science vs religon, which one is important and needed ? Rating Options

[mipadi]

There's also a consensus among the vast majority of scientists that global warming is occurring, as noted in this pamphlet. Furthermore, as noted here, between 1993-2003, there were 928 climate-related papers published in peer-reviewed journals; 0% disputed the general consensus on global warming.

[sixfive]

I'm not disputing global warming. My argument is that it's not man made. It was going to happen regardless of whether or not we were here.

[mipadi]

Poor choice of words on my part, but the links also support the argument that global warming is indeed man-made and that this point is agreed upon by a majority of scientists who study in climate-related areas.

[sixfive]

Fair enough. Let me get back with you on this later today

[sixfive]

Kay double post, sorry :] More of a bump, tbh. Maybe some repeat information, I'll try to exclude it, I'm just formatting it in word and copying/pasting





Okay I know I posted about the petition project earlier, and I remember your response to it as well, but I’m going to post more about it lol.

http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/...s_BY_State.html

That’s just the number, and I’m aware of what you said about only 10% of them~ being in the field of climatology. The other 90% all went to schools and got degrees in whatever assorted scientific field they chose. Those people all, while ins chool, picked up the habit of thinking like a scientist (so I would hope). There are plenty of raw facts, without bias, that people can use to form their own conclusion on the matter. I would trust a scientist’s train of thought and analysis of the situation over the New York Times and Al Gore. Speaking of Al Gore, William Gray, one of the top hurricane scientists on earth has several times challenged him to a debate over the matter, not once did Al Gore accept.

Here’s a link regarding William Gray - http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/20...0304113132.aspx
And another one - http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/jul/15/hur...s-global-warmi/

Also, if these numbers were tricked, do you have a citation? Was that link with whoever he was repeatedly saying “What a joke” it? Does the UN have no bias? The people who are acting as if Global Warming is the end of all humanity have no bias? The government/IPCC has no bias? I’m sure that the moment they found out that they’re wrong on any matter (not necessarily this one), they would turn around and tell people that they were wrong and refute all the information previously pushed on the masses.

Here are two more sites if you care to check them out, one has a long PDF file you can get to from it, but I don’t know if you want to read 61 pages.

http://www.epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=266711
http://www.uncommondescent.com/science/400...-senate-report/

Man I just realized that this post is going to look unstructured and random as hell, oh well, I get sidetracked a lot :] blame cbc

Oh and one last link - http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results.html?artId=22866

Hopefully you consider a few of the things I linked credible, if not I don’t know what to tell you. I don’t think either of us are going to change our stance on the matter, but I feel I’ve presented plenty of valid information to support my side of the argument. :]

[brooklyneast05]

i still have to read more into the whole petition project thing, i feel like it's sketchy...but i can't really back that up yet.

i didn't get the link that was just about how they wrote a book against it or something? i think i'll have to actually download the pdf and flip through it.

the uncommon descent one though...i really really really can't bring myself to take william dembski and company serious. i mean, i just can't take someone who doesn't even believe in evolution seriously when it comes to science matters.


so yeah this post is kinda useless lol. my position is the same as it was last time we had this debate and that's michael's opinion as well.to be fair though, like i said, i haven't read that much about it since like two years ago when i wrote my term paper on this. so i still have to catch up before i could really say my opinion is 100% still the same.


I'LL BE BACK TO THIS.

[dosomethin888]

There is an extremely simple answer to this... it just depends on the person.

[NoSex]

There is an extremely simple answer to this... it just depends on the person.

NO!

[PCDKitty]

I think that science is more important. Not saying religion isn't. It's a great thing to have faith. I certainly do. But a lot of science is facts and pretty much keeps our world running. Religion isn't facts. It's all beliefs. We can't prove anything of religion unless we had God on TV talking. Also, a lot of religions are cults in my opinion. Religion also can make people obsessive and afraid to live there lives fully. But there both so important in different ways.

This is a very racy question. Please, no one send me pms bashing my beliefs.

[fameONE]

My beliefs have changed tremendously over the past 3 years, so I'd might as well throw my two pennies out there...

I care not to believe in a supreme being, especially when I cannot prove that being's existence. I believe in science, but how the world came to be isn't a topic that keeps me up at night, and I damn sure won't be stressing myself out just to find some sort of documentation that gives me a warm and fuzzy about the 'big bang.' We're born; we live; we die; anything beyond that is currently out of my realm of comprehension. Live. I'll cross that bridge when I get to it and a book of fables, or fear of the unknown, won't change that.

[sixfive]

Brando, what are your thoughts on Deism?

[fameONE]

I have a great amount of respect for Deism. That isn't to say that I shit on all other religions, but Deism is the, "there is God, and if it happens, it happens," mindset that I've held for a while. As of now, I can't say that either believe in God, or that I don't; it's an issue of not caring about it particularly.

Nonetheless, if today's society had more visibility on Deism, then perhaps there would be less of an emphasis on organized religion, making people a little less (insert adjective here).

[NoSex]

deism is the pansy-ass transitional period between religious theism and atheism; if someone is honest and sane it is only a temporary position, held tenuously (if at all).

[sixfive]

deism is the pansy-ass transitional period between religious theism and atheism; if someone is honest and sane it is only a temporary position, held tenuously (if at all).

No way. I'm neither atheist nor religiously theistic. If I do in fact turn to one later down the road, I'll let you know. I promise. Seriously.

[Tung]

[fameONE]

No way. I'm neither atheist nor religiously theistic. If I do in fact turn to one later down the road, I'll let you know. I promise. Seriously.

Co-sign.

I lack a belief is a supreme being, but that doesn't mean I need to go around proclaiming that I'm an atheist.

[mipadi]

I lack a belief is a supreme being, but that doesn't mean I need to go around proclaiming that I'm an atheist.

Well, technically, if you don't believe in a god, you are an atheist.

But when did "identifying myself as an atheist" equate to "proclaiming that I'm an atheist"? For example, I'm an atheist; I'm not shy about admitting that fact should it come up in conversation, but I hardly think I'm trumpeting the fact that I don't believe in God, either.

[Whinoa]

it's amazing. my thread lasts for 4 years.

[NoSex]

No way. I'm neither atheist nor religiously theistic. If I do in fact turn to one later down the road, I'll let you know. I promise. Seriously.

so you're a deist? cool... not!
it's just a position that is a teeny-tiny-bit-less ridiculous and unsubstantiated; you're still just about as unscientific as a f**king christian or a f**king scientologist or a f**king moron, whatever. it might have made sense to be a deist at the infancy of modern science, but... it's been a few centuries, you need to "man up." it's not okay ever to believe in a fairy tale man, even if that fairy tale man doesn't happen to be a man and he doesn't happen to get angry every time you wank yo dick.

I lack a belief is a supreme being

you are an atheist.

Well, technically, if you don't believe in a god, you are an atheist.

But when did "identifying myself as an atheist" equate to "proclaiming that I'm an atheist"? For example, I'm an atheist; I'm not shy about admitting that fact should it come up in conversation, but I hardly think I'm trumpeting the fact that I don't believe in God, either.

word.

[Tung]

so you're a deist? cool... not!
it's just a position that is a teeny-tiny-bit-less ridiculous and unsubstantiated; you're still just about as unscientific as a f**king christian or a f**king scientologist or a f**king moron, whatever. it might have made sense to be a deist at the infancy of modern science, but... it's been a few centuries, you need to "man up." it's not okay ever to believe in a fairy tale man, even if that fairy tale man doesn't happen to be a man and he doesn't happen to get angry every time you wank yo dick.

You need to calm down bro.

[fameONE]

Well, technically, if you don't believe in a god, you are an atheist.

But when did "identifying myself as an atheist" equate to "proclaiming that I'm an atheist"? For example, I'm an atheist; I'm not shy about admitting that fact should it come up in conversation, but I hardly think I'm trumpeting the fact that I don't believe in God, either.

Good point.

What drove you, Nate or anyone else here to this point? Was it because you weren't raised in a religious household, or was it that you called religion on its bullshit? I'm curious. I know everyone has their reasons.

[sixfive]

It's cool, I'd be lying if I said that post surprised me. You see, having completed school on time, being on track with my life, knowing I'm going somewhere, I'm a lot less cynical than our boy Nate.

[mipadi]

What drove you, Nate or anyone else here to this point? Was it because you weren't raised in a religious household, or was it that you called religion on its bullshit? I'm curious. I know everyone has their reasons.

I used to be really interested in religion. I didn't grow up in a terribly religious household, but we did go to church when I was young (although I haven't been regularly since I was 9). My freshman year of college, I became even more interested, going so far as to join a Bible study group. I think the real turning point came when I started studying other belief systems. Something didn't seem right in the fact that the Christian belief system is largely mutually incompatible with other religious systems. The idea that "Christians are right and everyone else is wrong" didn't seem correct. Furthermore, I couldn't believe that everyone who believed something else before Christ was wrong, too.

Anyway, long story short, the myriad forms of religious beliefs ultimately led me to the conclusion that no one is right. It's not really a very logical conclusion, and doesn't stand up to intense scrutiny, but it was the belief that I eventually developed.

[datass]

i believe

religion = human invention
science = not human invention

[sixfive]

I used to be really interested in religion. I didn't grow up in a terribly religious household, but we did go to church when I was young (although I haven't been regularly since I was 9). My freshman year of college, I became even more interested, going so far as to join a Bible study group. I think the real turning point came when I started studying other belief systems. Something didn't seem right in the fact that the Christian belief system is largely mutually incompatible with other religious systems. The idea that "Christians are right and everyone else is wrong" didn't seem correct. Furthermore, I couldn't believe that everyone who believed something else before Christ was wrong, too.

Anyway, long story short, the myriad forms of religious beliefs ultimately led me to the conclusion that no one is right. It's not really a very logical conclusion, and doesn't stand up to intense scrutiny, but it was the belief that I eventually developed.

I've felt that, as well as this thought:

If you're not a Christian, don't take Jesus as your savior, etc, blah blah blah, you're not going to go to Heaven? It doesn't matter if you lead a completely just/righteous life, do everything right, just lack faith. On the flip side, you can commit crimes, be a dick to people all your life, so long as you repent near the end and take Jesus into your heart and get into heaven? What if you were never introduced to Christianity, to religion? What if you were persecuted? What if you're of another faith? All of this is could be due to social upbringing and you could have little to no control over it, so because of that you won't go to heaven? Seems pretty lame to me, not at all like the God people preach about.

At the same time, I have no reason to disbelieve a higher being, maybe a god? Maybe something else. I don't know. I'm fully into science, etc, but what put the stuff necessary for the big bang into play? I guess I just like to believe that maybe there were something that started it for kicks, an explanation for things not yet explainable. *shrug.