It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will Science Ever Advance Enough to Disprove Religion?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Science, in popular culture, has become a religion itself.
People like Neil deGrasse-Tyson get on their pulpits and preach "science" and theories as if they are fact when NO ONE KNOWS THE EXACT ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE! Certain models are argued just like religion was argued 2000 years ago.

The singularity has become the "science explains everything BUT this", but arrogance keeps alternative theories from even being studied.

Just keep an open mind. And respect all as long as they respectfully disagree.




posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

They also found Troy from the Iliad...doesn't mean there were Cyclopes....



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: the owlbear

No it hasn't become a religion... It's fact. That's just a creationist talking point to make a false equivilency.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: grey580

They also found Troy from the Iliad...doesn't mean there were Cyclopes....



At the same time, even Hawking is backing off his theory of black holes...things change. Evolve.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: the owlbear

No it hasn't become a religion... It's fact. That's just a creationist talking point to make a false equivilency.



I'm not a creationist.
I'm just open to all theories because we do not have the answer.

I dont even know if we are evolved enough to know the question.


Eta: whatever you "prove as fact" through physics and especially astrophysics will have an "anomaly" which didnt quite fit the paradigm in a month, year, or even a couple of years. If science is so "proven" in your opinion, than why are there these outliers and anomalies? Maybe our math is wrong for the now.
To discredit any theory is to discredit science. Especially when new discoveries are made every day.
edit on 29-4-2014 by the owlbear because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Why do you ask This question?

Why don't you ask the question: Will religion ever be advanced enough so we humans can create miracles thus rendering Science obsolete?

Works both ways ya know..



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

This was the question that troubled Einstein..... He could not separate the two. Archeology has proven some things in the bible certainly not all. Every time someone says I will believe in God when I can see him, is when I say do you believe there was a President Lincoln?

I also find it interesting that during the time of WWII the German science was hugely ahead of everyone else, but yet there belief in God and the occult was so great they coveted the "Heilige Lanze" Holy Spear". Their desire for the intangible power of all things occult was amazing. It didn't bother them a bit to mix the two .

The interesting thing will be the effect on society when it is proven to be true.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Science will not disprove religion. In the event that major component of a religion is disproven, the claims it makes will be redefined so that they cannot be tested by science.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

In a single word "NO", indeed science is a fractal expanding ever evolving collection of idea's and model's of the universe based on OUR perception and the perception of the tool's we or others have developed to allow further speculation and while science has lower reality practical and applicable structures at it's higher level's it is purely hypothetical and indeed alway's will be no matter how convinced and ego bound a given speculative theorist is in his own particular model of the universe or on his/her perception of other speculative universal model's.
Also like the infamous alchemists stone the grand unified field theory (which is essentially the same thing as the alchemists stone - to be able to express the universe in a simple and concise model that predicts even what is now described as chaos and allows reality and universal manipulation) will never truly be obtained and though Einstein is claimed to have written one then erased it from his white board it is more likely he realised it like some mathematical problems, especially with variable's and constant's which are truly unknown can never be solved.
Of course this does not invalidate the pursuit of the idea's but it does explain that the hill of science is infinite to climb and no matter how high they climb the top will alway's still be infinitely far away, of course it may eventually explain a small time space continuum but the entirety of the universe is another matter, especially if it is a conscious universe which willingly eludes being defined or if our own psychology by it's own spherical projection through it's own conscious shape defined by our senses and mind type is also defining our theoretical and theological models of reality, blinkering us to structures outside of our conception of and ability of thought, and even if we increase dimensionally in our consciousness there will alway's be dimensions above and below our awareness and knowledge/awareness.

edit on 29-4-2014 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE

Don't really need a long OP here to set the premiss.


Will science ever reach the point where they can flat out disprove religion?


IMHO they already have. Not really the concept of god, but the anchient texts. But will they ever advance to the point we know enough to know there's no place for him in the standard model?


Your OP betrays a specific religion, care to share which "him" you are referring to?

www.merriam-webster.com...


re·li·gion noun \ri-ˈli-jən\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods

: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group


How can science disprove the belief in something? Obviously OP does not have enough understanding concerning how proofs are developed or theories of physics develop.

The mathematicians will be the ones who decide the matter. When it can be explained why math describes the physical laws matter operates by then some progress will be made. Until then it will just be trolls saying,"because science!" The simple enigma of why calculus works so perfectly and elegantly to describe and measure all things must be solved. Until then all science is 'proven' by a tool which human kind does not understand.

The conundrum of using a mystery to disprove the 'imaginary' is a fundamental flaw in OP's thought process.

This thread is trololololol ahhh who cares . . . ?

-FBB



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

In a way science is its own religion.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE

Don't really need a long OP here to set the premiss.


Will science ever reach the point where they can flat out disprove religion?


IMHO they already have. Not really the concept of god, but the anchient texts. But will they ever advance to the point we know enough to know there's no place for him in the standard model?


Seriously? It seems like every day there are discoveries making our world more fascinating, spooky, and mysterious. And, like others have said, most religious adherents have the cop-out of their gods working in mysterious ways.

Personally, science can't really disprove my beliefs but they have so far been discovering evidence in support of them. Science is a study of the unknown and one facet of spiritual pursuits is also the study of the unknown. One puts their focus on observation of those unknown while the other harnesses them.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

Because it's science's job to find the truth of the natural world. If it was created by a god then that would be part of that truth. Plus laws and decisions are made only over biblical teachings. So if it's all fake then obviously we didn't make the best, most informed of the possible decisions.


Religious believers have been trying to find some proof of religion for thousands of years. While science has been trying to disprove it for the last 100 years.



No, it's not science's job to find the truth of the natural world. It's science's job to uncover how the natural world works. Those aren't exactly the same thing although they can be very close.

And some people have been trying to prove religion, although how you prove a ceremonial system is beyond me. I think you mean finding proof of God by finding proof of Biblical events which is not proving religion. And proving or disproving Biblical events is just a cat and mouse game. For every person who says you can, you will find so many more who say you can't.

For me, if God created the universe, He pre-existed it and doesn't exist by the same laws that bind it, so how are scientists ever going to prove or disprove Him? It's a moot point until we learn how to break the bounds of our own universe, and at this stage in the game, such an exercise is barely theoretical.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I would disgree on the basis religion and science are both belief systems, science is more applicable but to someone whom put's there FAITH in science how is it less a religion than someone whom put's there faith in a deity, both are religions if you look at it like that but don't tell the humanist atheist's or they may have an epithany.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I think you have the question backwards.

I think your opinion of man's scientific knowledge is overly high.

I think science has a long way to go before it can prove how we got here and why.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: ketsuko

I would disgree on the basis religion and science are both belief systems, science is more applicable but to someone whom put's there FAITH in science how is it less a religion than someone whom put's there faith in a deity, both are religions if you look at it like that but don't tell the humanist atheist's or they may have an epithany.


Oh, well, in that sense of science, I agree with you. Science has been perverted into what it was never intended to be. I was talking about science in the sense my husband, a scientist, sees it - a tool and not a belief system.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: the owlbear

Absolutely.... But I have no idea how an anomaly in a pretty known field equates to the Christian creation story being possibly true. I include all the other major religions in that as well. Since I grew up in the south as a southern baptist, Christianity is the only religion I'm intimately familiar with.


Science and history are the reason I became an athiest. If you look into what we know about the history of mankind it only matches up with the religions if you squint real hard and swap some stuff around. The only actual evidence in a religious diety of any kind. Is the fact we seem to always have believed in one. Hell even the Neanderthals buried there dead with tools. Not something you do if there's no after life....and that's just entirely too thin for me.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE

Don't really need a long OP here to set the premiss.


Will science ever reach the point where they can flat out disprove religion?


IMHO they already have. Not really the concept of god, but the anchient texts. But will they ever advance to the point we know enough to know there's no place for him in the standard model?


No, because "religion" was something created to keep people under control. Spirituality, on the other hand, is what you should be referring to.

Ancient texts are fictional stories to teach us morals, therefore science doesn't really need to disprove them. Even if you did think they were real stories, they have been translated a bizillion times and can't be trusted.

I think science will advance & spirituality will still be around but I don't think one can disprove the other. Everything is made up of energy on the quantum level & something had to put the chaos into forms.

this is all imho though



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

From that perspective correct and indeed many priest from ancient time's to modern in all religion's have used empirical observation and noted in detail there observation so arrive at conclusions based on there observations but also colored by there philosophical/religious/cultural outlook.
In true science from a western perspective a scientist can never proove a theory but can disprove one, this became a headache for some whom had long established cherished theory's and since small fluctuations would be emminent evidence of these pillers of many other spin off branches of science being wrong or incomplete along with the fundemental whole house of card's problem that it entailes the chaos theory was adopted from quantum theory to give them a cop out and allow such flawed theory's to remain when 99.9999e percent of the time the expected result based on those established theory's was returned but of course it is not 100 percent so in fact the theory's thus encompassed are fundementally proven wrong and so even for some scientists bad data thus obtained mean's that a large proportion of scientific theory is based on belief, but for those scientists whom know this it is merely an ever present headache but something they have to live with.
It tend's to only affect very small factors which macro scale observation seldom takes into account but proves that our science is far from accurate and in a field of absolute's accurate is or is not and in this respect even from a quantifiable point of view science is a faith based system, it work's regularly though (in not absolutely 100 percent of the time) unlike hope based faith system's.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 07:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: the owlbear
Science and history are the reason I became an athiest. If you look into what we know about the history of mankind it only matches up with the religions if you squint real hard and swap some stuff around. The only actual evidence in a religious diety of any kind. Is the fact we seem to always have believed in one. Hell even the Neanderthals buried there dead with tools. Not something you do if there's no after life....and that's just entirely too thin for me.


A better measure of the validity of religious beliefs would be their prophecies.

Some people are waiting to see if these sort of things come true, for example Biblical prophecies, since you are familiar with them;
biblehub.com...


Zechariah 12:3
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.


Weird occurrences such as the Jews being dispersed across the land, then over a thousand years later reestablishing the nation of Israel. Furthermore the notion that the whole world would be set against Israel and that they shall be a cup of trembling for the world.

Strangely accurate presentation of the current status of the world affairs of today, no?

Of course you would have to understand the symbolism of the mystery schools from Egypt to Kabbalism to really be clued in on what these visions are depicting/ describing.

-FBB




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join