SNAKEBITE wrote:it wouldn't matter what I say or have said, since my outlook on things is fundamentally different then yours you'll always come to your own conclusions.
Maybe so, unfortunately.
but again, this is what I took issue with
"When asked what they would do if scientists were to disprove a particular religious belief, nearly two-thirds (64%) of people say they would continue to hold to what their religion teaches rather than accept the contrary scientific finding, according to the results of an October 2006 Time magazine poll"
thats the rhetorical point that made me say "I love those rhetorical scientifical questions like
"If I can prove something that I currently can't would you believe me?""
I think you missed me posting that this was a bullshit question. Do not mistake this for science- no scientist would say this.
my response was not against science as a whole just the link Brian left but now took down. so please don't make it about our history of conversations and your misunderstandings as to my position with science and religion. It wouldn't matter how clear I am about it since it doesn't fit into your paradigm you will always take issue. thats cool, but maybe its not me being unclear but some people holding on too tight to what they believe they can't wrap their head around me critiquing something I still respect.
Ok, that's cool.
History has not debunked religion,
yes, it has.
just the people who use it to manipulate the masses for the people in powers will.
Not everything is a conspiracy.
But if its impossible to disprove god then science should ask the rhetorical question "what if it did would you change your mind" and then call them stupid if they say no...everyone in that particular scenario ends up sounding stupid IMHO.
This question is not scientific. It's impossible to ask this question following the rules of science, since it falls outside of the rigid parameters of scientific study.
but I really don't think you can judge my stance since I feel you have totally time and time again misunderstood my attitude. Maybe you might want to listen better and not with the Snakebite hates science ears.
Ok, well- maybe it's your approach. If you don't hate science I'm open to hear that. BUT - what I hear is that you don't really accept science for what it is, or accept the rules it follows. I don't understand why.
I respect all faiths, they are the same.
See? Science is the antithesis of faith. Faith does not fall under the umbrella of science at all.
We're all trying to find the truths.
This I agree on
With quantum physics we're finding perception can change reality.
I know thats only one aspect of it but still something we've just scrapped the surface of.
Quantum physics is fundamentally wrong in many important ways, In the same ways that Newton's theory of gravity was wrong. It describes a system in a makeshift way without understanding it. It's flawed in that it fails to grasp the structural reality of spacetime "particles/waves" , but it's the best we have right now to make certain things make sense. That said, it does not change reality.
so, what if Science does prove the existence of a grand creator, whatever you want to call it, but what if it was aware, intelligent and was responsible for what we experience?
Impossible. It's entirely impossible for science to contemplate god.
What if we find the galactic core has consciousness
We would possibly eventually be able to measure it.
and each core is intentionally responsible for all things in our particular galaxy and that same consciousness is what some call God, would you believe? would you let go of all these scientific ideas of what god isn't and become a man of god so to speak? or would you deny it three times?
Sure I'd believe it. But what you're suggesting is almost certainly untrue.
cuz thats exactly what the article Brian left said in its reverse. but the question is avoided the same way the people he is judging avoid it.
I highly doubt that. But I have no way of knowing, since the article is no longer linked to.
so again, my beef, in this case, is with the author who claims science as his faith of choice.
Science is not a faith. IT IS THE OPPOSITE OF FAITH.
I do see trends across the science community and that trend is intolerance towards people of religious faith and thats divisive which is unhealthy.
just sayin. you don't agree, fine. go with god.
I'll go with god right after I hang with Santa.
[edited to clarify view of quantum physics in blue.]