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.
The difference is that science has a process in place to validate new information and use it to improve itself, while many ancient religions work hard to rationalize their failings and even fight against remediation.
God created the Universe, including science and people. Until I see scientists CREATE entire universes then, there's no way anybody can ever convince me otherwise. Scientists=small potatoes.
Actually with string theory and experiments with subatomic particles there is a possibility that scientists will be able to create tiny universes.
Back to the original post, while this may be interesting and possibly revolutionary if these guys were or are successful it still doesn't mean we are replacing God with science. God (or any higher higher intelligence) and science can still coexist. These experiments and our theories only show what method was used and how it was done in a more detailed way.
On a side note, it would be really interesting and kind of mind-screwing to find out our universe started out in some laboratory of creatures trying to understand their universe. Maybe they have forums in that universe debating on whether their god's existence conflicts with their science.
Back to the original post, while this may be interesting and possibly revolutionary if these guys were or are successful it still doesn't mean we are replacing God with science. God (or any higher higher intelligence) and science can still coexist. ... Maybe they have forums in that universe debating on whether their god's existence conflicts with their science.
The use of the word "their" is important, in the context of this thread. It's appropriate, and quite important, in the context of God. The failures of religion generally isn't not a generic failure, but rather a specific failure: A specific conception of God, i.e., the Roman Catholic conception of God, the Protestant Christian conception of God, the Jewish conception of God, etc. So while referring to "their god" make sense and cuts to the heart of the issue, by contrast, there is no such thing as "their science". Science, by definition is common, encompassing even conflicting understandings of something for which definite proof elevating one conception over the other eludes us. That one aspect of science, the acknowledgement of the Whole and every perspective's rightful place in shaping our collective understanding of the Whole, is actually what's missing from the religions within which most of the failure occurs.
I am kind of jumping in here but I think in time science will prove religion wrong and more then likely prove there is no god but on that one I am not so sure.
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.
