What's wrong with science as religion

Salon.com ^ | 31 Jul 08 | Karl Giberson

[hosepipe]

[ If you say He is "not there," then you won't look for Him. And if you don't look for Him, He won't find you. ]

LoL...

[MHGinTN]

Can you use a Lorentz transformation with a venue in which there is no well-defined temporal limit, no well-defined temporal parameter? Would you be so foolish as to say such a temporal limitation does not exist when you come to realize the limit is not well defined such that it can be factored with a Lorentz transformation, but 'some' temporal factor is there based upon not yet well understood data?

Your way of dealing with ill-defined parameters is to assert they do not exist. Sadly, that approach is contradictory to what you claim you take as your position.

[Soliton]

Can you use a Lorentz transformation with a venue in which there is no well-defined temporal limit, no well-defined temporal parameter? Would you be so foolish as to say such a temporal limitation does not exist when you come to realize the limit is not well defined such that it can be factored with a Lorentz transformation, but 'some' temporal factor is there based upon not yet well understood data?

What are you talking about?

[SnakeDoctor]

>>>> You worship nothing, emptiness, Santa Claus.

>>> Prove it.

>> *chirp-chirp* *chirp-chirp*

I am disappointed at the lack of a response.

H

[Alamo-Girl]

Recently I came to realize that this question of whether man can be the measure of anything, in what way, and to what extent, is at the heart of the great debate between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr regarding the sufficiency of quantum theory as an ultimate theory of physical reality. That is, this question has already been asked, within the physics community, by the two greatest scientific minds of the twentieth century. Asked — but not yet answered.

The details of this insight will have to wait 'til I can get something down on paper. I'm working on it, and will ping you in due course — for I feel strongly you will find it of interest.

Thank you so much for all your wonderful insights, dearest sister in Christ!

I look forward to reading your essay on this very point.

[MrB]

Plus you avoided answering my question: Why is God such a bugaboo for you?

I keep telling you folks, you're wasting your time with arguing the "surface" questions that the "skeptics" put forth.

Because they're not voicing their true objection. Your question above hits on it nicely.

My version is "What would you have to give up if you accepted the Christian God of the Bible?"

It's probably something REALLY selfish, if the person honestly answered it.

[MHGinTN]

But I'll bet you're not surprised. :^)

[MHGinTN]

To be fair to the ‘some scoffers’, sometimes the thing the person thinks they would have to give up is the specious foundation of their own superiority fro ‘conquering life’. There is an interesting stroy related by Carl Jung regarding a physician who came to him asking to be taught Jung’s method for psychoanalytical treatment that showed such healing for very troubled souls. An interesting ‘isolationist’ dream the physician related to Jung gave the teacher an insight into why the physician should not be immersed in the Jungian method. To open up for the Jungian development of self would have threatened with destruction the very well constructed ego the physician maintained in order to function in healing children.

[Alamo-Girl]

Soliton: I am incapable of faith.

betty boop: This is an untruthful statement, Soliton. For clearly, you do have faith — at the very least in solitons; and then again, in Soliton.

Your capacity for faith is not the issue. The issue is: Why is God such a "bugaboo" for you?

Soliton, surely you must have faith a chair will hold you before you sit down in it - or that what you see is "there" somehow else you would not open doors or stop to look both ways before crossing a street.

I too want to know why God is such a "bugaboo" to you.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Religion is dangerous, he wrote; it breeds hatred and idiocy.

And he needs no evidence for his "scientific" ideas.

[Soliton]

Soliton, surely you must have faith a chair will hold you before you sit down in it

You don't seem to understand the meaning of faith. I wouldn't be surprised if my chair broke. It has happened before. It has never happened because of supernatural reasons however.

[MrB]

[tongue in cheek]
Maybe he has a porn addiction he doesn’t want to give up.

[SnakeDoctor]

Not in the least.

H

[metmom]

soliton: “I am incapable of faith.”
************************************************************

Not true. You believe that science can prove things and lead one to the truth. That takes faith.

[metmom]

The fact that so many believers are rude, semi-literate goobers makes it a hard club to join though.

That's funny considering what I've read over at DC.

[metmom]

Don't merely declare there is no proof of God. "Proof" or evidence cannot be forthcoming in a situation where you absolutely deny, as your initial position, the reality of God. If you say He is "not there," then you won't look for Him. And if you don't look for Him, He won't find you.

Assuming the conclusion is a very subjective way to deal with things. It colors the outlook of the person and they don't even realize it.

Not only does the person not look for God, but since the person has already decided that there is no proof for God, then nothing one can present him will convince him because he has, a priori, decided that it is not proof.

[metmom]

I don't fear ghosts, goblins, devils, or demons.

Neither do Christians. The Bible you claim to know so much about says that greater is He who is us, than he who is in the world.

[SnakeDoctor]

[Soliton] You worship nothing, emptiness, Santa Claus.
[Hemorrhage] Prove it.
[Soliton] *chirp-chirp* *chirp-chirp*
[Hemorrhage] I am disappointed at the lack of a response.
[Soliton] (blank stare)

*********

Then its checkmate, I suppose.

Its been a pleasure.

H

[betty boop]

"What would you have to give up if you accepted the Christian God of the Bible?"

You nail the issue right on the head, MrB, right there. And I suspect that the conclusions you draw from this insight are "spot-on."

Extraordinarily well done, MrB!