Faith its not just for Christians anymore (771 hits)
Category: NoneRating: -0.44 on 45 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by FryBender (View user info) at 2006-02-10 15:36:18 EST
The term faith is generally ascribed to people who believe in one of the monotheistic religions of the world: Judaism, Christianity, Islam. In all actuality faith is not just a trait that religious people possess, faith is a universal human trait. We all have faith in something, whether it be personal ability, or family, or our belief system, faith is a tie that binds. The purpose of this post is to examine the role of faith in the Theory of Evolution.
Before we get to belief in how life formed on the planet we need to establish how the universe we live in was formed. The Big Bang Theory is the most accepted explanation in the scientific community. The Big Bang Theory estimates that the universe is between 13-20 billion years old from a random cosmic expansion of a subatomic ball that hurled time space and matter in every direction. So everything came from an initial speck of infinite density that had existed outside of space and time. Where this singularity came from and why it exploded cannot be answered. Nor do we find an explanation for the latter formation of complex solar systems approximately 10 billion years later. So to believe in the Big Bang Theory you have to surmise that:
A. Our complex universe, that has produced at least 1 planet that can sustain life formed as the result of the explosion of a mysterious ball of matter that just existed.
B. The chaotic explosion produced galaxies, stars, planets, time, space, gravity and every single known and unknown law of physics.
C. So far we have to believe in several evolutions at this point:
1. Cosmic evolution
2. Stellar evolution
3. Chemical evolution
4. Planetary evolution
Now that we have planet Earth, which is at this point a rock orbiting around a star. Coincidently this barren rocky planet is just the right distance from this star to one day support life. How did organic life spring from this rock anyway? Well then we get to another evolution, Organic evolution, otherwise known as spontaneous generation. Basically Organic evolution surmises that for millions of years it rained on planet Earth and apparently water + rock = life. So basically everything on this planet is related, from apples to zebras, we all came from this "soup". In order to tie everything in we need to believe in 3 more types of evolution:
A. Organic evolution
B. Macro evolution
C. Micro evolution
Interestingly enough the theory of spontaneous generation has been around longer than Charles Darwin, the basic concept of spontaneous generation was proposed by a 6th century (BC) philosopher named Anaximander. So even way back then people were attempting to connect the dots "scientifically". Again not a bad theory for an ancient Greek to believe or a 19th century Scientist to believe, especially when they had no knowledge of the existence of DNA or its complexity. What are the odds of simple life being created from inorganic materials? They vary but they all surpass the scientific Impossibility Standard set at 1 in one hundred billion, billion, billion, billion, billion. Keep in mind we are talking about the development of simple single celled organisms, not complex organisms.
So tell me how belief in the Big Bang Theory and the Subsequent 7 evolutionary steps is done so out of sheer logic and not faith? Say what you will but I will put my faith into a Jewish carpenter who lived 2,000 years ago any day.
User Reviews
Submitted by User10030 (user info) at 2006-02-11 18:27:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Here's the difference: "Intelligent designers" try to find evidence that supports their theory. Scientists look at the evidence, decide on the best possible explanation, and do tests to see if their hypothesis holds water.
That's not to say that there isn't faith in science, but faith in science is what we call scientific law, not scientific theories. The very notion of "theory" leaves faith out. and, scientific laws have been proven and reproven so many times that the faith is well founded.
And, when you said you would rather believe in Jesus than the big bang, you fail to realize that there is eidence to support each of the evolutions you mention, where as believing in Jesus only involves beleieving in a couple of books that were written ... a couple hundred years after his death, if I'm not mistaken.
Let me give you an example of how scientist extrapolate something:
a=1 b=2 c=3 d=4 e=5 f=6 g=7 h=8 i=9 j=10 k=11 l=12 m=13 n=?
Most people will say 14. Do we know that n=14? no, but it wouldn't make sense if it didn't.
Do we know the big bang happened? no, but some of the things we observe about our universe wouldn't make sense if it didn't. Just like I won't say "Oh yea, n=14" nobody (intelligent) is saying "oh yea, the big bang happened" but, people will say "It looks like the big bang probably happened" just like I'l say "It looks like n should probably = 14".
Submitted by Garrik (user info) at 2006-02-11 11:57:12 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
The whole point is scientists don't "believe" or have "faith" in anything, they just use the most logical observable patterns to predict, extrapolate or calculate the most probably cause or outcome required. That is hugely different to a book where some guy called "Luke" tells you about some guy wearing a nappy multiplying fish with his hands.
And whoever said stuff in the bible has been proved right, show me the evidence. I constantly hear "blah blah Jesus was real, blah blah blah". Prove it, I'm sick of hearing it and never seeing any evidence. And also note: The fact that the bible ascribes a few events in history to god or whatever means nothing, I could write a book and say "yay for the Garrik smoteth the unbelievers in their towers of world trading and it was as fire." that doesn't mean if some retard picks up my book in 2000 years they can go "hey look the world trade centres really WERE destroyed, it's all true!!!".
Garrik 9:12
And he spaketh; you are all retarded. And yay, t'was true.
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-02-10 20:15:05 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
That is the worst explanation or understanding of anything ever.
Might I suggest that you repeat 9th grade and get back to me.
-2.
Submitted by skrapmetal (user info) at 2006-02-10 20:08:50 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
This horse is pulp already. Let it go.
Submitted by Oxymoron (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:57:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:23:33 (#)
Ranking: 0
you are misunderstanding eveolution oxymoron.
it's not that monkeys turned into man its that they share a common ancestor.
as we do with all living things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You just reworded the same thing I said
Submitted by Death_Metal_Dude (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:48:28 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
wow you're dumb
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:23:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
you are misunderstanding eveolution oxymoron.
it's not that monkeys turned into man its that they share a common ancestor.
as we do with all living things.
Submitted by Oxymoron (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:21:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-02-10 17:52:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
This is what happens when we don't spend enough money on education.
point of order: Is there anything Biblical or otherwise to assert that Jesus was, in fact, a carpenter? I think its common knowledge that his what. step-daddy was a carpenter, but does that naturally lead to the theory that Jesus was himself handy with a hammer and nail or whatever sorts of things carpenters used 2,000 years ago, mud pies maybe.
Actually, now that I think about it, what did Jesus do you know for money. They did have money then, I myself own a couple of coppers from the era and I'm guess that they were not all that different from us in that they had to exchange this money for things like food and shelter. If I were Jesus I would have snapped my fingers and created money, but I don't think that Jesus was a counterfeiter anymore than he was a carpenter.
public speaker maybe?
How much do you figure the old boy charged for public appearances?
Maybe he did the opening prayers for ball games. How did that go?
Dear Heavenly uh dad we're gathered here today to watch a group of grown men see who can force this leather thing through that hoop up there the most times.
And if he did that do you think God would care?
Maybe God peaked down to see if Jesus was pulling for one side or the other and tripped someone from the opposing team.
Nah, if there is a God, I don't think he cheats at sports.
I think I'll stick with public speaker.
Now the question is, what Jesus really Jewish? I suppose that all depends on whether or not you think of Jewish as a race or a religion. Most of the people I know who are born and raised Jewish and then later convert to something else don't call themselves Jewish anymore.
hmmm
Maybe it would be better if you said that you would rather put your faith in a public speaker who was a Jew by race who renounced Judaism and has been dead for roughly 2,000 years than a theory that has been proven countless times though various methods that do not become less valid for you lack of understanding.
lacks a certain je ne sais quoi though doesn't it
In the meantime, mind if I recommend a book? Sure why not, you should really pick up a copy of The Ancestor's Tale by Richard Dawkins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God damn your sexy...
Though I'd like to point out that Evolution(the theory of adapting and changing) is not the topic here. It is Creationism vs Big Bang.
I for one believe in evolution. However, I do not believe in inter-species evolution(Monkey to Man). There's absolutely no evidence for that.
I also do not believe in the Big Bang theory. I have no evidence to back this up, but my opposition doesn't either.
Still think you're sexy, even if you're not a monkey.
Submitted by userpete86 (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:16:34 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Oh, and life could have arisen from RNA based chemical reactions that are arguably not alive and naturally occuring in perfectly heated pools of carbon.
Protobionts are the name.
http://www.biocab.org/Protobiont.html
Submitted by userpete86 (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:13:12 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
The entire universe and life as we know it makes complete sense. The fact that you can't explain something doesn't mean that it didn't happen that way by accident.
That being said, intelligent design is retarded, even if (as I happen to believe) God created everything anyway. The fact of the matter is that if life didn't happen to be as it is today we simply wouldn't be here to argue the matter.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 18:08:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Jesus should've been aborted. The Bible would've been way shorter:
"I unsheeted my sword. Put it up Mary's cunt. She cried all night and shat Jesus in the morning. We buried it next to the donkey barn. Fin."
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2006-02-10 17:52:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
This is what happens when we don't spend enough money on education.
point of order: Is there anything Biblical or otherwise to assert that Jesus was, in fact, a carpenter? I think its common knowledge that his what. step-daddy was a carpenter, but does that naturally lead to the theory that Jesus was himself handy with a hammer and nail or whatever sorts of things carpenters used 2,000 years ago, mud pies maybe.
Actually, now that I think about it, what did Jesus do you know for money. They did have money then, I myself own a couple of coppers from the era and I'm guess that they were not all that different from us in that they had to exchange this money for things like food and shelter. If I were Jesus I would have snapped my fingers and created money, but I don't think that Jesus was a counterfeiter anymore than he was a carpenter.
public speaker maybe?
How much do you figure the old boy charged for public appearances?
Maybe he did the opening prayers for ball games. How did that go?
Dear Heavenly uh dad we're gathered here today to watch a group of grown men see who can force this leather thing through that hoop up there the most times.
And if he did that do you think God would care?
Maybe God peaked down to see if Jesus was pulling for one side or the other and tripped someone from the opposing team.
Nah, if there is a God, I don't think he cheats at sports.
I think I'll stick with public speaker.
Now the question is, what Jesus really Jewish? I suppose that all depends on whether or not you think of Jewish as a race or a religion. Most of the people I know who are born and raised Jewish and then later convert to something else don't call themselves Jewish anymore.
hmmm
Maybe it would be better if you said that you would rather put your faith in a public speaker who was a Jew by race who renounced Judaism and has been dead for roughly 2,000 years than a theory that has been proven countless times though various methods that do not become less valid for you lack of understanding.
lacks a certain je ne sais quoi though doesn't it
In the meantime, mind if I recommend a book? Sure why not, you should really pick up a copy of The Ancestor's Tale by Richard Dawkins.
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 17:21:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by MackTuesday (user info) at 2006-02-10 17:13:26 (#)
Ranking: -2
nope not trolling, believe every word I wrote...
-----------
Then you must be willfully ignorant -- why else would you be satisfied to say, "God did it," and leave it at that? A wise person shuts his trap about things he doesn't understand, so please shut your trap until your stubborn ignorance develops into at least a halting willingness to understand *why* scientists venture to put forth these ideas, and how hard they work to avoid conceptual and experimental error.
You don't seem to understand what a grave insult it is to call what scientists do "faith". While on the job, a good scientist never excepts anything to be proven beyond possibility of doubt. THAT IS NOT FAITH. Faith involves believing in something without evidence, or despite evidence to the contrary. To say that a scientist practices faith (on the job) is to call that scientist incompetent.
It may be above your head, but that doesn't mean faith is required to believe it.
-------------------------------------------
no doubt scientist work hard. Nevertheless as it stands if you believe in religion or evolution you are making a leap of faith.
Submitted by MackTuesday (user info) at 2006-02-10 17:14:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Darn it, I meant "accepts," not "excepts."
Submitted by MackTuesday (user info) at 2006-02-10 17:13:26 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
nope not trolling, believe every word I wrote...
-----------
Then you must be willfully ignorant -- why else would you be satisfied to say, "God did it," and leave it at that? A wise person shuts his trap about things he doesn't understand, so please shut your trap until your stubborn ignorance develops into at least a halting willingness to understand *why* scientists venture to put forth these ideas, and how hard they work to avoid conceptual and experimental error.
You don't seem to understand what a grave insult it is to call what scientists do "faith". While on the job, a good scientist never excepts anything to be proven beyond possibility of doubt. THAT IS NOT FAITH. Faith involves believing in something without evidence, or despite evidence to the contrary. To say that a scientist practices faith (on the job) is to call that scientist incompetent.
It may be above your head, but that doesn't mean faith is required to believe it.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:55:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Oxymoron (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:34:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
"The Theory of Evolution, although not perfect, comes from verifiable facts.
Religions are mere stories. Christianity is no different than Santa Claus."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no facts in Science.
===
Wow...first time I hear that one.
Fuck all we've discovered so far...let's go back 3000 years!
Woohoo!
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:38:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by MackTuesday (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:34:40 (#)
Ranking: 2
+2 not because I agree or because I think your post was insightful, but because I think you're trolling and don't believe a word of what you just wrote. I hope your post pisses off as many people as possible because sanity needs to outvoice the nutjobs that spew bullshit like this.
----------------------------------
nope not trolling, believe every word I wrote, not trying to piss anyone off, and well I have been called far worse than a nutjob. Thanks for the +2 though
Submitted by MackTuesday (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:34:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
+2 not because I agree or because I think your post was insightful, but because I think you're trolling and don't believe a word of what you just wrote. I hope your post pisses off as many people as possible because sanity needs to outvoice the nutjobs that spew bullshit like this.
Submitted by Oxymoron (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:34:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"The Theory of Evolution, although not perfect, comes from verifiable facts.
Religions are mere stories. Christianity is no different than Santa Claus."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no facts in Science.
The events in the Bible, although not all of them, have been proven to actually have happened. Jesus was a real man. Muhhamed was a real man. Abraham was a real man. Moses was a real man.
Whether these things accurred with all the miracles of god or not is up to the believer/skeptic.
The Bible is looked at as one of the first History books, maybe with a little spin on it. Homer's Iliad is looked at much the same way.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:31:41 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Slut.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:27:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:20:18 (#)
Ranking: 2
ubmitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:12:11 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:03:42 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:51 (#)
Ranking: -2
===
My point is, from a logical standpoint, religions has the burden of the proof, not atheists.
____________________________________________________________________
That much I agree with. But then again, I don't think that God can be proven.
===
Yes! And that is why you have Faith in God and I have none. And that is why, according to the Bible, you will go to Heaven because it's hard to have Faith and God likes it. And that's why I will go to Hell where my soul will be ravaged and raped for eternity, and will like it.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:27:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
yeah they'll come up with some new form of math one day that undoes everything we've learned since euclid and then the world will spiral down into nothingness as everything our reality was based on crashes and all math nerds engineers simultaneously implode.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:20:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
ubmitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:12:11 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:03:42 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:51 (#)
Ranking: -2
===
My point is, from a logical standpoint, religions has the burden of the proof, not atheists.
____________________________________________________________________
That much I agree with. But then again, I don't think that God can be proven. Then again, I don't think that ANYTHING (outside of pure math) can be proven. Logically speaking.
Ah, the pure, unmittigated power of doubting everything.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:19:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
no, the word itself, in a religious context, is associated with all belief systems that involve a god or gods instead of a higher state of mind not just the ones from abraham. that's like saying the last few thousand years that hinduism has been around faith was never associated with theirs because it doesn't stem from judaism.
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:18:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:51 (#)
Ranking: -2
There is scientifical evidence that asserts the Theory of Evolution.
There is zero evidence that there is a God.
Therefore, believing in God requires you to have Faith. Which is the purpose of all religions, otherwise we would just acknowledge God as a fact and Faith would be obsolete.
You are an idiot. I have Faith and certitude in that.
faith would never be obsolete,we will never know everything there is to know in an infinate universe. Saying faith can be made obsolete is like saying love could be made obsolete. On a side note, I think this is my first insult from Caul....woohoooo now I am feeling like a member of Uber!
===
My point is, from a logical standpoint, religions has the burden of the proof, not atheists.
The Theory of Evolution, although not perfect, comes from verifiable facts.
Religions are mere stories. Christianity is no different than Santa Claus.
Religions disappear over time (Christianity might be viewed as Greek mythlogogy in the future). Physical facts don't.
And love is already obsolete, ma nouille. It's a mere chemical reaction that dissipates over the course of months and disappears when your girlfriend gets fat.
-----------------------------
Well fat girls need love too ya know, I guess thats why black men evolved :D
Regardless have my own beliefs as well as every other person on the planet, and I do not try and force my beliefs on others. If you want to believe in Evolution, Islam, Jehovas Witness, Earth worship, whatever thats on you (except hippies, I dislike hippies). The only point I wanted to get across is that we all have faith in something.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:17:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:03:22 (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:58:39 (#)
Ranking: 2
You actually don't need to draw this out as far as you did to show the importance of "faith" in science. Simply according to standard scientific method, things cannot be proven, they can only be disproven, because if you want to be intellectually honest, there is always the possibility out there that a phenomenon which will disprove your theory can be found. So, basically, nothing is ever "true" or "known" as we understand those words. Rather most everything is taken on faith, after repeated examples.
===
The logic of disproving is something common from Christians. But the thing is, you have to prove something before disproving it, otherwise you can make up anything. Religion has not even gone past that first step. The Theory of Evolution has.
Welcome to reality my religious friend.
_____________________________________________________________
No. You have to assert something, hypothesize something, possit something, come up with a theory to test before you can disprove the theory. You can never PROVE the theory. Ever.
The closest you can come is to say, "Gosh, we just REALLY don't think anything is ever going to come along to change our minds about this."
Karl Popper/Thomas Kuhn
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:13:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:10:27 (#)
Ranking: 0
so when did faith only describe the believers of judeo-christian religions? i missed that definition somewhere along the path of life.
I just used the judeo-christian religions for example, they are the best known. As I point out faith is a universal trait and as such every person, regardless of religion has it.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:12:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:03:42 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:51 (#)
Ranking: -2
There is scientifical evidence that asserts the Theory of Evolution.
There is zero evidence that there is a God.
Therefore, believing in God requires you to have Faith. Which is the purpose of all religions, otherwise we would just acknowledge God as a fact and Faith would be obsolete.
You are an idiot. I have Faith and certitude in that.
faith would never be obsolete,we will never know everything there is to know in an infinate universe. Saying faith can be made obsolete is like saying love could be made obsolete. On a side note, I think this is my first insult from Caul....woohoooo now I am feeling like a member of Uber!
===
My point is, from a logical standpoint, religions has the burden of the proof, not atheists.
The Theory of Evolution, although not perfect, comes from verifiable facts.
Religions are mere stories. Christianity is no different than Santa Claus.
Religions disappear over time (Christianity might be viewed as Greek mythlogogy in the future). Physical facts don't.
And love is already obsolete, ma nouille. It's a mere chemical reaction that dissipates over the course of months and disappears when your girlfriend gets fat.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:10:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
so when did faith only describe the believers of judeo-christian religions? i missed that definition somewhere along the path of life.
Submitted by Oxymoron (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:09:35 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Bender, what you've done here is expose the hypocracy of Big Bang believers/Atheists. They will argue with you till the cows come home about how the universe was created, but don't relize their evidence is as Faith based as your's.
I think it's just as easy to believe that everything was created by a supreme being, than it is to believe everything just showed up on it's own.
Whatever the true origin of life is. It makes me feel better to believe in something that gives me purpose, rather than just being here.
And if I die and find out my life of believing in a creator is false. What have I lost?
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:03:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:51 (#)
Ranking: -2
There is scientifical evidence that asserts the Theory of Evolution.
There is zero evidence that there is a God.
Therefore, believing in God requires you to have Faith. Which is the purpose of all religions, otherwise we would just acknowledge God as a fact and Faith would be obsolete.
You are an idiot. I have Faith and certitude in that.
faith would never be obsolete,we will never know everything there is to know in an infinate universe. Saying faith can be made obsolete is like saying love could be made obsolete. On a side note, I think this is my first insult from Caul....woohoooo now I am feeling like a member of Uber!
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 16:03:22 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:58:39 (#)
Ranking: 2
You actually don't need to draw this out as far as you did to show the importance of "faith" in science. Simply according to standard scientific method, things cannot be proven, they can only be disproven, because if you want to be intellectually honest, there is always the possibility out there that a phenomenon which will disprove your theory can be found. So, basically, nothing is ever "true" or "known" as we understand those words. Rather most everything is taken on faith, after repeated examples.
===
The logic of disproving is something common from Christians. But the thing is, you have to prove something before disproving it, otherwise you can make up anything. Religion has not even gone past that first step. The Theory of Evolution has.
Welcome to reality my religious friend.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:51 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
There is scientifical evidence that asserts the Theory of Evolution.
There is zero evidence that there is a God.
Therefore, believing in God requires you to have Faith. Which is the purpose of all religions, otherwise we would just acknowledge God as a fact and Faith would be obsolete.
You are an idiot. I have Faith and certitude in that.
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:59:08 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
DUDE IT'S FRIDAY AT 4 PM, STOP THINKING SO MUCH
Submitted by RamenNoodle (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:58:41 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:52:36 (#)
Ranking: 0
so, God created this enormous universe of billions of billion of stars and planets, but only one planet with complex higher life forms?
What a Loser.
I did not once say that Earth is the only planet with life, besides just pointing out that no matter what you believe you are believing on faith.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:58:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
You actually don't need to draw this out as far as you did to show the importance of "faith" in science. Simply according to standard scientific method, things cannot be proven, they can only be disproven, because if you want to be intellectually honest, there is always the possibility out there that a phenomenon which will disprove your theory can be found. So, basically, nothing is ever "true" or "known" as we understand those words. Rather most everything is taken on faith, after repeated examples.
Submitted by sl4tt3ry (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:55:13 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by RamJetMax (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:52:30 (#)
Ranking: -2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Quint (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:44:37 (#)
Ranking: 0
Science>Religion. Every time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Religion>Government. Every time.
.......................................
Rock>Scissors. Every time.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:52:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
so, God created this enormous universe of billions of billion of stars and planets, but only one planet with complex higher life forms?
What a Loser.
Submitted by RamJetMax (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:52:30 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by Quint (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:44:37 (#)
Ranking: 0
Science>Religion. Every time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Religion>Government. Every time.
Submitted by Garrik (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:51:41 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Science is based on observed evidence, patterns, predictions and extrapolations (be it back or forth) not on "what some geezers called Mike and John say".
Submitted by Garrik (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:50:37 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Or macrobiology it seems
Submitted by Garrik (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:49:42 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
You obviously don't understand cosmology.
Submitted by dove666 (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:47:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Visitors scraped the shit off their shoes.
Submitted by Quint (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:44:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Science>Religion. Every time.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2006-02-10 15:40:10 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Prime Mover Theory