+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    45

    Is Science a religion?

    People sometimes make fun of religious people for believing things without proof, don't people do the same thing with science?
    How do we know for example what the air is like on Mars? I haven't been there, should I just believe the readings of the robot they put up there?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Strykstar View Post
    People sometimes make fun of religious people for believing things without proof, don't people do the same thing with science?
    How do we know for example what the air is like on Mars? I haven't been there, should I just believe the readings of the robot they put up there?
    1. we have been there. with robots and probs half a dozen times.
    2. We can do spectrographic analysis.

    Long story short. There is proof if you care to do the work to look it up.

    The only people who treat science like a religion are people who can't be bothered to learn about the topic and the level of effort and work people go through to arrive at the results they do.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    45

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    1. we have been there. with robots and probs half a dozen times.
    2. We can do spectrographic analysis.

    Long story short. There is proof if you care to do the work to look it up.

    The only people who treat science like a religion are people who can't be bothered to learn about the topic and the level of effort and work people go through to arrive at the results they do.

    Who is "we" though? I certainly haven't been, I don't think you have either.
    I'm just saying you are also going by something that someone else said, just like religious people.

    You can find me a video of a robot rolling around there, but I can find you one of someone claiming to speak to God too...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Strykstar View Post
    Who is "we" though? I certainly haven't been, I don't think you have either.
    I'm just saying you are also going by something that someone else said, just like religious people.

    You can find me a video of a robot rolling around there, but I can find you one of someone claiming to speak to God too...
    Well the one difference is that If you had the resources you could repeat experment or action that was taken in science and get the same result. Something that MILLIONS of people have already done accross the globe). Plus these results match up with other results that people are capible of recreating as smaller version or in other fields.

    In short sciences results are repeatable and testable and they generally match up with other fields. In short if someone took the time and effort beyond internet searching they would find that the results were true.



    As opposed to religion where you can't repeat or even test the result experienced by a person and you are complety relying on faith that what the person said is true.



    Also if were to continue your line of logic than EVERYTHING would be faith. You don't know the precise reason why gas makes your car work on the subatomic level.

    You can't even prove the earth is round with the thought process your are suggesting.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    74

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    I...think I get what you're aiming for here. You and I can't very well repeat an experiment that says, for example, that the dinosaurs once roamed the earth because we just don't have the knowledge nor the technology to do so. And we're relying on someone else saying 'Yes, this is true'.

    Which is similar to the way religion works. Someone with an authority on the matter says something, and then someone else repeats that as fact. And down and down we go.

    There are however some things in science which match up much better to the way religion works. For example, at one time alchemy was fact, and would in time become the basis for our modern science, yet is now known to be mostly lies and fake. However, the argument is that religion never evolves or changes like this. Except it does. Belief structures still continue to change to this day, with the core principles remaining.

    Take for example something as simple as evolution. Originally, it didn't work the way we now believe it to, namely, survival of the fittest. One theory of how evolution happened was that a proto-giraffe centuries ago stretched his neck out just a little bit, to reach the higher leaves. This slightly longer neck was passed on to his son, who stretched his neck a little further, and passed this longer neck onto his son, and on and on. It wasn't an active 'This animal has a better chance of passing on its genes' but more 'If you do this thing, then your son will automatically be better at doing this thing'. Which was discredited for centuries until...well, it turns out that actually, things do sort of work like that. Not quite the same, but if you become a body builder, your proteins have to fold a certain way in order to get all that muscle. And if you keep that up throughout your life, and then have a child, that child's body will have an innate knowledge of how to better fold proteins in order to gain muscle.

    It isn't going to make your baby super strong or anything, but if your child also chooses to be a body builder, it will take them less time to get in shape than it did you. And this will continue down the generations.

    Similarly, originally the Old Testament was the be all and end all of religon. And then the New Testament came along. Or the Quaran etc. Religion evolves just as much as science, just at a slower rate.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusky View Post
    I...think I get what you're aiming for here. You and I can't very well repeat an experiment that says, for example, that the dinosaurs once roamed the earth because we just don't have the knowledge nor the technology to do so. And we're relying on someone else saying 'Yes, this is true'.

    Which is similar to the way religion works. Someone with an authority on the matter says something, and then someone else repeats that as fact. And down and down we go.
    but we do have evidence that dinosaurs existed and that they roamed the earth based on the fossil record and thousands of other bits and pieces of evidence.

    You can't run an experiment on dinosaurs but you can do experiments on the evidence that there were dinosuars and continue to arrive at the same results over and over.

    As opposed to the belief that there was a massive world wide flood..... something there is NO evidence for and nothing that supports it and no-one can repeat anything. And you are 100% relying on the authority of someone.

    do you see the difference?

    There are however some things in science which match up much better to the way religion works. For example, at one time alchemy was fact, and would in time become the basis for our modern science, yet is now known to be mostly lies and fake. However, the argument is that religion never evolves or changes like this. Except it does. Belief structures still continue to change to this day, with the core principles remaining.
    Science changes to seek to get closer and closer to the right answer and admits when it's wrong.

    Religion is forced to change by societies and generally never admits that what it thought previously was wrong.

    Also if religions had a choice they would not change. As noted by the fact that most major religions who think along the same lines that you are proposing are generally about 50+ years beyond the societal times and almost 100 years behind the science.

    Take for example something as simple as evolution. Originally, it didn't work the way we now believe it to, namely, survival of the fittest. One theory of how evolution happened was that a proto-giraffe centuries ago stretched his neck out just a little bit, to reach the higher leaves. This slightly longer neck was passed on to his son, who stretched his neck a little further, and passed this longer neck onto his son, and on and on. It wasn't an active 'This animal has a better chance of passing on its genes' but more 'If you do this thing, then your son will automatically be better at doing this thing'. Which was discredited for centuries until...well, it turns out that actually, things do sort of work like that. Not quite the same, but if you become a body builder, your proteins have to fold a certain way in order to get all that muscle. And if you keep that up throughout your life, and then have a child, that child's body will have an innate knowledge of how to better fold proteins in order to gain muscle.

    It isn't going to make your baby super strong or anything, but if your child also chooses to be a body builder, it will take them less time to get in shape than it did you. And this will continue down the generations.


    Similarly, originally the Old Testament was the be all and end all of religon. And then the New Testament came along. Or the Quaran etc. Religion evolves just as much as science, just at a slower rate.
    the difference is that in science the false theory was discarded and a better theory arrose in it's placed based upon the evidence.

    With religion.

    The Old testiment still exists. People still use it as a bases for morality and science, they still selectivly quote and use it. Still to this very day people still use it's laws and biblical literalsim.

    And the new testiment came about not because of the evidence but because people liked it more so it was added to the old testiment. If there was evidence that jesus was there wouldn't be Jews, there would be no muslims and the 2 books would be saying almost exactly the same thing.

    The reality is that at the time of the New testiment and the quaran it was societs that had changed and not the religion itself.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    I'd like to add one more thing to this line of thought.

    In society we judge someones fitness by there ability to predict the future or rather there ability to accurately take stock of a situation based on the available evidence and make predictive results.

    This is how we generally judge the value of an opinion.

    So even if you were to say that all science is opinion than you are left with one startling fact.

    Science makes predictive and consistent predictive results. The results are repeatable making it a good solid opinion.

    vs.

    Religion that can't make come up with consistent predictive results. Even using the same holy books there are still over 2000 separate sects of Christianity and over a thousand other religions.

    In short it's a mess. It's a poor, and rather incompetent opinion.



    So if you really do want to suggest that science and religion are the same than all you have done is turn something wonderful into nothing more than incompetent ramblings. This is what happens when you try to join science and religion.

    Hence why the 2 must forever remain separate.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    74

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    but we do have evidence that dinosaurs existed and that they roamed the earth based on the fossil record and thousands of other bits and pieces of evidence.

    You can't run an experiment on dinosaurs but you can do experiments on the evidence that there were dinosuars and continue to arrive at the same results over and over.

    As opposed to the belief that there was a massive world wide flood..... something there is NO evidence for and nothing that supports it and no-one can repeat anything. And you are 100% relying on the authority of someone.

    do you see the difference?
    I'm agreeing with you on this. My point was that you and I, humble people on the internet without the skills and technology can't run the same tests a scientist with all the right stuff can. So we're relying upon someone else to tell us 'Yes, this shit is real'. Get what I'm saying? I'm explaining what I think the guy meant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Science changes to seek to get closer and closer to the right answer and admits when it's wrong.

    Religion is forced to change by societies and generally never admits that what it thought previously was wrong.

    Also if religions had a choice they would not change. As noted by the fact that most major religions who think along the same lines that you are proposing are generally about 50+ years beyond the societal times and almost 100 years behind the science.
    But religion does change to seek to get closer to the right answer. Things change, albeit slowly, but take Catholicism for instance. A hundred years ago say, the unbaptised and suicides went to purgatory. Now they go to heaven because they didn't get a chance to accept God, or in the case of suicides, they couldn't have been in their right mind.



    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    the difference is that in science the false theory was discarded and a better theory arrose in it's placed based upon the evidence.

    With religion.

    The Old testiment still exists. People still use it as a bases for morality and science, they still selectivly quote and use it. Still to this very day people still use it's laws and biblical literalsim.
    Yes, people still quote the Old Testament as if it was fact, and say that it is proof that for example, gays are an abomination. But are you really saying that science never holds onto a false theory, and no one ever still subscribes to older theories that have since been proven to be incorrect? I mean, you must live in a totally different world than me, because people still say things like the earth is flat, or the sun revolves around earth. Or what about the people who still subscribe to the outdated notion that black people are scientifically proven to be inferior to white people, and that their brains are wired to make them more subservient? Are you going to tell me that they don't exist?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusky View Post
    I'm agreeing with you on this. My point was that you and I, humble people on the internet without the skills and technology can't run the same tests a scientist with all the right stuff can. So we're relying upon someone else to tell us 'Yes, this shit is real'. Get what I'm saying? I'm explaining what I think the guy meant.
    Sorry i had previously responded to strykstar. Your argument mirrored his and i had nothing else to go on to suggest otherwise.



    But religion does change to seek to get closer to the right answer. Things change, albeit slowly, but take Catholicism for instance. A hundred years ago say, the unbaptised and suicides went to purgatory. Now they go to heaven because they didn't get a chance to accept God, or in the case of suicides, they couldn't have been in their right mind.
    How do you know they are getting closer to the right answer? They could be getting further away. You have no way of knowing expecially cosidering all the divergent paths from over 2000 off shoots of Christianity. It's no like all religions are suddenly converging on the same answer.




    Yes, people still quote the Old Testament as if it was fact, and say that it is proof that for example, gays are an abomination. But are you really saying that science never holds onto a false theory, and no one ever still subscribes to older theories that have since been proven to be incorrect? I mean, you must live in a totally different world than me, because people still say things like the earth is flat, or the sun revolves around earth. Or what about the people who still subscribe to the outdated notion that black people are scientifically proven to be inferior to white people, and that their brains are wired to make them more subservient? Are you going to tell me that they don't exist?
    But religion didn't do ANY of that. It was science that dispelled the above notions and religion was FORCED to follow and in most cases they didn't do so till over a century after the fact.

    In short religion didn't willfully evolve. It was dragged kicking and screaming as society learned more without them.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Well the one difference is that If you had the resources you could repeat experment or action that was taken in science and get the same result. Something that MILLIONS of people have already done accross the globe). Plus these results match up with other results that people are capible of recreating as smaller version or in other fields.

    In short sciences results are repeatable and testable and they generally match up with other fields. In short if someone took the time and effort beyond internet searching they would find that the results were true.



    As opposed to religion where you can't repeat or even test the result experienced by a person and you are complety relying on faith that what the person said is true.



    Also if were to continue your line of logic than EVERYTHING would be faith. You don't know the precise reason why gas makes your car work on the subatomic level.

    You can't even prove the earth is round with the thought process your are suggesting.
    actually.............the EARTH is NOT round but WHY should SCIENCE bother the PUBLIC with such DETAILS!? SSHHHHHH.........:freak3: :judges: :spin2: :
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    27,212

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Sorry i had previously responded to strykstar. Your argument mirrored his and i had nothing else to go on to suggest otherwise.



    How do you know they are getting closer to the right answer? They could be getting further away. You have no way of knowing expecially cosidering all the divergent paths from over 2000 off shoots of Christianity. It's no like all religions are suddenly converging on the same answer.





    But religion didn't do ANY of that. It was science that dispelled the above notions and religion was FORCED to follow and in most cases they didn't do so till over a century after the fact.

    In short religion didn't willfully evolve. It was dragged kicking and screaming as society learned more without them.
    NOT to break up your PARTY but WHY focus on the LUNATICS of RELIGION cause certainly the SAME may exist with SCIENCE call them FOLLOWERS and IMAGINERS!? but like CONGRESS/GOV can any such BALANCE exist ANYMORE!? i myself am CRITICAL of SCIENCE in it's SLAVERY to CAPITALISTIC goals based on the MATERIAL ENHANCEMENTS of the POPULACE VS the PSYCHOLOGICAL imperatives being IGNORED!? we have the NUCLEAR BOMB in a world that STILL contains LUNATICS!? and by POPULATIONS demands just INCREASES the ODDS of the 2 meeting in a DESTRUCTIVE way!? was HITLER a MAN before his TIME!? :errr: :1crysad: :
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  12. #12

    Re: Is Science a religion?

    Science and religious things are both separate things. Science is based on facts and you can prove it doing practical on it any time you wish, but on religious facts it is quite difficult to do practical, these are based on beyond the life experiences that no body could tell.

Similar Threads

  1. Science Channel Support our Science Contest?
    By Contest Scams in forum Mail Order Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-05-2015, 05:57 PM
  2. When Science, Medicine And Religion Agree
    By Almost Wayno in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-13-2014, 11:48 AM
  3. NASA piling garbage science on science fraud
    By aguest in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-03-2009, 01:18 PM
  4. Are Science and Religion Enemies of Morality?
    By coberst in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-14-2009, 06:12 PM
  5. Why science will shame religion!
    By enlightenment in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-02-2007, 09:15 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •