agathodaimon
Senior member
- Jul 11, 2005
- 488
- 0
- 0
I don't reply to off topic threads a lot, but MAN there are a lot of religion/science-oriented threads.
Originally posted by: Vic
I await your scientific proof that the FSM doesn't exist. In the meantime, the use of reductio ad absurdum in this case is a logical fallacy. Your personal preferences about what is or is not absurd have no meaning in an argument about our universe which is, in real scientific truth, far more absurd than we have ever and could possibly ever imagine.
Yes, but you aren't putting absolute faith in the process, then, because you are reserving judgement based on results. That's like if I say, "I trust in the justice system - except when it fails, like in [insert case here]".Originally posted by: blackllotus
You can have faith in the scientific process as a whole while still not having faith in all scientific theories out there.
People who disbelieve evolution or believe the young earth theory would still be idiots regardless of whether or not they happen to be correct, because they have no factual basis for either of those two beliefs.
Originally posted by: RichardE
Yes, Look at the progression since say 1000AD. Eventually Science will become the new religion, we will have faith in ourselves.
Originally posted by: MainFramed
isn't there more scientific proof there is a good than there is there isn't one?
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: MainFramed
isn't there more scientific proof there is a good than there is there isn't one?
No. There is zero both ways, just as there is zero proof of and against the existence of unicorns.
Originally posted by: FrontlineWarrior
have you seen the movie idiocracy? in the future idiocy is "superior" too.
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: 6000SUX
Originally posted by: MainFramed
isn't there more scientific proof there is a good than there is there isn't one?
No. There is zero both ways, just as there is zero proof of and against the existence of unicorns.
This is off-topic but, the modern image of the unicorn (white horse with a single, spiraling horn) probably never existed, but perhaps the tales of such dating back thousands of years ago were based on the rhinoceros or a different animal, and there are evidences for the various theories. Read the Wikipedia article.
Originally posted by: KLin
You post a flamebait topic but don't want any flaming. Right. :roll:
Originally posted by: ppdes
Nothing science can do because facts are irrelevant to believers. Education might eventually manage it, however. If children knew the details of thousands of religions at a young age, they might realize how stupid it is to think any particular one of them is actually correct, for example.
Originally posted by: EXman
Originally posted by: KLin
You post a flamebait topic but don't want any flaming. Right. :roll:
typical trolling from an anti-Christian know it all.
If anyone can prove there is no God, which I think is an arrogant and more than likely a waste of time cause our science cannot prove everything, please stop calling church peeps stupid.
Can I prove there is a God? probably not to your satisfaction, no. Can you prove there isn't...
Originally posted by: BladeVenom
The fact that so many people believe in God proves that a belief in God is superior to atheism. If such a belief were not superior then it wouldn't have evolved as a dominant trait in so many societies. So Darwinism proves the superiority of religious beliefs.
Originally posted by: johnnobts
nom b/c science can never answer the deeper questions we as human beings struggle with:
1. who am i?
2. what is my purpose?
3. where am i going?