Science vs Religion

Rotation Advertisements

We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum.

If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away.

Click here to Register!

If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk

If you're already a member please log in to your account:

Pages:
1
…
4
5
6
…
10

Science vs Religion
Tweet Topic Started: May 20 2014, 03:18 AM (7,728 Views)
Shei Len	May 27 2014, 07:59 AM Post #61
Posts: 20 Group: New Member Member #11,250 Joined: April 22, 2014 Gender Male Favourite Anime Dragonball Z What Browser do you use? Google Chrome Favourite Manga Dragonball	I honestly think it's pointless to debate things with religious folk. And I don't say that because I think they're stupid, I just think that they don't think the same way non religious and no faith based people think. Therefore, it's pointless. You're not going to convince them of anything, and they aren't going to convince you of anything. People who are strictly science>all types do not care nor do they give credit to anyone a faith based man or woman has to say; likewise, vice versa. It just doesn't go anywhere. Also, being a scientific person myself, and a faith based person, I can safely say this is true, because science does not invalidate religion, nor does religion invalidate science. They coexist quite nicely, actually.



~~Doggo Champion 2k17~~	May 27 2014, 05:19 PM Post #62
Posts: 7,931 Group: GTFO Member #6,380 Joined: June 20, 2011 Country United States Favourite Anime here comes What Browser do you use? o shit waddup! Favourite Manga dat boi	Shei Len May 27 2014, 07:59 AM I honestly think it's pointless to debate things with religious folk. And I don't say that because I think they're stupid, I just think that they don't think the same way non religious and no faith based people think. Therefore, it's pointless. You're not going to convince them of anything, and they aren't going to convince you of anything. People who are strictly science>all types do not care nor do they give credit to anyone a faith based man or woman has to say; likewise, vice versa. It just doesn't go anywhere. Also, being a scientific person myself, and a faith based person, I can safely say this is true, because science does not invalidate religion, nor does religion invalidate science. They coexist quite nicely, actually. Not necessarily true, though. Science does completely invalidate religion in most aspects. I was a Christian when I first joined this forum, and now I'm an atheist, so I see this type of debate as something that can actually have an effect on some people.



+ Ginyu	May 27 2014, 05:27 PM Post #63
Leve Feyenoord 1! Posts: 4,490 Group: Elite Member Member #9,685 Joined: June 30, 2013 Gender Female Country Netherlands Favourite Anime NJPW What Browser do you use? Chrome Favourite Manga Reading is for nerds, yo!	Shei Len May 27 2014, 07:59 AM science does not invalidate religion Not completely, but in most aspects it really does. It is possible to both believe in science and also in god, but most of the time it doesn't work out or people constantly contradict themselves. It's a nigh impossible combination IMO.
	Ask GinyuTokusentai


Shei Len	May 27 2014, 06:10 PM Post #64
Posts: 20 Group: New Member Member #11,250 Joined: April 22, 2014 Gender Male Favourite Anime Dragonball Z What Browser do you use? Google Chrome Favourite Manga Dragonball	GinyuTokusentai May 27 2014, 05:27 PM Shei Len May 27 2014, 07:59 AM science does not invalidate religion Not completely, but in most aspects it really does. It is possible to both believe in science and also in god, but most of the time it doesn't work out or people constantly contradict themselves. It's a nigh impossible combination IMO. To say science invalidates religion indefinitely is to exclude the super natural, which is illogical, because you do not know whether or not the super natural exists, even as a scientist, you cannot exclude anything until you have 100% concrete proof. It just doesn't work that way. Therefore, they can coexist. There doesn't need to be amnity between the two; there doesn't always have to be a fight to be had or a debate. Science is science, and that's infallible. But you say the world came into existence 13 billion years ago, anyone can say, "Yeah, God did that." It just does not work. Either could be right, because of my first point; you cannot say science invalidates religion because you are excluding the super natural, and since you have no proof the super natural does NOT exist, you can not do that. It's illogical. Edited by Shei Len, May 27 2014, 06:11 PM.



+ Ginyu	May 27 2014, 06:17 PM Post #65
Leve Feyenoord 1! Posts: 4,490 Group: Elite Member Member #9,685 Joined: June 30, 2013 Gender Female Country Netherlands Favourite Anime NJPW What Browser do you use? Chrome Favourite Manga Reading is for nerds, yo!	"You can't prove it doesn't exist." That's a cliché thing religious people say. As a religious person you claim god exists, therefore the burden of evidence is on you. Just because science can't prove you wrong doesn't mean can co-exist with you.
	Ask GinyuTokusentai


Shei Len	May 27 2014, 07:20 PM Post #66
Posts: 20 Group: New Member Member #11,250 Joined: April 22, 2014 Gender Male Favourite Anime Dragonball Z What Browser do you use? Google Chrome Favourite Manga Dragonball	You can't have it that way and call it cliche just because you don't agree with it, lol. It doesn't work like that either. You can prove it wrong, and that makes you mad, because that means there's a possibility it's true. Prove me wrong, and I'll be wrong. But as it stands, my logic is sound.



yokip	May 27 2014, 07:27 PM Post #67
Posts: 36 Group: Member Member #11,272 Joined: April 29, 2014	The super natural cannot exist. If it does then it just falls in with the natural because it would exist making it part of existence. “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” Quote by ― Albert Einstein



+ Ginyu	May 27 2014, 07:35 PM Post #68
Leve Feyenoord 1! Posts: 4,490 Group: Elite Member Member #9,685 Joined: June 30, 2013 Gender Female Country Netherlands Favourite Anime NJPW What Browser do you use? Chrome Favourite Manga Reading is for nerds, yo!	Shei Len May 27 2014, 07:20 PM You can't have it that way and call it cliche just because you don't agree with it, lol. It doesn't work like that either. You can prove it wrong, and that makes you mad, because that means there's a possibility it's true. Prove me wrong, and I'll be wrong. But as it stands, my logic is sound. You can prove it wrong, and that makes you mad, because that means there's a possibility it's true. you have no idea what my view is on life. I don't need solid proof to believe whether something exists or not. In my mind I use simple logic to define true and false. The fact that I can't prove religion wrong makes me just as mad as the fact that I can't prove unicorns or the Loch Ness monster wrong. In my mind it's just illogical, therefore I don't bother trying to come up with solid scientific evidence. But as it stands, my logic is sound. The only logic I've seen so far on your hand is: you can't prove it wrong, because it doesn't exist. But as I've already explained with Loch Ness and unicorns. You can make up thousands of things and nobody would be able to prove you wrong, simply because they don't exist. You can't observe something that can't be seen. We can however use simple logic.
	Ask GinyuTokusentai


* Yu Narukami	May 27 2014, 07:37 PM Post #69
Izanagi! Posts: 12,330 Group: Retired Staff Member #6,446 Joined: July 3, 2011 Gender Not Specified Country None	The thing is, when you make claims, the burden of proof is on you. It isn't the job of science to 'disprove religion', or 'disprove the supernatural'. It's the job of the people who believe that those things exist to prove that they do. In regards to the topic itself, I subscribe to the idea that the Universe simply came into being via the Big Bang. The laws of physics, the idea of cause and effect and every other sort of limitation that we observe in the Universe wouldn't exist before the Universe existed. Therefore, the idea of an 'uncaused cause' becomes a viable possibility.



lunar2	May 27 2014, 11:01 PM Post #70
Posts: 9,150 Group: Member Member #5,265 Joined: September 24, 2010 Gender Not Specified Favourite Anime dragonball/z/gt/movies What Browser do you use? internet explorer or firefox	but the supernatural is, by definition that which is above the natural laws. an uncaused cause, or divine cause as i like to call it, is a supernatural event. the only non-supernatural explanation for the universe is the infinite chain of cause and effect. something has always been here, in some form. you can't have both an absolute beginning and a completely natural explanation, which is why the catholic church supported the big bang theory, since it proved the universe had a beginning, and therefore proved the existence of something divine.
	list of canon sources: the DB manga, and the Dr. Slump manga as it applies to the crossover during the rra saga. list of non canon sources: everything else, regardless of origin, format, or quality. for those that blindly follow word of god


Shei Len	May 29 2014, 03:33 AM Post #71
Posts: 20 Group: New Member Member #11,250 Joined: April 22, 2014 Gender Male Favourite Anime Dragonball Z What Browser do you use? Google Chrome Favourite Manga Dragonball	One of the reasons the Catholic church adopted the big bang theory, is because they understand science..AND religion. In the science department, you always must have a beginning to something, even science will tell you that. The greatest scientist and minds of our time will tell you, they don't know all the answers. They are just as dumbfounded as the rest of us as to what the ultimate beginning was, because that doesn't seem to make any sense. So, say you believe in the big bang. How that happened..cosmic heat colliding in nothingness..it..doesn't make any sense, and no one can argue otherwise. Because how does something come from nothing? How does something appear when there is..nothingness? Absurd. And say we forgo any form of logic and say that is possible (it's not, laws of thermodynamics proves that), what created..those things? What created the things that created the big bang? Where does it end, and where does it begin? Infinity doesn't exist in our plane of existence. So..what "made" the things that "made" the things that "created" the big bang? I could go on and on. It doesn't end, therefore it's not plausible at all.



+ Ginyu	May 29 2014, 08:04 AM Post #72
Leve Feyenoord 1! Posts: 4,490 Group: Elite Member Member #9,685 Joined: June 30, 2013 Gender Female Country Netherlands Favourite Anime NJPW What Browser do you use? Chrome Favourite Manga Reading is for nerds, yo!	Shei Len May 29 2014, 03:33 AM One of the reasons the Catholic church adopted the big bang theory, is because they understand science..AND religion. In the science department, you always must have a beginning to something, even science will tell you that. The greatest scientist and minds of our time will tell you, they don't know all the answers. They are just as dumbfounded as the rest of us as to what the ultimate beginning was, because that doesn't seem to make any sense. So, say you believe in the big bang. How that happened..cosmic heat colliding in nothingness..it..doesn't make any sense, and no one can argue otherwise. Because how does something come from nothing? How does something appear when there is..nothingness? Absurd. And say we forgo any form of logic and say that is possible (it's not, laws of thermodynamics proves that), what created..those things? What created the things that created the big bang? Where does it end, and where does it begin? Infinity doesn't exist in our plane of existence. So..what "made" the things that "made" the things that "created" the big bang? I could go on and on. It doesn't end, therefore it's not plausible at all. Who created god? And don't give me that 'god is eternal' nonsense because that isn't plausible either. Whatever the truth may be about the very beginning we probably wouldn't be able to comprehend it anyway, at least the Big Bang theory has evidence to back it up, creationism has none.
	Ask GinyuTokusentai


~~Doggo Champion 2k17~~	May 29 2014, 06:00 PM Post #73
Posts: 7,931 Group: GTFO Member #6,380 Joined: June 20, 2011 Country United States Favourite Anime here comes What Browser do you use? o shit waddup! Favourite Manga dat boi	GinyuTokusentai May 29 2014, 08:04 AM Shei Len May 29 2014, 03:33 AM One of the reasons the Catholic church adopted the big bang theory, is because they understand science..AND religion. In the science department, you always must have a beginning to something, even science will tell you that. The greatest scientist and minds of our time will tell you, they don't know all the answers. They are just as dumbfounded as the rest of us as to what the ultimate beginning was, because that doesn't seem to make any sense. So, say you believe in the big bang. How that happened..cosmic heat colliding in nothingness..it..doesn't make any sense, and no one can argue otherwise. Because how does something come from nothing? How does something appear when there is..nothingness? Absurd. And say we forgo any form of logic and say that is possible (it's not, laws of thermodynamics proves that), what created..those things? What created the things that created the big bang? Where does it end, and where does it begin? Infinity doesn't exist in our plane of existence. So..what "made" the things that "made" the things that "created" the big bang? I could go on and on. It doesn't end, therefore it's not plausible at all. Who created god? And don't give me that 'god is eternal' nonsense because that isn't plausible either. Whatever the truth may be about the very beginning we probably wouldn't be able to comprehend it anyway, at least the Big Bang theory has evidence to back it up, creationism has none. Exactly what I would have said. If something coming from nothing is absurd, then that means God is absurd. And God is absurd. There is no reason for anyone to believe in a god - it's just a placeholder explanation, like I said earlier.



lunar2	May 29 2014, 11:51 PM Post #74
Posts: 9,150 Group: Member Member #5,265 Joined: September 24, 2010 Gender Not Specified Favourite Anime dragonball/z/gt/movies What Browser do you use? internet explorer or firefox	GinyuTokusentai May 29 2014, 08:04 AM Shei Len May 29 2014, 03:33 AM One of the reasons the Catholic church adopted the big bang theory, is because they understand science..AND religion. In the science department, you always must have a beginning to something, even science will tell you that. The greatest scientist and minds of our time will tell you, they don't know all the answers. They are just as dumbfounded as the rest of us as to what the ultimate beginning was, because that doesn't seem to make any sense. So, say you believe in the big bang. How that happened..cosmic heat colliding in nothingness..it..doesn't make any sense, and no one can argue otherwise. Because how does something come from nothing? How does something appear when there is..nothingness? Absurd. And say we forgo any form of logic and say that is possible (it's not, laws of thermodynamics proves that), what created..those things? What created the things that created the big bang? Where does it end, and where does it begin? Infinity doesn't exist in our plane of existence. So..what "made" the things that "made" the things that "created" the big bang? I could go on and on. It doesn't end, therefore it's not plausible at all. Who created god? And don't give me that 'god is eternal' nonsense because that isn't plausible either. Whatever the truth may be about the very beginning we probably wouldn't be able to comprehend it anyway, at least the Big Bang theory has evidence to back it up, creationism has none. ObsessiveFanGirl May 29 2014, 06:00 PM GinyuTokusentai May 29 2014, 08:04 AM Shei Len May 29 2014, 03:33 AM One of the reasons the Catholic church adopted the big bang theory, is because they understand science..AND religion. In the science department, you always must have a beginning to something, even science will tell you that. The greatest scientist and minds of our time will tell you, they don't know all the answers. They are just as dumbfounded as the rest of us as to what the ultimate beginning was, because that doesn't seem to make any sense. So, say you believe in the big bang. How that happened..cosmic heat colliding in nothingness..it..doesn't make any sense, and no one can argue otherwise. Because how does something come from nothing? How does something appear when there is..nothingness? Absurd. And say we forgo any form of logic and say that is possible (it's not, laws of thermodynamics proves that), what created..those things? What created the things that created the big bang? Where does it end, and where does it begin? Infinity doesn't exist in our plane of existence. So..what "made" the things that "made" the things that "created" the big bang? I could go on and on. It doesn't end, therefore it's not plausible at all. Who created god? And don't give me that 'god is eternal' nonsense because that isn't plausible either. Whatever the truth may be about the very beginning we probably wouldn't be able to comprehend it anyway, at least the Big Bang theory has evidence to back it up, creationism has none. Exactly what I would have said. If something coming from nothing is absurd, then that means God is absurd. And God is absurd. There is no reason for anyone to believe in a god - it's just a placeholder explanation, like I said earlier. what created the big bang, then? either the universe is eternal, or something created it. either that something is eternal, or something created it. the only two options are the divine cause or the eternal chain of cause and effect. there is no 3rd option. so no matter what, you are taking something on faith. either you take on faith that something was not created, or you take it on faith that the chain of events we are a part of has always existed from eternity. either you have eternity, or you have a cause that is not itself caused. neither option is better supported by science than the other, so quit trying to act like your position is superior, because it's not. specific religions are wrong. that's inevitable when there is more than one religion. the concept of religion itself "a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects", is not wrong. everyone has fundamental (serving as, or being an essential part of, a foundation or basis; basic; underlying) beliefs that are not supported by science. every explanation for the ultimate creation of the universe is currently unsupported by our knowledge. string theory? just a bunch of guesses and equations. it shouldn't even be called a theory, especially when it predicts at least 6 spatial dimensions that we have no evidence for. ekpyrosis? requires string theory. hyperinflation? where's the other universes? even the basic big bang theory still doesn't explain why the universe behaves the way it does. the universe should be a uniform spread of particles, not clumps of matter floating in vacuum. so no matter what you believe, you believe in a religion. even agnosticism is the fundamental belief that no one knows what happened. so quit trying to pretend that your unfounded and/or incomplete beliefs are superior to anyone else's. because everything science has been churning out the last few decades has been nothing but placeholder beliefs. and a lot of those are placeholder beliefs that are twisted versions of other placeholder beliefs. scientists today are doing the same thing shamans and wise men did millenia ago. they ran out of things they could prove with the tools they had, so they started guessing.
	list of canon sources: the DB manga, and the Dr. Slump manga as it applies to the crossover during the rra saga. list of non canon sources: everything else, regardless of origin, format, or quality. for those that blindly follow word of god


~~Doggo Champion 2k17~~	May 30 2014, 12:04 AM Post #75
Posts: 7,931 Group: GTFO Member #6,380 Joined: June 20, 2011 Country United States Favourite Anime here comes What Browser do you use? o shit waddup! Favourite Manga dat boi	Quote: what created the big bang, then? either the universe is eternal, or something created it. either that something is eternal, or something created it. the only two options are the divine cause or the eternal chain of cause and effect. there is no 3rd option. so no matter what, you are taking something on faith. either you take on faith that something was not created, or you take it on faith that the chain of events we are a part of has always existed from eternity. either you have eternity, or you have a cause that is not itself caused. neither option is better supported by science than the other, so quit trying to act like your position is superior, because it's not. The point is, we don't know what happened. Science doesn't have a definite answer yet, and maybe it never will. Who knows. What I am saying is that it's illogical to believe that a god had to create everything. Accepting that we don't know the answer is better than creating a false placeholder position like god. Quote: specific religions are wrong. that's inevitable when there is more than one religion. the concept of religion itself "a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects", is not wrong. everyone has fundamental (serving as, or being an essential part of, a foundation or basis; basic; underlying) beliefs that are not supported by science. All religions are wrong, plain and simple. Science and facts can disprove every major world religion out there (not including philosophies like Satanism, Buddhism, etc.) Chances are if said religion has a religious text that contradicts scientific facts - take the torah, for example - then that religion is not scientifically correct. So yeah, these religions may not be scientifically accurate, but people can delude themselves if they want, I suppose. You're free to believe and buy into whatever you want. Quote: every explanation for the ultimate creation of the universe is currently unsupported by our knowledge. string theory? just a bunch of guesses and equations. it shouldn't even be called a theory, especially when it predicts at least 6 spatial dimensions that we have no evidence for. ekpyrosis? requires string theory. hyperinflation? where's the other universes? even the basic big bang theory still doesn't explain why the universe behaves the way it does. the universe should be a uniform spread of particles, not clumps of matter floating in vacuum. So what? We don't know the answers. That doesn't mean we need to conjure up a divine being. Quote: so no matter what you believe, you believe in a religion. even agnosticism is the fundamental belief that no one knows what happened. so quit trying to pretend that your unfounded and/or incomplete beliefs are superior to anyone else's. Who the hell ever acted like that? Agnosticism and atheism are not religions. They are beliefs, though, so you're correct in saying that. Quote: because everything science has been churning out the last few decades has been nothing but placeholder beliefs. This is true. I never claimed the big bang theory was a fact. Actually, I never even talked about the big bang theory at all, so I would assume you're directing this at someone other than myself. Quote: and a lot of those are placeholder beliefs that are twisted versions of other placeholder beliefs. scientists today are doing the same thing shamans and wise men did millenia ago. they ran out of things they could prove with the tools they had, so they started guessing. This is where you're wrong. Theories like the big bang have quite a bit of evidence behind them, and a simple google search would yield that much. I don't know where you're getting the idea that the concept of a god is more scientifically accurate than the concept of the big bang theory, but yeah.



0 users reading this topic

Our users say it best: "A great way to make a forums for free and it is very reliable as well. Thank you Zetaboards." Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Deep Discussion · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
4
5
6
…
10