14-03-2005 18:26									#31
	Re: Does the 'throw out science' argument work Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by johncmcleod But still, even using the correct scientific methods, what is found to be true is not necessarily true, for further advances in technology help us understand it better and may change our beliefs about it. One could say that science helps us understand things better, but we can't understand something perfectly and completely, and therefore knowledge gained through science isn't infallible.

The point is, surely, that science gives us a framework, or a method, or tools to help us understand the processes or structures in and underlying our environment.

It also provides the means whereby scientists not yet born may revise or challenge earlier findings, or discover better ways to explain things.




Religion doesn't, by and large- something 'is' because it is, or because somebody says that a god said it was, and that it is forbidden to say it isn't, or that questioning it is punishable by death or torture.

	14-03-2005 22:01									#32
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: I believe someone like the Buddha came to that conclusion - not to worry about whether there is a god. Quite explicitly, in fact.

I think I'll go sit under a tree...

	14-03-2005 22:11									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

It's just giving up the sex that sucks - or doesn't, so to speak.

	14-03-2005 23:02									#34
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

That's the deal breaker

	14-03-2005 23:10									#35
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

The bollocks continues...

	15-03-2005 07:19									#36
	Re: Re: Does the 'throw out science' argument work Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom The point is, surely, that science gives us a framework, or a method, or tools to help us understand the processes or structures in and underlying our environment. It also provides the means whereby scientists not yet born may revise or challenge earlier findings, or discover better ways to explain things.

This is excellent. Now we can all just copy-n-paste.

	15-03-2005 11:06									#37
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Provost Harrison The bollocks continues...

I think a comment like this, if youve made at least one constructive comment in the thread, is ok but in this case why even post this?
BTW Im a scientist like you, and would like to know if there are reasons for this opinion?

	15-03-2005 11:15									#38
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

My understanding of science is very limited, so sorry if this is really elementary, but here is my understanding of the origin of the universe. Because energy and matter are interchangeable (Einstein's theory of relativity), originally there was only energy, then some cosmic accident occurred and large quantities of energy were transformed into matter. If this is incorrect, please explain it to me. My two questions though are a) where did the energy come from and b) how did this accident occurr, what caused the change?

	15-03-2005 21:35									#39
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Lul Thyme I think a comment like this, if youve made at least one constructive comment in the thread, is ok but in this case why even post this? BTW Im a scientist like you, and would like to know if there are reasons for this opinion?

Why bother? There are people who are just so thick-skulled that it is impossible to try and explain. If you explain the 'errors of their ways' you get hostility and defensiveness and they just retreat back to their fictitious religions and come out with the same nonsense all over again...it's too much like hard work to rehash this stuff...

	15-03-2005 22:15									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I agree, but then why bother posting at all?
The two sensible things in my mind, is to post your argument or not post at all...

	15-03-2005 22:32									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Because it is just so irritating how people can be so dense, that is why...

	16-03-2005 00:31									#42
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy Ideally none, however if God can be refuted then the 3000 year old bullshit that says that if you're not heterosexual, male and belligerent then you're inferior, can finally be consigned to the history books.

Yes, but rejecting the religions based on that bullshit in favour of deism would serve the same end.

	16-03-2005 02:14									#43
	Inflate your Upload Space

Deism is naturalistic religion, still a form of theism. If theism can be undermined then that end would also fall, at least logically speaking. Undoubtably people would still believe it but if they questioned it they could see God = false .

	16-03-2005 05:11									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by johncmcleod My understanding of science is very limited, so sorry if this is really elementary, but here is my understanding of the origin of the universe. Because energy and matter are interchangeable (Einstein's theory of relativity), originally there was only energy, then some cosmic accident occurred and large quantities of energy were transformed into matter. If this is incorrect, please explain it to me. My two questions though are a) where did the energy come from and b) how did this accident occurr, what caused the change?

My knowledge is a bit shaky too, but my understanding is that the universe was a singularity--space was discontinous and all collapsed in a single point. As a result, it is impossible to know anything about what happened before the singularity, if it even makes since to talk about "before" at all. In other words, there is no explanation of where it came from (I don't see any reason to expect we would be able to know that) and the "accident" occurred because, given the structure of the universe immediately after the singularity, the laws of physics required that it happen. Indeed, it's hardly an accident in any sense at all: my understanding is that in a singularity there can be no mass and only energy, while under any other circumstances energy will transform into mass (and vice versa, but at different rates depending on the situation).

Don't take this as solid fact; I probably don't have it completely right and someone knowing more physics should correct any errors I've made.

	16-03-2005 06:32									#45
	Put an end to popups!

Civman, you pretty much hit the nail on the head. It doesn't help to think of it in a spacial sense... rather the singularity was a situation where time didn't exist.

	16-03-2005 06:47									#46
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by johncmcleod My two questions though are a) where did the energy come from and b) how did this accident occurr, what caused the change?

The answers are "we don't know" and "we don't know."

However, just because we don't know isn't evidence of a god.

	16-03-2005 06:50									#47
	Put an end to popups!

Indeed... lack of evidence against |= evidence for

...especially considering the overwhelming amount of existenting evidence against, the concept of God is effectively being kept alive only by blind faith; I can think of no rational argument that hasn't been completely refuted.

	16-03-2005 06:55									#48
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Yup, that's just the boring bog standard "god of the gaps" argument they've got left.

	16-03-2005 07:24									#49
	Remove this text

Have creationists tried to explain cases like panda's thumbs? I'm not sure it's even possible in a creationist framework. Well, that's the whole point of Darwin and co. anyway. Cases such as these seals the fate of creationism.

quote: In either case, the panda's thumb is a contrivance that is an artifact of the history of the panda. It is not an ideal design fitted perfectly for holding bamboo, it is an evolved contraption. The original function of the radial sesamoid was to reduce the chance of tears in the tendon that runs to the thumb from a muscle in the arm (the sesamoid forms where this tendon bends around the edge of the wrist). The radial sesamoid was then co-opted to serve its present role in handling bamboo. Indeed, much of the panda's anatomy speaks of contrivance - it is a bear from a meat eating ancestry that has evolved to eat bamboo. Many details of its anatomy appear to be strange contrivances that reflect this history.

	16-03-2005 09:31									#50
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by nostromo Have creationists tried to explain cases like panda's thumbs? I'm not sure it's even possible in a creationist framework. Well, that's the whole point of Darwin and co. anyway. Cases such as these seals the fate of creationism.

No, they aren't trying and haven't been. The whole foundation of "Scientific Creationism" (ID included), if such a thing is possible, is the attacks on evolution. I think Giancarlo's famous quote is so applicable describing Creationism:

You criminal! You provided nothing!