Originally posted by Ullri consider religion and science as two different things. religion is more on the lines of philosophy, a set of ideas about how one should live his life, how should he behave, it is about giving hope, etc.
Here is why I have a problem with the whole idea that dinosaurs existed alongside human beings.
As a theist (of a different religion than probably everyone on this site) I don't have the problem with the belief in a higher power(s) but I do acknowledge that religion is only mechanism that we use to explain that which we cannot fully understand and science ha ...[text shortened]... themselves look like clowns and are hurting their cause by thereby excluding rational people.
science is about knowledge, pure knowledge, concrete notions.
for this matter, religion is not more wrong than science because they are about completely different notions. and that is why those that use one to try and disprove the other will fail from the start.
Originally posted by ZahlanziAgreed.
i consider religion and science as two different things. religion is more on the lines of philosophy, a set of ideas about how one should live his life, how should he behave, it is about giving hope, etc.
science is about knowledge, pure knowledge, concrete notions.
for this matter, religion is not more wrong than science because they are about compl ...[text shortened]... ions. and that is why those that use one to try and disprove the other will fail from the start.
I often say this, and I'm nearly equally often disputed of this.
1 edit
Originally posted by black beetleIt is a culture thing not a conspiracy in my opinion, the results would
Sure thing.
These miserable atheists have set a whole machinery, a real plot, the ultimate concpirancy big time in order to deny by any means the Humanity the real, pure knowledge, which is that the Human and the Dinos were together side by side in that arc😵
be much the same, bottom line you don’t hold the common belief
system of the herd you feel the results of that, from being called
anti-science to any number of other things. It would not be the
"atheists" either, though I do believe many of them are part of it, but
their are theist as well.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayThe point is that the scientific finds and evidence prove that the dinos and the Human never lived together. In case we could find scientific finds and evidence of the opposite, then we would accept the opposite. Right now the claim that dinos and the Human lived together is just false and non-scientific. That simple😵
It is a culture thing not a conspiracy in my opinion, the results would
be little different, bottom line you don’t hold the common belief
system of the herd you feel the results of that, from being called
anti-science to any number of other things. It would not be the
"atheists" either, though I do believe many of them are part of it, but
their are theist as well.
Kelly
Originally posted by UllrAre you a Neo-Pagan, or Wicca or something, because there´s likely to be a few others? Zoroastrian on the other hand would be rare.
Here is why I have a problem with the whole idea that dinosaurs existed alongside human beings.
As a theist (of a different religion than probably everyone on this site) I don't have the problem with the belief in a higher power(s) but I do acknowledge that religion is only mechanism that we use to explain that which we cannot fully understand and science ha ...[text shortened]... themselves look like clowns and are hurting their cause by thereby excluding rational people.
Mainstream Christian thinking rejects the God of the Gaps which is really what this argument is about. Most Christians regard their God as being separate from the universe and not bound by it´s rules, and pretty non-interventionist. The (interventionist) God of the Gaps only has control over the gaps in our scientific system, each new discovery reduces God´s dominion. Now, the fundamentalists would therefore have us believe that all science that does not have an immediate technological pay-off is incorrect and immoral. They are in fact attempting to hold back the tide.
This leads most Christians, and for that matter Muslims, Jews, Hindus or whatever to regard their God(s) as being above science. God is then the God of the whole universe and more, and not just of the Gaps in our knowledge. So you have the irony that the people making the argument for creationism, who deny the existence of dinosaurs actually are dinosaurs - even in the eyes of people who believe in the same God as them.
Now since one of the gaps in our knowledge is why and how wave-functions collapse, the God of the Gaps has a pretty large loophole - since being able to do that selectively makes turning water into wine a cheap party trick. However this does not prevent the philosophical position these people take from being bankrupt. Essentially they want you to be afraid of the dark and run to their God for solace.
I am an agnostic, I find the whole idea of supernatural entities rather unlikely, and I find the religion I was brought up with (Christianity) self-contradictory - were I to believe I think a pantheon is more plausible. On the other hand I could be wrong and don´t want to upset any Gods just on the off chance, so I try to respect other peoples beliefs. But really the stuff I hear here from alleged Christians drives me towards complete atheism. If people out there really think the world was created 6,000 years ago and humans shared it with dinosaurs then they really really need psychiatric help - this is real madness territory.
Originally posted by black beetleIt proves they did not live together, I'd have to say, I don't think so.
The point is that the scientific finds and evidence prove that the dinos and the Human never lived together. In case we could find scientific finds and evidence of the opposite, then we would accept the opposite. Right now the claim that dinos and the Human lived together is just false and non-scientific. That simple😵
It may suggest the two were not found together, that is a far cry from
saying proof don't you think?
Kelly
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay….It MAY suggest the two were not found together,
It proves they did not live together, I'd have to say, I don't think so.
It may suggest the two were not found together, that is a far cry from
saying proof don't you think?
Kelly
.… (my emphasis)
There is no “MAY” about it -they have NEVER been found together in the fossil record and, in addition, the fossil record clearly shows they are separated by MANY millions of years -if that isn’t proof or at least very strong evidence that they never were together then what is?
I guess you would always deny such science evidence when it conflicts with your religious beliefs no matter how blatantly absurd your denial of the existence and validity of such scientific evidence.
Hypothetically, if it was against your religious beliefs that the earth is round and not flat, you would be arguing against the evidence that the earth is round by saying things like “how do you know the Earth is round if you haven’t ever seen it as round with your own eyes” etc.
And if I point out to you that astronauts in space have seen it is round then you may just dismiss that as anti-Christ “atheistic propaganda” as part of some mass “atheistic conspiracy” etc -in other words, all the astronauts are simply lying.
But the fact is the fact that the Earth is round is not against your religious beliefs which is why you don’t deny the scientific evidence that it is round. But the fact that dinos and humans are separated by millions of years is against your religious beliefs ( because the Bible doesn’t say this ) and -what a coincidence!!! -you selectively deny any scientific evidence that dinos and humans are separated by millions of years 😛
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonHe denies any science he doesn't understand...
I guess you would always deny such science evidence when it conflicts with your religious beliefs no matter how blatantly absurd your denial of the existence and validity of such scientific evidence.
Originally posted by KellyJayNope; this is an illogical thought because it contradicts the scientific finds and evidence, due to the facy that the dino's fossils are found solely at a specific depth. Once there will be fossils at a different depth the scientist will be oblidged to reconsider this issue. Until then, the case is closed -this is the reason why we take for granded that dinos and the Human never lived at the same period.
It proves they did not live together, I'd have to say, I don't think so.
It may suggest the two were not found together, that is a far cry from
saying proof don't you think?
Kelly
3 edits
Originally posted by black beetleah beetle my trusty feer, come thou henst to scotland, we shall go down by cloudens side, through the hazels spreading wide, oer the waves that gently glide on the bonnie banks of Loch Ness and we shall observe the last living dragon, the Loch Ness monster! Ah it is to him that all dragon variations of the Sicilian defense take its name, now beetle my friend, you made have heard vague reference to the noble Sicilian taking its name from a certain heavenly constellation or the pawn formation after ..g6, but no, it was inspired by the last living dragon and a testimony to Kellyjays research, the loch Ness monster, i invite you all, to the banks of Loch ness to bear witness, Ryanair do cheap flights to prestwick!
Nope; this is an illogical thought because it contradicts the scientific finds and evidence, due to the facy that the dino's fossils are found solely at a specific depth. Once there will be fossils at a different depth the scientist will be oblidged to reconsider this issue. Until then, the case is closed -this is the reason why we take for granded that dinos and the Human never lived at the same period.
and while i am here, here is a poem for you beetle that you may recite to the beautiful Maria, its an old Burns song, called , ca the ewes (call the sheep, as in from the hill side)
Ca' the ewes to the knowes,
Ca' them where the heather grows,
Ca' them where the burnie rowes,
My bonnie dearie
Hark the mavis' e'ening sang,
Sounding Clouden's woods amang;
Then a-faulding let us gang,
My bonie dearie.
We'll gae down by Clouden side,
Thro' the hazels spreading wide,
O'er the waves that sweetly glide,
To the moon sae clearly.
Yonder Clouden's silent towers,
Where, at moonshine's midnight hours,
O'er the dewy-bending flowers,
Fairies dance sae cheery.
Ghaist nor bogle shalt thou fear,
Thou'rt to love and heav'n sae dear,
Nocht of ill may come thee near;
My bonie dearie.
Fair and lovely as thou art,
Thou hast stown my very heart;
I can die - but cannae part,
My bonie dearie.
glossary:
ca' - call
burnie - small river, a stream
rowes - runs, as in a stream running
bonnie - beautiful
mavis - a thrush
sae - so
ghaist - ghost
bogle - spirits, hobgoblins
nocht - none, nothing
stown - stolen
cannae - cannot
dearie - beloved
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAh ye lang leggedy beastie,
ah beetle my trusty feer, come thou henst to scotland, we shall go down by cloudens side, through the hazels spreading wide, oer the waves that gently glide on the bonnie banks of Loch Ness and we shall observe the last living dragon, the Loch Ness monster! Ah it is to him that all dragon variations of the Sicilian defense take its name, now beetle m ...[text shortened]... goblins
nocht - none, nothing
stown - stolen
cannae - cannot
dearie - beloved
my beautiful Maria's heart melted wi it poem!!
So I really thank you deeply from my heart,
for you dedicated your sweet time in order to post us this fine Rabbie's poem🙂
Originally posted by ZahlanziExplain the philosophy of science.
i consider religion and science as two different things. religion is more on the lines of philosophy, a set of ideas about how one should live his life, how should he behave, it is about giving hope, etc.
science is about knowledge, pure knowledge, concrete notions.
for this matter, religion is not more wrong than science because they are about compl ...[text shortened]... ions. and that is why those that use one to try and disprove the other will fail from the start.