Posted on 06/10/2007 6:38:21 PM PDT by kathsua
Empirical science and religion differ in some fundamental ways. Scientists look for questions to ask. Priests (preachers, rabbis, etc) just provide answers.
Science has theories that are subject to change. In 1896, physicists believed that atoms were the smallest particles of matter. A year latter J.J. Thomson overturned this theory by reporting his discovery that atoms were actually comprised of smaller charged particles he called "protons", "electrons" and "neutrons". Later research demonstrated that Thomson's particles were comprised of even smaller particles.
Religion has truths that are to be accepted without question. Those who question these truths may be treated as heretics.
Real scientists encourage questions. They even ask questions about established theories including aspects of the Theory of Relativity and try to find ways these theories might be wrong. Stephan Hawking demonstrated what a real scientist does when he suggested he had been wrong when he suggested that information cannot escape from a black hole. Physicists have a model of the atom they are satisfied with, but that hasn’t stopped them from checking to see if they might have missed something. They are currently colliding heavy nuclei to test the model.
Relgion gets its truths from prophets or dieties. Science has to do things the hard way by conducting repeated observations and experiments. Science cannot verify theories about physical processes that cannot be examined.
Some people who call themselves scientists want science to become a substitute for religion, or at least function more like a religion.. Some believe that science can provide an explanation for events in the distant past that is so accurate it cannot be questioned. Such a claim is illogical because insufficient information is available. For example, those who talk about greenhouse gases state they can precisely determine past temperatures by examining tree rings or ice cores. The width of tree rings depends upon availability of water and the amount of time temperatures are within the range the tree can grow in, not average temperatures. The religious fanatics of the greenhouse gas religion have been accused of practicing censorship of those who disagree with their doctrine.
The subject of the origin of the universe and life on earth has traditionally been the province of religion. Science can only deal effectively with the present. It cannot observe or manipulate the distant past to verify theories. The subject of the origin of the universe and life on earth is interesting and scientific studies of the present might provide useful information, but science cannot provide a definitive answer to the question of how the universe or biological life came to exist. Science can only say what might have happened.
Time wounds all heels?
I took that point to be directed at the obvious variances over time e.g., cumulative mutative effects of cosmic rays.
Man, these anti-evolution rants are just plain bizarre.
LOL....Nice to see that you’re still here. We may not agree on much, but I respect your commitment to your profession.
Obviously...but with respect to the argument at hand, time is merely a metric rather than a mechanism.
Man, these anti-evolution rants are just plain bizarre.
What is truly bizarre, is that some people who claim to speak in the name of science, simply do not understand the distinction between the two...
“The soul never dies - it’s a spirit. “
Is it like Casper the Ghost?
Aren’t you going to get a little bored sitting at the right hand of the throne for all of eternity? You won’t even be able to taste a Snickers bar ever again. You’ll have to pass the “time” trying to communicate with the spirits in your “area,” but then, they won’t have anything to do either.
Being deceived about life in general here and heaven, you are probably deceived about hell, also, and bought the lie it doesn’t exist. Let’s see, God is not who He says He is, heaven is boring and there is no hell. Yep, just what the evil one wants you to believe - he done his job, he’s gotcha! Sad thing is - you are a willing participant and arrogant and gleeful in your blindness. You think ‘this life’ is all there is. If you believe heaven is boring, you believe there is a heaven - why only half the picture? Just like there is good and evil, right and wrong, there is a counterpart to heaven and that is hell.
One thing is certain, without knowing God, one lives in fear and cannot be truly happy and in peace because we were made with a void that can only be filled with God’s love and until that happens, you will always be searching for something else to make you happy and never attain it.
Pardon me, I was typing pretty quickly. I did not mean to imply that time itself caused evolution.
How about I re-write my comment this way: "your experiment does nothing to show that it is generations that matter more than any other potential factor."
However, proponents here continue to fail to note how that single fruit fly experiement proves anything meaningful, other than the fact that a certain group of flies didn't evolve under a specific set of conditions. They merely attacked my poor word choice.
Perhaps you are unaware that there are religions other than your own.
Religion is man-made. There is only one truth - God’s Word and Jesus is the living Word of God. The path to Him is narrow and straight but the path to destruction is wide.
Lastly, it’s not my ‘own’ truth - it’s God’s Truth. I only have His Truths. ‘God’s Word is true and everyman a liar.’
The problem isn't science but it's misuse.
“And I guarantee you that we can indeed observe the past.”
Incorrect statement. Archaeologists can observe the fossil record of plants and animals that lived in the past.
You wrote: “WOW! How little you know. I’ll be able to eat all I want. We get a supernatural body just like Christ had when He was resurrected. He ate with His disciples.”
BF: You are confused. If Christ ate with his disciples after being resurrected, his body was not supernatural. By the way, when Christ appeared to his disciples post-resurrection, what was he wearing? Did he bring some supernatural clothes, or did he show up naked?
You wrote: “You are not only deceived about this earth but about heaven, also. It’s called heaven for a reason.”
BF: Sorry, didn’t follow that. Why is it called “heaven”?
You wrote: “Being deceived about life in general here and heaven, you are probably deceived about hell, also, and bought the lie it doesn’t exist. Let’s see, God is not who He says He is, heaven is boring and there is no hell. Yep, just what the evil one wants you to believe - he done his job, he’s gotcha!”
BF: You are a funny guy.
You wrote: “Sad thing is - you are a willing participant and arrogant and gleeful in your blindness. You think ‘this life’ is all there is. If you believe heaven is boring, you believe there is a heaven - why only half the picture? Just like there is good and evil, right and wrong, there is a counterpart to heaven and that is hell.”
BF: You are confused again. Heaven would be boring if it existed, but it doesn’t exist. Neither does hell.
You wrote: “One thing is certain, without knowing God, one lives in fear and cannot be truly happy and in peace because we were made with a void that can only be filled with God’s love and until that happens, you will always be searching for something else to make you happy and never attain it.”
BF: I don’t live in fear and I am (usually) truly happy and in peace. Sorry to disappoint you, but I am voidless. As for you, you must be the truly fearful and/or unhappy one, not having even a decent screen name and all.
Times must be tough at the Telegraph, now that they have fifth graders writing articles for them.
Though Israel means to struggle with God while islam to submit.
I argue with God, constantly.
Coyoteman - Im on your side - seems like the creationists have made more of a religion of calling those who uphold scientific standards the bad guys than most scientists who not only hold the creation in awe but delight in its discovery. These are the same people who are happy to receive the multitude of benefits recieved from science, yet will bite the hand that gives it to them, calling them ‘unbelievers’ merely because they don’t put on the same performance they do. They can’t refute your definitions and like their reading of the Bible, select only those parts that appear to argue in their favor. The ones calling ‘evolution’ a faith are the ones dealing in lies and have made it a religion to make evolution into a religion more so than those who agree with the scientific observations in the theory.
Incorrect statement. Archaeologists can observe the fossil record of plants and animals that lived in the past.
Archaeologists deal with past cultures. Paleontologists and other scientists deal with fossils.
Now that you know what an archaeologist is, care to tell me again what it is we do?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.