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.

 

Ask An Atheist Anything

page: 32
25
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
Quote: I made no such assumption. Are you Adam, the one who made that video? If so, it's not surprising you made another bizarre assumption.

Yes I am Adam and I wasn't referring to you I was referring to the other dude that said I was belittling others beliefs based on my own observations of science and religion.



Quote: No. Science follows observations and evidence and is ever-changing. Religion codifies their assumptions and resists change at all costs.

Sceance resists change as well. Anyone who believes in Darwin will resist change but evolution is just a word that means things change, the same thing religion does. It's not a theory. Even a cloud changes every second. It's a dualistic debate about the same thing. One religious belief for another.



I don't believe such things because "science told me so". It's because the evidence for certain scientific theories can be observed from many branches of investigation, and experiments can be done personally to verify the findings of science. We understand things about the universe because we rely on the convergence of multiple lines of inquiry which render the same results.


I'm not saying science is wrong. Your car runs because of science.


Science comes along and says there's no soul it's just chemicals and here's some drugs we want to sell you to deal with it. That's dogma, not belittling other's beliefs, because science has just as much potential to harm humanity as religion, just look at what those drugs they want to sell you have done to society!



Science is ethically ambiguous. Science in the hands of good people benefits society, science in the hands of evil people can harm the masses. This does not invalidate science as the best tool we have to understand the universe nor does it qualify science as a dogma.


The same goes for relgion. Religion is the hands of good people benefits society, in the hands of evil people can harm the masses. It therefore must also be ethically ambiguous.




posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Science also codifies it's beliefs. They call them laws. Laws, codes, it's the same thing.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:27 AM
link   
Not to mention the eye of God is found on the Verichip logo. Science is just assuming the new postion of Relgion. It was planned on. It's not just the atheist logo.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
Sceance resists change as well. Anyone who believes in Darwin will resist change but evolution is just a word that means things change, the same thing religion does. It's not a theory. Even a cloud changes every second. It's a dualistic debate about the same thing. One religious belief for another.


Incorrect. Evolution is a scientific theory and is confirmed by many branches of the science. Just because certain Abrahamic religions feel threatened by it and challenge it does not make it a dogma. Evolution is not a matter of belief, any more than one would "believe" in gravity and it has no tenets of religion in any way. Furthermore, aspects of evolutionary theory do indeed change with regularity.



I'm not saying science is wrong. Your car runs because of science.


Yet you do isolate certain areas of science and either misinterpret it or flat out deny it.


The same goes for relgion. Religion is the hands of good people benefits society, in the hands of evil people can harm the masses. It therefore must also be ethically ambiguous.


Actually, religions lay a claim to moral and ethical behavior and provide instructions for one's morality. Religion, particularly Abrahamic religions, are anything but ethically ambiguous. It only becomes ethically ambiguous if people pick and choose which moral instructions to adopt and which ones to discard. The buffet-bar approach to religion happens often and changes frequently with the social zeitgeist.

What I've gathered from your video and your posts is that you have your own presumptions about the universe which require you to deny many aspects of both religion and the sciences because your viewpoint generally cannot hold up to the scrutiny of either. This is common with those who grasp to pseudoscientific and/or metaphysical hypotheses.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
And although I appreciate Science's attempt to explain the beginning of the universe, it's the exact same as Religion's attempt. The name Yahweh means a sexual explosion, a big bang. The name is always used in reference to an orgasm: YAH-WEH! Metaphorically it's all the exact same thing! Just a different unsatisfactory explanation. It still leaves just as much mystery and question as religion and doesn't solve anything. Thousands of years ago they had advanced technology, and the beings that gave man that technology created... religion.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
Science also codifies it's beliefs. They call them laws. Laws, codes, it's the same thing.


No, scientific laws are not codified beliefs. Laws are simply concise facts representing functions of nature: tautologies resulting from repeated observation and experimentation.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
And science is doing the same thing regarding ethical morals when it deals with global warming and "greenery."



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:39 AM
link   
They are not concise "facts" because every day they change.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:50 AM
link   
The cult of YAH, the Abrahamic religion is known as the cult of the: material universe. Down to its basic core, it is giving an explanation for life. An explanation. No different. By the way, the sun is a cube and it's spinning so fast it looks like a sphere.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Is that bizarre? I'm sure Galileo was regarded as bizarre!



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   
And evolution is NOT a theory. Everything changes. It's a word. If you want to sit here and observe with a camera how a cloud changes go ahead. It is not a theory it is a fact. It was brought about as a "theory" to distract everyone into a meaningless debate.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
They are not concise "facts" because every day they change.


Scientific laws are facts and do not change (except in the most extreme environments such as black holes). Scientific theories, modes of explanations, do indeed change with new research.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
And evolution is NOT a theory. Everything changes. It's a word. If you want to sit here and observe with a camera how a cloud changes go ahead. It is not a theory it is a fact. It was brought about as a "theory" to distract everyone into a meaningless debate.


With all due respect it appears you do not understand the definition of a scientific theory. Scientific theories are facts, not philosophical hypotheses. When it comes to the theory of evolution there is no debate as to the truth of it. The "debate" (denial) comes from religious fanatics who find it threatening to their religion. Scientists have debates within evolutionary theory as we figure out the mechanics and nuts & bolts of extremely specific aspects of it.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   
How else does science become dogmatic? There are plenty of instances. How come nearly every scientist ignores the fact that global warming is occuring on every planet in the solar system, not just on Earth? Because they are working for the same people that control religion, who want to tax us for carbon when they really just want money. How come they treat cancer with radiation? To pay for their machines. Money money money. They don't care about anything else, just like the priests. They are no different.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   
No evolution is not a theory, I'm sorry but it's just not. It's a word and it means stuff changes, and I'm about to "change" right now by shaving.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
The cult of YAH, the Abrahamic religion is known as the cult of the: material universe. Down to its basic core, it is giving an explanation for life. An explanation. No different. By the way, the sun is a cube and it's spinning so fast it looks like a sphere.


That science provides explanations about the physical world is inevitable as it relies on the process of observation of the physical world. It is still enormously different from religion even though both may overlap in areas of explanations of the physical world.

Your assertion about the sun being a fast-spinning cube is contradictory to all observation. As you previously required me to prove you wrong about this I might remind you that it is not my burden to prove a negative. It is your burden to back your assertion. I'm willing to review your data should be be able to provide it.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
No evolution is not a theory, I'm sorry but it's just not. It's a word and it means stuff changes, and I'm about to "change" right now by shaving.


Evolutionary theory is the name for the process of adaptation by natural selection and biological synthesis. It is a scientific theory: few deny this.

Evolution is also a word which describes a process of change.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by mhorndisk
How else does science become dogmatic? There are plenty of instances. How come nearly every scientist ignores the fact that global warming is occuring on every planet in the solar system, not just on Earth?


Because such science is funded by lobbies, governmental or industrial, which pay scientists to crunch malleable data in favor of desired results. This violates fundamental principles of scientific method.


Because they are working for the same people that control religion, who want to tax us for carbon when they really just want money. How come they treat cancer with radiation? To pay for their machines. Money money money. They don't care about anything else, just like the priests. They are no different.


That science is exploited by unethical people harkens back to my previous point of ethical ambiguity. Simply because there exists unethical people employing scientific data and discoveries for their own purposes does not make science inherently dogmatic.

[edit on 22-7-2010 by traditionaldrummer]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Global "warming" or "cooling" isn't a theory either. It means stuff gets hot or cold. Stuff falls because of gravity. They're just words. Stuff does stuff... so what?! Of course there are benefits to applied science, but look at the religion of the Dogon tribe, who found Sirius was a binary star system thousands of years ago before science did. Man is God, not some invisible guy floating around in the clouds laughing at you saying I told you so. Psalms 82 says Ye are Gods, but ye shall die as men. Both atheists and Christians have the exact same brainwashed concept of God, who is simply: the most enlightened being (alien if you want) in the universe. The top of the scientific food chain, its all the same.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
Quote: Simply because there exists unethical people employing scientific data and discoveries for their own purposes does not make science inherently dogmatic.

Then by that assumption:
Simply because there exists unethical people employing religious beliefs and discoveries for their own purposes does not make religion inherently dogmatic.

Everyone has their own religious beliefs. Everyone creates God in their own image. Just because most priests are dogmatic doesn't mean that all religious people are dogmatic. It's people as well as their institutions who are dogmatic. Religion itself, just as science itself, is not dogmatic. Yes a particular type of religion may be dogmatic, but not all religion is dogmatic.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join