Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: please remove science from religion

  1. #1 please remove science from religion 
    Forum Freshman genep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    37
    Only when science becomes certain, like religions, should they be allowed to mingle.

    As long as science is based on the Uncertainty Principle and particles are waves that are probability-clouds, and light has no time to travel ... and electrons are simultaneously attracted and repelled by protons ... I mean until science gets at least SOME order to it ... until then it should not tarnish or dilute the relative rock-solid values, principles and dogma of gods and their religions.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    This strikes me as one of the most bizarre, nonsensical, contradictory posts I have read on this or any other forum.

    Only when science becomes certain
    One might as well say "only when rabbits become cabbages", "only when orange becomes Australia".
    Science is based upon uncertainty. That is its beauty and its strength. The conclusions of science - whether we call them hypotheses, theories or laws - are always provisional. When new evidence is found, or a fresh interpretation emerges, the conclusions may change, or be strengthened. Science is not only prepared to consider alternative explanations, when the evidence warrants this, but is obliged to: that is a key part of its methodology.

    Only when science becomes certain, like religions, should they be allowed to mingle.
    How exactly do science and religion mingle. Who or what is the authority that permits or probibits mingling?
    Science is an objective, logical, systematic approach to our view of the world. Religion provides a spiritual, emotional, emotive world view. These cannot mingle, yet they are intimately related: they are opposite sides of the same coin.

    As long as science is based on the Uncertainty Principle
    Perhaps you would care to expand upon exactly how science (by implication all science) is based on Heisenberg.

    particles are waves that are probability-clouds
    Why do you find this problematic?

    light has no time to travel
    ?

    and electrons are simultaneously attracted and repelled by protons
    Citations please.

    I mean until science gets at least SOME order to it
    Science is filled with order: the equations that describe everything from orbital motion to eutectic crystallisation, the classifications systems that define the inter-relationships between igneous rocks, or the cladograms of the biologist. Any science in its infancy is a desriptive science and organising those descriptions one of its main goals.
    the relative rock-solid values, principles and dogma of gods and their religions.
    Realtive versus rock-solid? Rock solid versus dogma?

    I have to assume all this was posted with your tongue very firmly in your cheek. I do hope you will confirm this hypothesis shortly. Of course, with different evidence I am prepared to consider the possibility that you are simply crazy.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Futuria
    Posts
    57
    Well we actually dont have a SCI supportive religions (among the major ones at least).

    Futurism with its teachings of "continuos development and progress of Humanity" is not yet BIG.

    What about "Scientology" whats this all about? Sounds "Scientific" to me.

    Realians with its cloning efforts ? Well now that they use it for propaganda tool. but when they get big.. we get another dogma system!?
    Want to have unlimited power? Dont stop learning and u'll have it.

    http://science.mojforum.si
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Katulus
    What about "Scientology" whats this all about? Sounds "Scientific" to me.
    The only science in Scientology is science fiction . L.Ron Hubbard's most imaginative work by far.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    I think the original poster was being sarcastic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I assumed so. I just wanted to see if we had any scientologists on the forum I could lure into a frank and meaningful discussion.
    [Also, I have huge admiration for Hubbard. If you are going to be a con artist do it big.]
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Futuria
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    I assumed so. I just wanted to see if we had any scientologists on the forum I could lure into a frank and meaningful discussion.
    [Also, I have huge admiration for Hubbard. If you are going to be a con artist do it big.]


    I say that often too.
    Want to have unlimited power? Dont stop learning and u'll have it.

    http://science.mojforum.si
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 UV-gap 
    Forum Freshman genep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    This strikes me as one of the most bizarre, nonsensical, contradictory posts I have read on this or any other forum.
    .....
    I have to assume all this was posted with your tongue very firmly in your cheek. I do hope you will confirm this hypothesis shortly. Of course, with different evidence I am prepared to consider the possibility that you are simply crazy.
    Far, far beyond your wildest dreams: I personify the insanity that the mind and its "life" needs to be Reality's "nothing" fiction, thoughts.

    Do a search for "UV-gap" with Google. A UV-gap is the same as physics' quantum-gap except it includes ALL thoughts including those belonging to all the humanities and all the theologies.

    -- simply crazy
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    27
    Also, most of the time it is religion trying to "mingle" with science. Not the other way around.

    Ever heard of Inteligent Design? What about the Pennsilvania and Nebraska court cases? In that case, overly religous parents were trying to force Intelegant Design into science class rooms (and suceeded in Nebraska).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    [Also, I have huge admiration for Hubbard. If you are going to be a con artist do it big.]
    This is close to my attitude towards Joseph Smith.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •