Science proves life after death

[_Themis]

You do like to attack science a lot and then promote your own ideas which are just ideas running through your head. Why attack so much unless you think they are wrong a lot and that you are closer to being right? In reality ideas running through the head of the scientists is juts the starting point and no where close to being a justified belief until lots of evidence is collected that supports the idea and no good evidence that shows it is wrong. That doesn't stop people from having lots of unjustified beliefs. I may have a lot less today, but probably still have some.

I don't think I have attacked science, except to say, "It no more legit in reality than religion."

You suggested science had no better an idea of the age of the earth then religion. This is an amazingly ignorant statement. They are worlds apart. Religion has no methodology and no evidence to rely on. Science has a lot of evidence.

By that, I mean, religion got us a civilized place, not science.

That would also be incorrect. Religion has been a part of human life probably from the start, but it would be wrong to give it credit for everything humans have accomplished.

Science is a product of religion.

Nope, but many religious people have been good scientists. Science is a methodology, but it was never religion that came up with those methodologies even though many people who did were members of a particular religion.

I am not afraid to toss out my ideas and have people trash them. In the process, I'm pretty confident that you don't know either. You have justified your beliefs, (or at least it sounds like you have) statistics imply you are wrong.

Coming up with ideas is not the problem. This is a common trait of humans, and one commonly wrong. Scientific method demands a certain amount of evidence before an idea is accepted as true, while you do not. A good scientist is also a skeptic.

[_Lemmie]

Frankly, I've never heard of one evolutionist, "Christian" or not, beseeching GOD for insight in understanding data ------

Hmm...I wonder why that is?

If one wishes to write a fairytale about how the would began, well have at it, but if the desire is to really understand GOD, why and how ------ you cannot pretend that ignoring HIS existence doesn't count.

Yes, that is every scientist's desire-- to understand God.

Somehow I feel you may not understand what a scientist does or how they do it.

[_Dr. Shades]

If you were not a colossal hypocrite, you would live without the benefits of the science you have such contempt for, but then you would have to become Amish.

[MODERATOR NOTE: Please remember that phrases such as "if you were not a colossal hypocrite" do NOT belong in the Celestial Forum, and refrain from such aspersions in the future.

Please keep in mind that not all forums here are the Terrestrial Forum.

Thank you.]

[_SPG]

Frankly, I've never heard of one evolutionist, "Christian" or not, beseeching GOD for insight in understanding data ------

Hmm...I wonder why that is?

If one wishes to write a fairytale about how the would began, well have at it, but if the desire is to really understand GOD, why and how ------ you cannot pretend that ignoring HIS existence doesn't count.

Yes, that is every scientist's desire-- to understand God.

Somehow I feel you may not understand what a scientist does or how they do it.

I don't think I wrote this quotes. As for your thought about me misunderstanding scientist. I'm not a accredited scientist but I love science, and I use science all the time. I follow it quite closely.

However, there are "things" that are obvious but no one wants to look at. For example, savant-ism. Savants are natural humans that basically have super powers. They can do math, play music, paint pictures, etc, but usually cannot button their shirt. Sometimes, their abilities simply blow us away. They defy everything we know about normal humans. Nature obviously has the ability and the knowledge to make us incredibly smart. If nature can give super powers to someone that is otherwise retarded, why not me? Why not all of us?

My observation, based on dozens of similar situations, is that there is an underlying intelligence that hides from us. In some ways, it is obvious, but it actively inhibits us from intentionally tapping into it. Only people that become unbalanced in their chemistry get to see it.

Now, most doctors think these unbalanced witnesses are crazy and that what they see is complete delusion. But. . . . I see it as, normal people don't see it because "normal" means blinded. Normal human chemistry blocks out so much. For example, we don't have quite the same smelling capabilities of a dog, but our noses pick up thousands of smells that don't get processed in our conscious minds. But that information is processed and filed away.

Humans are shut out of their own minds. I understand (I think) why this is necessary, but to me it is obvious. We have been kicked out of the garden of life so speak, we are not trusted to enter inner chambers of intelligence and consciousness.

[_SPG]

You suggested science had no better an idea of the age of the earth then religion. This is an amazingly ignorant statement. They are worlds apart. Religion has no methodology and no evidence to rely on. Science has a lot of evidence.

Moses talked about the "beginning." After 4000 years of passing the story on, (for religious reasons) we have something like this.

"In the beginning. . . God Moved in the void, God said Let there be Light, Let there be earth, let there be plants, let there be animals, let there be humans."

Everything I've read about science, pretty much agree with this.
Early man used a lunar calendar, so Adam being 930 years old, really equates to 77 years. Early man used terms like "40 days and 40 days" to mean "a really long time." So, I don't get to caught up on numbers. I run numbers every day and I know how easy it is to mess them up. That Moses seems to have an understanding of how the universe was created is mind blowing.

That would also be incorrect. Religion has been a part of human life probably from the start, but it would be wrong to give it credit for everything humans have accomplished.

I will give one power a higher score then religion and that is survival. But art, most often was about religion. Building, social structures, kingdoms, causes, etc, all built on religion.

Nope, but many religious people have been good scientists. Science is a methodology, but it was never religion that came up with those methodologies even though many people who did were members of a particular religion.

If you can say this, you have probably never been part of a religion. Religion invented methodology. We have still have rituals that date back 5000 years. Religion first noted the pattern in the stars, patterns in the weather, patterns in human behavior, etc. They had a god for everything.

Coming up with ideas is not the problem. This is a common trait of humans, and one commonly wrong. Scientific method demands a certain amount of evidence before an idea is accepted as true, while you do not. A good scientist is also a skeptic.

Here is the dangers of science. A good scientist is a skeptic. We need faith to act. Scientists gain their faith from learning and experimenting. That scientist then goes into the world with a confidence that he/she knows something. This creates a "priest class" where non educated people lack confidence that they understand reality.

Faith is powerful, but not necessarily right. I have seen people healed by faith. I have seen people healed by science. I have seen people die from the ignorance of faith, and I have seen people die from the ignorance of science.

People don't have to understand how electronics work to enjoy them. They don't have to understand science to be happy. And, they don't have to be belong to a religion.

But. . . find me one person that thinks themselves free from religion. I will show them how their very existence, their identity, their habits, their home, their community, their feelings, their dreams, etc, are all connected religion. Family is a product of religion. Community is a product of religion, (even if we have learned how to take religion out of it.)

[_Choyo Chagas]

Early man used terms like "40 days and 40 days" to mean "a really long time."

please, send this sentence to littlenipper, who is captivated/seduced by nonexisting "literal translation" (YLT...)

as he is an early man, it is not a wonder...

[_Themis]

You suggested science had no better an idea of the age of the earth then religion. This is an amazingly ignorant statement. They are worlds apart. Religion has no methodology and no evidence to rely on. Science has a lot of evidence.

Moses talked about the "beginning." After 4000 years of passing the story on, (for religious reasons) we have something like this.

"In the beginning. . . God Moved in the void, God said Let there be Light, Let there be earth, let there be plants, let there be animals, let there be humans."

Everything I've read about science, pretty much agree with this.
Early man used a lunar calendar, so Adam being 930 years old, really equates to 77 years. Early man used terms like "40 days and 40 days" to mean "a really long time." So, I don't get to caught up on numbers. I run numbers every day and I know how easy it is to mess them up. That Moses seems to have an understanding of how the universe was created is mind blowing.

Moses is not likely to have been a real person. None of the earliest sources get anywhere near to that time. The Bible stories of the age of the earth are not true, and it's later efforts to figure this out that has given us far better information. There is not much amazing to understand that life cannot exist without the earth and sun, or that plants have to come before animals.

Building, social structures, kingdoms, causes, etc, all built on religion.

Not really. Religion is a part of what may inspire what is built though.

If you can say this, you have probably never been part of a religion. Religion invented methodology. We have still have rituals that date back 5000 years. Religion first noted the pattern in the stars, patterns in the weather, patterns in human behavior, etc. They had a god for everything.

I was part of a religion for most of my life. Religion did not invent methodologies. It came up with it;s own, but not good one for getting accurate answers about the world. That is why it has come up with so much crap. Religion did notice the patterns. People did. As time went on people came up with better methodologies for looking at and figuring out how the word works. It's what we call science today.

Here is the dangers of science. A good scientist is a skeptic. We need faith to act. Scientists gain their faith from learning and experimenting. That scientist then goes into the world with a confidence that he/she knows something. This creates a "priest class" where non educated people lack confidence that they understand reality.

Faith is powerful, but not necessarily right. I have seen people healed by faith. I have seen people healed by science. I have seen people die from the ignorance of faith, and I have seen people die from the ignorance of science.

People don't have to understand how electronics work to enjoy them. They don't have to understand science to be happy. And, they don't have to be belong to a religion.

But. . . find me one person that thinks themselves free from religion. I will show them how their very existence, their identity, their habits, their home, their community, their feelings, their dreams, etc, are all connected religion. Family is a product of religion. Community is a product of religion, (even if we have learned how to take religion out of it.)

You do spout a lot of gibberish. I wish you could write more clearly. Science is just better methods of looking at the world and we have loads of evidence of it's successes and religions failure. Because of this we see that science is the one changing religious beliefs. It's too bad that some like nipper are left behind in their ignorance.

[_SPG]

You do spout a lot of gibberish. I wish you could write more clearly. Science is just better methods of looking at the world and we have loads of evidence of it's successes and religions failure. Because of this we see that science is the one changing religious beliefs. It's too bad that some like nipper are left behind in their ignorance.

We could just go around like this, but I'm not going to convince you, I can tell.

Religion has a "different" way of looking at things. Metaphorical is a valid method of observing something that otherwise cannot be seen. God is invisible, no one has denied that.

"To God, all things are spiritual." This is a literal statement, and spiritual is just as invisible as God is.

It's easy to say, "there is not such thing as Archangel Michel because no one has ever seen him." Or at least that can be documented. Yet, Joan of Arc answered the call of Archangel Michel and saved France. And the people rallied behind her because of him. Now, hero energy is a personality. It must really be expressed in the form of a personality.

Now science might recognize that heroes and hero complexes exist, but could science rally a nation to a hero? I don't think so. People must believe in the form of the hero, and that form must be provided by some form of teaching.

Now, we have doctors and firemen that heroes of science, so to speak. But even so, defining spirit is largely a religious thing, or has been in the past. I admit, we getting away from religion, but I'm not sure if the system can be sustained long term. The world on the verge of religious war. Some people are saying we don't need it. Other are saying, "join us or we will kill you." Others are saying, "we are right and we don't care others think."

Someone is going probably going to win this war or clean the planet trying. I think religion is basically more powerful because it deals with the passions of humans.

But, science cannot deal with the "invisible." I understand this, just like religion cannot really be taken literally.

[_LittleNipper]

Frankly, I've never heard of one evolutionist, "Christian" or not, beseeching GOD for insight in understanding data ------

Hmm...I wonder why that is?

If one wishes to write a fairytale about how the would began, well have at it, but if the desire is to really understand GOD, why and how ------ you cannot pretend that ignoring HIS existence doesn't count.

Yes, that is every scientist's desire-- to understand God.

Somehow I feel you may not understand what a scientist does or how they do it.

"Why is that?" you ask. Because they BELIEVE they know better. Somehow I feel that you imagine that scientists are "gods". And frankly EVERYONE should desire to seek and understand GOD --- not just scientists...

[_Themis]

Religion has a "different" way of looking at things.

Not really. Religion is just a set of beliefs and practices an individual or group has. Not all beliefs and practices fall under religion. People in the past tried to understand the world, but were not well equipped to do so with most of what they saw and experienced. Scientific methodologies are just a set of rules on how to evaluate what we see and experience to get a more accurate understanding. Most religion came before this and we see a lot of incorrect beliefs because of it. I don't blame many for getting things wrong so badly. Many did the best from what they had, while others made it up for their own benefit.

Now science might recognize that heroes and hero complexes exist, but could science rally a nation to a hero? I don't think so. People must believe in the form of the hero, and that form must be provided by some form of teaching.

Science is just a set of rules to help us get more accurate information about the world. It's should be a part of what we do, but it is not something meant to be everything to humanity and it's needs. It just helps us better understand things that can help us in many different areas. Like why humans like to have hero figures.

But, science cannot deal with the "invisible." I understand this, just like religion cannot really be taken literally.

Scientific methodologies have helped us to experience the invisible. Many things like spirit or God are not well defined to really test to see if they exist. Science doesn't have areas it is not allowed to evaluate. If spirits really exist it is a question science could answer. That it hasn't yet is because most believers have not defined it well and so run to every hole to hide in.