• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Great Debate: "Has Science Refuted Religion?"

Roboramma said:
I don't intend to refute anyone's belief. They have the belief, I don't even desire to change that. Nevertheless there is very good evidence that the universe (and the earth) is more than 6000 years old. That some people believe differently doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

Your proofs have no effect on the believers. Their beliefs have no effect on your proofs. This is why science and belief systems are orthogonal.
 
paiute said:
Your proofs have no effect on the believers. Their beliefs have no effect on your proofs. This is why science and belief systems are orthogonal.
Click to expand...

Science deals with reality and how the world is. You can choose to believe whatever you like but it doesn't affect the reality of the situation and if the reality is at odds with your belief then your belief is refuted regardless of whether you change your mind or not.

Not believing in gravity does not affect whether science has refuted the idea that you might fall off the Earth at any moment.

Take a non-religious example of homeopathy and nobody would argue that science and alternative medicine are orthogonal.
 
punshhh said:
Yes I don't want to belittle the achievements of humanity through the practice of science. Indeed it is a testimony to our ingenuity as a species. However take a look at what this thread is about, its not about the subjects studied by scientists. Its not about objective physical reality. Its about whether a group of people described as scientists have refuted religion.

Lets take a closer look at this, ( I haven't watched the video yet, I will today if I have time)
Are they a group of scientists?
Do they speak for the scientific community?
Do scientists routinely refute religion as part of their work?
What are they actually refuting?
What is religion?
What is the goal or purpose of religion?
Why do we have religion?
Why do we have science?


False, well then you can answer these questions then, can you not?

What is our origin? (accepting the discoveries of science)
What are we? (accepting the discoveries of science)
Why is reality the way it is? (accepting the discoveries of science)
What is existence?
Can we say anything about our origin and any creators which may be involved in it?
Click to expand...
And what does your years of practicing mysticism say about these questions? You go on and on about how practical and/or how people can gain knowledge through mysticism yet so far that I've read, you remain silent on these issues.

So, in other posts which follow this that I'm quoting, you acknowledge sciences answers and say you don't know any answers other than science. At least, you may correct me if I'm misunderstanding.
 
Mashuna said:
1. Get a scientist with or without faith
2. Set up a double-blind test of faith healing
3. Write up the results.
4. Think up excuses for why it didn't work
4(a). Probably something to do with sheep and goat, but using religious terminology.
5. Declare faith the winner, as the Bible states you can't test God.
6. Tithes!
Click to expand...
As to your number four and four(a), with Limbo, it's always, now and forever, the Trickster God! <creepy music>

Which is rather sad, as I see it, because he's ultimately so limited in the explanations of how things work and why. He seems to have his theory of knowledge gained by mysticism (as he even stated, specifically Christian mysticism) and anything which seems to contradict it or tend to disprove it is laid at the feet of this amazing Trickster God. Pretty black-and-white thinking, really.
 
paiute said:
Your proofs have no effect on the believers. Their beliefs have no effect on your proofs. This is why science and belief systems are orthogonal.
Click to expand...

If religion did more than just believe I'd be inclined to leave it alone. No, religion does more than believe. It claims to knowledge, and those claims fail unless you dress them in magic. These claims to knowledge are so obtuse and we handle them with such abandon that again, if religion wants to protect itself from science by saying science doesn't have a definitive answer, you can at least remember this: Religion has so little to offer that its claims of a God who sends good people to heaven and bad people to hell are so baseless that it could be the other way around and that a God with a sense of humor sends bad people to heaven and good people to hell.

That's how useless reducing religion is, and science showed it. Religion sucks at being correct.
 
Last edited:
The Norseman said:
And what does your years of practicing mysticism say about these questions? You go on and on about how practical and/or how people can gain knowledge through mysticism yet so far that I've read, you remain silent on these issues.
Click to expand...
The only knowledge I have alluded to with reference to mysticism is the realisation of the truth of situation one finds oneself in, through a consideration of what we do not know. There are other approaches to mystical knowledge which are regarded as woo on this forum.

So, in other posts which follow this that I'm quoting, you acknowledge sciences answers and say you don't know any answers other than science. At least, you may correct me if I'm misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
I am saying that in spite of the discoveries of science, I still don't know what is our origin and neither does anyone else.

To be explicit, we don't know what exists*, what existence is or how it came to be.


* If you think you know that a particular thing exists, think again.
 
This thread devolved into what the purpose of the word "retarded" was meant for.
 
Lowpro said:
I'm sure it was prophecized in some religious text. Surely so.
Click to expand...

I would comment about what a pointless prophecy such a prophecy would be or what a useless religiong such a religion would be... but they wouldn't be top contenders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom