Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it always comes back to the creation question ans still not really clear even with sicces thr eories so mnay accpet so easily. its like mnay that have been found lackig now after eyars of theory accpted as fact. one can beleive what they like because we will never know for certain in reality.
The test of any theory is that the same conclusions reached can be predicted for some other similar set of circumstances. Positions of the planets tomorrow, inter stellar explosians, etc. All of the basic theories of the cosmos were tested when we sent men to the moon in 1969. Guess what? They worked. exactly the way scientists had predictied. I might also point out the chance men took when they exploded the first nuclear weapon. Some scientists expected it to set the entire atmosphere afire. Instead they worked to control the exact amounts, mix them in a bomb at the time of detonation and end one of the longest most ferocious wars in the history of mankind. Now we have nukes 100 times stronger than the early ones.
I worked with bible thumpers in the 1960's who first predicted that we would never make it to the moon because it was not the will of the lord and then after Neil Armstrong sent back pictures from there the same people said they never really were on the moon that the pictures were made out west somewhere. That's what all religion is....blind faith and superstition:
SUPERSTITION: A Faith In Something For Which There Is No Material Evidence.
Nobody has ever died and returned to tell about it so all religion is superstition. Dying is death...that's why they call it dead. A near death experience is not dead.
Has there ever been a question, that had a scientific answer (however inadequate), but for which now the best answer is a religious one?
Yes-
The origin of the universe and the multi-verse.
If you examine string theory and the multiple "solutions" for the same mathematical equations, it suggests several hundred thousand independent universes, which occur in an ordered fashion. The brass tacks of advanced physics suggest an ordered nature of the universe which could not have occurred, by statistical probability, by chance.
Likewise, theoretical physics shows us that there are up to sixteen parallel dimensions, most of which are subatomic, which occur in our universe. Could "heaven" or other realms be a part of one of these parallel dimensions? One simply needs to look at the data for the "loss" of energy when photons collide with a diffraction screen. Where did it go? Further, the true solution for Einstein's famous E=mc2 is actually E=+/-mc2, which suggests a movement of energy, of equal and opposite magnitude, out of our sphere of reality. Where is that?
If we believe in science and statistics, we should (or must) believe in religion. To call religion a "superstition" is somewhat ignorant and reveals a lack of understanding of many of the nuances of physics. Did you know that Werner von Braun and James Van Allen were Christians? Were they just idiots?
If you examine string theory and the multiple "solutions" for the same mathematical equations, it suggests several hundred thousand independent universes, which occur in an ordered fashion. The brass tacks of advanced physics suggest an ordered nature of the universe which could not have occurred, by statistical probability, by chance.
Likewise, theoretical physics shows us that there are up to sixteen parallel dimensions, most of which are subatomic, which occur in our universe. Could "heaven" or other realms be a part of one of these parallel dimensions? One simply needs to look at the data for the "loss" of energy when photons collide with a diffraction screen. Where did it go? Further, the true solution for Einstein's famous E=mc2 is actually E=+/-mc2, which suggests a movement of energy, of equal and opposite magnitude, out of our sphere of reality. Where is that?
If we believe in science and statistics, we should (or must) believe in religion. To call religion a "superstition" is somewhat ignorant and reveals a lack of understanding of many of the nuances of physics. Did you know that Werner von Braun and James Van Allen were Christians? Were they just idiots?
Shhh...don't tell arrogant humans that want to use science to destroy religion that there is a limit to formal logic...
Shhh...don't tell arrogant humans that want to use science to destroy religion that there is a limit to formal logic...
And no obvious limit to the ignorance of people actually believing that they are the chosen few among billions....that anyone who doesn't believe the foolishness that they believe will exist in a lake of fire and brimstone for all eternity. Talk about rediculous!
And no obvious limit to the ignorance of people actually believing that they are the chosen few among billions....that anyone who doesn't believe the foolishness that they believe will exist in a lake of fire and brimstone for all eternity. Talk about rediculous!
If you examine string theory and the multiple "solutions" for the same mathematical equations, it suggests several hundred thousand independent universes, which occur in an ordered fashion. The brass tacks of advanced physics suggest an ordered nature of the universe which could not have occurred, by statistical probability, by chance.
Likewise, theoretical physics shows us that there are up to sixteen parallel dimensions, most of which are subatomic, which occur in our universe. Could "heaven" or other realms be a part of one of these parallel dimensions? One simply needs to look at the data for the "loss" of energy when photons collide with a diffraction screen. Where did it go? Further, the true solution for Einstein's famous E=mc2 is actually E=+/-mc2, which suggests a movement of energy, of equal and opposite magnitude, out of our sphere of reality. Where is that?
If we believe in science and statistics, we should (or must) believe in religion. To call religion a "superstition" is somewhat ignorant and reveals a lack of understanding of many of the nuances of physics. Did you know that Werner von Braun and James Van Allen were Christians? Were they just idiots?
You obviously didnt understand the question.
How is religion a better answer to any of those questions than the theories we hold today?
String theory and multiverse theory are hardly agreed upon in the physics realm, you cant just say "well this couldnt have happened by accident, therefore god," no matter how eloquently you try to put it.
I could come up with a religion right now, on the spot, and it would hold as much scientific merit as any other in existence.
Youre assuming there are 16 dimensions, youre assuming one of those is heaven.
How can you not see how flawed that thinking is?
An infinite universe doesnt mean an infinite number of possibilities, otherwise you defeat your own argument in that a religious answer is not the best, as there would be an infinite amount of gods and heavens and hells and demons and werewolves, and zero religions accept that belief.
Nor has science been able to prove that there is no Yeti.
Nor has science been able to prove that there is no Big Foot.
Nor has science been able to prove that the Easter Bunny does not exist.
Nor has science been able to prove that there are no Aliens among us.
It seems that you do not understand how science works.
1. Maybe not, but I did stay at The Y ak And Yeti Hotel in Kathmandu, Nepal (no joke!)
2. If there is one ... I wanna meet him: you know what they say about guys with big feet!
3. Then who was that at The King Of Prussia Mall giving out chocolate easter eggs to the kiddies?
4. Not so sure about that -- have you met my next door neighbors???
Youre assuming there are 16 dimensions, youre assuming one of those is heaven.
How can you not see how flawed that thinking is?
An infinite universe doesnt mean an infinite number of possibilities, otherwise you defeat your own argument in that a religious answer is not the best, as there would be an infinite amount of gods and heavens and hells and demons and werewolves, and zero religions accept that belief.
Try again.
Yes, the concept of being judged by a single, omnipotent entity is probably a silly thing.
But, why would you think a society where logic and probability theory were the highest value would be BETTER?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
