Science V Religion

Status
Not open for further replies.
First there was Ptolemy, he suggested the the earth was the centre of the universe. The church loved the idea, yes we are!

Then there was Copernicus, by observing elliptical orbits of other planets he could confirm that the Sun was the centre of the Universe.
Church: Oh ok, the Sun is the centre of the universe.

Then there was Gallileo who saw something orbiting Jupiter.
This could only mean that neither the sun or the earth was the centre of the universe. The church threw him in jail for the rest of his life.

Science says - church listens but does not hear. Nor see, as the blindfold is too thick.

What did i here on the news today.... Churches bombed in Iraq, priests kidnapped and murdered.
Bombs found at airport mailed to Jews in the US....

I know first hand that religous people are blind, small minded, self assured, blinker wearing morons who need to open their eyes and start thinking.

Jibber jabber
 
Faith yes, but based on something tangible and testable to a certain degree, logic and reason, if you will.

I dont see how one can "use" science.

Maybe my idea of what science is, is not quite the same as the classical definition...
 
Faith yes, but based on something tangible and testable to a certain degree, logic and reason, if you will.

You cannot test the assumptions that underpin the scientific method, especially if used in the realist stance. They are taken a priori. I will also point out that logic and reason don't mean what you seem to think they do. For a position to be logical and reasonable, it only has to be consistent with the evidence gathered and the assumptions taken, nothing more.

I dont see how one can "use" science.

Maybe my idea of what science is, is not quite the same as the classical definition...

I think that is quite likely. What level of scientific education do you have? Because IME science at basic levels is taught with a surety that simply doesn't exist when you get further up the chain, because you realise that most of what you've been taught before is an approximation, or in some cases just plain wrong, but predictively accurate, and that predictive accuracy is what science cares about.
 
63028_1654562525616_1283665798_31774454_1791855_n.jpg
 
Not sure exactly which ideas you think religion is intent on keeping forever... Though I'm sure you'll list various examples of people misusing religion, or people misusing science, or you'll show a general misunderstanding of faith in general.

You assume too much, sunshine ;):p
 
you missed "kill the people that dont belive in your religion" out of your flow chart Gerrard

Yeah I see Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, etc. rampaging on the streets killing non-believers all the time.

To claim to follow both, to me is hypocritical, it can be nothing else.

That's incorrect, sorry.
 
Last edited:
Ahh, ok. Dolph seems to be affirming the same kind of thing I think, apart from the education thing, not sure how that is relevant.

Because your knowledge of what the scientific method is all about and how it actually works increases with scientific education. Someone with a degree in a science subject will have a different understanding of what science can and cannot do compared to someone with just a GCSE.
 
Ahh, ok. Dolph seems to be affirming the same kind of thing I think, apart from the education thing, not sure how that is relevant.

As RDM says, understanding of the scientific method, the purpose of it, and its limitations varies hugely with the level of scientific education undertaken.

I'm not sure how you can say I was affirming the things you think, unless you put your point across badly, because I directly argued against several of the points in your post :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom