientist?

also there is a "GOD Part of the brain"

Love can't be quantified or qualified by bio-chemistry, maybe sexual urges. Otherwise you would really need to avoid crowded places! I don't discount these things but they can't pull the load.

jung anf freud - agree behaviorism is so inadequate, though.

Majored in Geology 10 years in analytical chemistry and 10 in computer science.

I think it's next to the 'Now where did I leave my car keys' part of the brain.

Did you read my post carefully. I don't believe on god. The collective conscience comment was sociological not anatomical; morality, ethics, etc.

[mirrille]

Originally posted by Cirdan
My religion is knowledge, awareness and repect of natural systems, and chocolate! God is our collective conscience, if one needs to be defined at all.

When I'm in a philosophical mopey kind of mood, I think that God is the Universe. Maybe it was created. But anything that created it has to exist, and therefore is part of it, by a certain definition. Maybe it created itself. It doesn't matter. What matters is that it is here. Never forget that we are part of the Universe too. Maybe we are part of God. We exist, so we are part of the Truth. So is everything else around us, even the things we don't understand. Maybe religions that have a sentient God or gods are just giving this collective some kind of identity or personality. The problem is that reality is so vast, any identity cannot encompass it all. So I just try to appreciate the world for what it is instead of trying to boil it down like that.
Please don't laugh at me.
I'm not a philosopher. I have no philosophy training. These are just the random musings of one small human being in awe of the world.

[Cirdan]

Nice post mirrille. Substituting the word god for the word universe is not necessary,though. It is an interesting concept. If you view the universe at the sub-atomic level, then matter, including people are "swirls" (for lack or a better word) of particles and energy appearing and disappearing in the time-space continuum. Then life would be like a sort of anti-entropy mechanism.

[afro-elf]

Love can't be quantified or qualified by bio-chemistry, maybe sexual urges. Otherwise you would really need to avoid crowded places! I don't discount these things but they can't pull the load.

I'll beg to differ. an example being is that it is not a 7 year itch it is a 3 year itch

about the time a child is able to fend for itself

i'll post some stuff later

but you might wanna check out




SCIENCE OF LOVE
any search engine should bring up info on the show

Did you read my post carefully. I don't believe on god. The collective conscience comment was sociological not anatomical; morality, ethics, etc.

roger wilco it came in loud and clear

Majored in Geology 10 years in analytical chemistry and 10 in computer science

cool

A) do you think you could a tell me some of the other ways of dating besides carbon 14..

B) anything you can add to this?
http://www.tolkientrail.com/entmoot/...&threadid=3126

[jerseydevil]

God is a concept by which we measure our pain. ~ The Beatles

I feel god was invented to explain things we didn't understand at the time. Is Greek mythology really all that different from Judaism and Christianity? Why when religion was so set on our world being the center of "the universe" did they have such a hard time accepting the fact that the earth in fact revolved around sun? Why do so many religious people still think that we are the only one's in the universe? To me these are narrow minded views.

Religion to me gets too much in the way of facts or the ability to expand one's knowledge. It's a belief system that prevents people from looking at things with an open mind and accepting changes. Take evolution as an example - so many people I have met say that god created the earth in so many days and made humans in his likeness and so forth. They won't even discuss any possible alternatives. Science is looking for facts. As we gain more discoveries and uncover more fossils - the science changes and evolves. Science is fluid and ever changing as we gain more knowledge of the facts. There is nothing out there that says that we just appeared out of no where other than what's written in a book. Nothing scientifically really backs up that claim, yet millions of people blindly follow that belief.

[Cirdan]

Afro-Elf,

Google came up with zip as to the biochemistry of love(3 odf the top ten were about chocolate... hmmm). I know that there is still much that is not known about the human brain. I've heard it said that it is the last frontier, since so much has been discovered about the universe, dark matter, etc. The love thing is a chimera exactly because there is no concensus on how to define it or what it's scope is. I feel love for my wife, my son, my sister, and my mother but they are not identical. It goes back to the chaos theory.
Science can tell you what causes an earthquake, where one is likely to occur, and what will happen based on good hard science. It will never be able to determine exactly when or exactly how much deformation or damage it will cause. It would require a detection system so massive it would violate the heisenberg uncertainty principle. I am less enamoured of science as the answer for everything, but still as eager for it's findings as ever. That Antartic icesheet breaking up was amazing. Don't forget that science also brought us pollution, nuclear weapons, nerve gas, dioxin and a host of chlorinated hydrocarbons that will be here long after we, as a species, will be gone.

Uranium and cesium are used for dating. I've read about a few other new techniques but I don't remember off-hand.

As far as the computer post ref. I'm no chip architech (those guys are scary ) It's a whole lot of resistance, capacitance, switches and gating... and a lot of people agreeing about standards.

What's your specialty? You sound well educated.