1. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    1977
    18 Dec '16 10:22
    http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20161215-if-we-made-contact-with-aliens-how-would-religions-react

    I seems to me that insofar as religions have any response to this at all, monotheistic ones are more likely to struggle to integrate it into their ideologies, whereas polytheistic ones tend to be more open to plurality and multiplicity.
  2. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91629
    18 Dec '16 20:36
    Originally posted by moonbus
    http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20161215-if-we-made-contact-with-aliens-how-would-religions-react

    I seems to me that insofar as religions have any response to this at all, monotheistic ones are more likely to struggle to integrate it into their ideologies, whereas polytheistic ones tend to be more open to plurality and multiplicity.
    This is pretty big.

    "scientists say its more "when" not "if" ' in terms of finding aliens.
    Fascinating...[gonna read some more]
  3. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    1977
    19 Dec '16 15:55
    It's a big jump from finding exo-life (microbes) to finding intelligent exo-life. I'm not holding my breath till we find the latter.
  4. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    44172
    19 Dec '16 20:33
    I think it is great that science brings new ideas and information to human thought,whereas religion rehashes the same old BS.
  5. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91629
    19 Dec '16 22:09
    Originally posted by moonbus
    It's a big jump from finding exo-life (microbes) to finding intelligent exo-life. I'm not holding my breath till we find the latter.
    But the theory of evolution would tell you that life evolves.
    So if you find microbes on one planet then the likelihood of finding intelligent life is just a hop,skip, and a jump away.
  6. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    20 Dec '16 17:40
    Originally posted by OdBod
    I think it is great that science brings new ideas and information to human thought,whereas religion rehashes the same old BS.
    Same old anti-religious BS. You think science can explain everything. We ask it one question, Why the universe? and look how inept your god of science is.
  7. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    8544
    21 Dec '16 09:06
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Same old anti-religious BS. You think science can explain everything. We ask it one question, Why the universe? and look how inept your god of science is.
    'Why' is such a human, emotive question. The one that really matters is 'how.'

    Science does a much better job at answering that question.
  8. Standard memberFetchmyjunk
    Garbage disposal
    Garbage dump
    Joined
    20 Apr '16
    Moves
    2040
    21 Dec '16 10:46
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    'Why' is such a human, emotive question. The one that really matters is 'how.'

    Science does a much better job at answering that question.
    And some believe that God and science are not mutually exclusive.
  9. Joined
    22 Sep '07
    Moves
    44172
    21 Dec '16 11:48
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Same old anti-religious BS. You think science can explain everything. We ask it one question, Why the universe? and look how inept your god of science is.
    Science does not claim to explain everything,in fact it recognises that current ideas will change and develop with the acquisition of new information.Religion seems to limit thought by adherence to a number of absolutes[depending on the type of religion].Your own post for example has assumed that there must be a why to the universe.
  10. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    1977
    22 Dec '16 01:01
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    But the theory of evolution would tell you that life evolves.
    So if you find microbes on one planet then the likelihood of finding intelligent life is just a hop,skip, and a jump away.
    What the theory of evolution does not tell us is how life gets started. It remains to be seen whether life does in fact get started wherever conditions favour it, or whether something else is required beyond chemicals and energy. If the former, then the monotheistic religions are going to have trouble integrating it into their ideology, IMO.

    How long it would take to hop, skip, and jump from microbes to intelligent life, is another kettle of fish. It took a few billion years here, according to the best available evidence. A higher temperature and a different mix of chemicals might decrease the time required elsewhere, whereas a lower temperature might considerably lengthen the time, or preclude higher forms from evolving altogether. The evidence of one planet is not a statistically significant sample.

    Moreover, there have been several mass extinction periods in Earth's history. Even if life were to get started on another suitable planet, nothing guarantees that it would survive catastrophes similar to Earth's previous mass extinctions.
  11. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35525
    22 Dec '16 11:06
    Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
    And some believe that God and science are not mutually exclusive.
    And I am one of them.

    Please explain how you think that God and science are mutually exclusive.
  12. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35525
    22 Dec '16 11:081 edit
    Originally posted by OdBod
    Science does not claim to explain everything,in fact it recognises that current ideas will change and develop with the acquisition of new information.Religion seems to limit thought by adherence to a number of absolutes[depending on the type of religion].Your own post for example has assumed that there must be a why to the universe.
    Of course there is a why. There has been ever since there were humans.

    How is easy. The evidence is right in front of us.

    It's the why that is hard.
  13. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35525
    22 Dec '16 11:12
    Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
    'Why' is such a human, emotive question. The one that really matters is 'how.'

    Science does a much better job at answering that question.
    Yes, science does a superb job of answering how.

    Just as religion answers the why. Pretending there is no why doesn't answer that question.
  14. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35525
    22 Dec '16 11:14
    Originally posted by moonbus
    http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20161215-if-we-made-contact-with-aliens-how-would-religions-react

    I seems to me that insofar as religions have any response to this at all, monotheistic ones are more likely to struggle to integrate it into their ideologies, whereas polytheistic ones tend to be more open to plurality and multiplicity.
    I have to resort to an internet meme for a response to this.

    "Not sure if serious."
  15. SubscriberGhost of a Duke
    A Spirited Misfit
    in London
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    8544
    22 Dec '16 16:16
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    Yes, science does a superb job of answering how.

    Just as religion answers the why. Pretending there is no why doesn't answer that question.
    touché.

    Have a great Christmas.
Back to Top