All science is theory. Even scientists won't argue that. There is no such thing as scientific fact, only scientific theory. Don't forget, it was scientists who said the Earth was flat. Arguments like that have no credibility. Science is always proving itself wrong. I'm not argueing for or against religion, I'm just saying the arguements are pointless and will never go anywhere. They never have throughout history. Now that is fact.
I would like to argue against this fact If all of these arguments were pointless, why would scientists bother? Surely the majority of technological advancements we've made, all the modern luxuries we take for granted, all the research into the universe and space travel is a result of people arguing against what others took for granted? Some people didn't want to accept the world was flat, so they set out to prove that theory wrong, and as a result we can now fly from Alaska to uh... *checks map* Russia... much faster than if we'd taken the other route. Blame everything on God and there's little reason to bother looking into new advancements in science, so in my opinion arguments have done an awful lot to help us as a species and to call them pointless is far from being fact. Of course it doesn't only apply to religion, half of it is down to arguing against existing scientific theory. Edit: I just thought of something. I wonder if I could spend an entire day trying to argue the side of Christianity and still sound reasonable and somewhat sane. I get the feeling I'd have to resort to putting it all down to mistranslation, metaphors and magic, but... that's acceptable, right?
argument results in knowledge and progression. whether the outcome is right or wrong, the process of argument and communication is what makes humans so superior. just as two computers are more powerful than one, two minds working together will provide comprehension and eventually, acceptance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_fact#Fact_in_science You can rest assured, if you drop an apple, it's gonna fall to the ground....that's a fact. Why it falls to the ground is theory.
There isn't a facepalm big enough. If there were, the resulting impact would likely create a cosmic explosion large enough to start life. Alright, I'm done. Instead of continuing the conversation, I'll just write a synopsis of how the rest of it would go: Me: Arguing about religion is doesn't work, we need constructive conversations. You: But I'm right. Me: Even if you are, you should be respectful of others. You: But I'm right. Me: Here's an example of why demeaning others doesn't work. You: Okay, but I'm right, they're idiots. Me: You did it again. You: But I'm right. Me: In the long run, it doesn't matter. You: But they're idiots and I need to tell them. Me: Why. You: Because I'm right and they're wrong. Me: How do you know? You: Scientist said so. Me: He's likely to be proven wrong in 100 years. You: But I'm right. Someone needs to tell them they're idiots. Me: why? You: Because it makes me look good (you won't say that, but it'll be implied in a somewhat Freudian manner). Etc, etc, etc.
That's not necessarily true...I was born, and raised in a catholic household, and attended catholic school for a majority of my early youth. I firmly believed in "god" and the theology presented to me. However through discussion, and reflection I realized probably about 6 years ago that I am an athiest. Sure at first I tried to rationalize it, and for a while I still prayed. But after a while the idea of man having even the faintest knowledge of what a supreme being would profess became absurd. At this point in time to believe that a supreme being would interact with human beings directly, seems to underestimate just how powerful a "supreme being" would be. Even stranger that we would have the intellect needed to comprehend his will. An atheist, at it's etymological core means one does not believe in the god of theism. Which is exactly what I am. EDIT: the fact that I edited this 20 times, some what detracts from any profound message I was trying to convey
I'd like everyone in this thread to know that you've all made God angry and that you're all going straight to hell. love, Jesus
Now that's just plain insulting. What I said was perfectly reasonable, arguments and the resulting determination to seek out the truth are surely responsible for a hell of a lot of our advancements as a species. Do you see what you're doing? I'm trying to provide reason to this conversation, yet you're treating it as an argument and flat out telling me I'm wrong, which was supposed to be the thing you were arguing against in the first place. You: You guys shouldn't call people wrong. Me: But doesn't this sound reasonable? You: You shouldn't do that. Me: Why not? We're having a discussion and I think this sounds totally plausible. You: /facepalm. Science is likely to be proven wrong in 100 years.
Heres a bit of wisdom: Humans are meaning making machines We all want to be right Stop this behaviour and be compassionate and a whole new world opens up to you of possibilities.
I agree with you that there is no need to call someone an idiot just for what they believe in. Instead I feel sorry for people who believe in a religion. In my opinion, Religion is like a parasite, attached to it's host - the human. Like a mental disease, it warps the mind, often for the worse. I can see how religion came about, a bunch of guys were scared about dying and wanted something to do all day so they invented religion and everything associated with religion. Religion always contradicts itself. So do you have any arguments FOR religion?
I don't see how anything "quantum" has anything to do with carbon, unless you're talking about multiple particles existing at the same time or in seperate universes. <-- me trying to be right ( see!)
I'm talking about principles that are fairly sound in science. I was alluding to cdubby's rhetorical attack on carbon dating.
Finally! That's what I was waiting to hear. Do you feel even slightly compelled to agree with me, or do you just feel what you felt before only stronger and with a little bit of anger? Do you get my point now?
They try to date rocks with it but if you understand what it actually is you'd know the only way carbon dating even has a chance of being accurate is if it's used on once-living things.
