Religious Beliefs

[Pandora's_Box]

They're opposites.
Belief in god is based on faith, it is making assumptions about the universe without any evidence.
Science is the investigation of the universe using controlled methods by collecting data of observable physical evidence of natural phenomena in order to contruct theoretical models of how things work. Models can be tested and retested to determine their validity.

I cannot see how a person can be a good scientist and believe in a god.

I hope we're not mixing up God with religion in this argument because while I agree that the belief in and practice of certain religions or aspects of certain religions necessitate a belief in God and the supernatural over science, I don't think the belief in God as the ultimate causality negates a belief in the mechanics of science.

That said, while I am in no way a believer in God myself, I can see and understand how someone, even a scientist, may believe in some greater entity at the heart of all things. Some supreme supernatural force that set about the events of the Big Bang and jump-started our existence.

In the same way that the existence of God is unprovable, so is his non-existence.

That make sense?

[Col.Foley]

They're opposites.
Belief in god is based on faith, it is making assumptions about the universe without any evidence.
Science is the investigation of the universe using controlled methods by collecting data of observable physical evidence of natural phenomena in order to contruct theoretical models of how things work. Models can be tested and retested to determine their validity.

I cannot see how a person can be a good scientist and believe in a god.

There is also a lot of belief in science.....

[Pandora's_Box]

There is also a lot of belief in science.....

Ummm....what kind of science do you practice?

If by belief you mean faith, then no.

If by belief than you mean simply believing something that has been proven to be true, then yes.

[Col.Foley]

Ummm....what kind of science do you practice?

If by belief you mean faith, then no.

If by belief than you mean simply believing something that has been proven to be true, then yes.

Yes...I mean faith. There is a lot of FAITH in science right now, and bad science, in things that may not be true, have not be proven to be true, and even the people saying it is true are using sketchy evidence to prove their points.

[Pandora's_Box]

Yes...I mean faith. There is a lot of FAITH in science right now, and bad science, in things that may not be true, have not be proven to be true, and even the people saying it is true are using sketchy evidence to prove their points.

Examples being?

[Col.Foley]

Examples being?

Since you asked....global warming....evelution....one of which I know to be true...the other one I am so skeptical of....

[Pandora's_Box]

Since you asked....global warming....evelution....one of which I know to be true...the other one I am so skeptical of....

Both are backed up by science. Both.

Yes, global warming too.

[Col.Foley]

Both are backed up by science. Both.

Yes, global warming too.

Bad science.

[Morbo]

Clearly she has if she's saying she has, therefore she can't not.

But I'm interested to hear why you think one can't believe in both God and science?

because science disproves god.

[Morbo]

Bad science.

uh, global warming is real.
its a naturally occurring phenomenon.
except human interference has had an impact on it's rate.

[Col.Foley]

uh, global warming is real.
its a naturally occurring phenomenon.
except human interference has had an impact on it's rate.

Right...and you are one hundred percent sure of this are you?

[Pandora's_Box]

Bad science.

No, Foley. Real facts and figures.

because science disproves god.

Really? I never got this paradigm-shattering memo. Where was the paper published?

Right...and you are one hundred percent sure of this are you?

Yes. It's a natural cycle of ice ages and warming trends that has been expedited by everything we humans pump into the environment.

Do you actually want to see the data?

[Col.Foley]

No, Foley. Real facts and figures.



Really? I never got this paradigm-shattering memo. Where was the paper published?



Yes. It's a natural cycle of ice ages and warming trends that has been expedited by everything we humans pump into the environment.

Do you actually want to see the data?

Right....
I have seen most of the date before, well a good deal of it. And guess what? It is bad science. All of it. Bad bad, bad, bad, terrible science. It is so obvious, to me, that I am surprised more people are not questioning this.

[shipper hannah]

I hope we're not mixing up God with religion in this argument because while I agree that the belief in and practice of certain religions or aspects of certain religions necessitate a belief in God and the supernatural over science, I don't think the belief in God as the ultimate causality negates a belief in the mechanics of science.

I realise that. But belief in a god is unsubstantiated and contradictory to scientific thinking, that is why I don't think a person can be a good scientist and believe in god. A pantheistic god, however, would be ok because 'god' is just a metaphor for the laws of the universe.

That said, while I am in no way a believer in God myself, I can see and understand how someone, even a scientist, may believe in some greater entity at the heart of all things. Some supreme supernatural force that set about the events of the Big Bang and jump-started our existence.

In the same way that the existence of God is unprovable, so is his non-existence.

That make sense?

Causality is something else I have a problem with, but I've already been over that.

[shipper hannah]

Right....
I have seen most of the date before, well a good deal of it. And guess what? It is bad science. All of it. Bad bad, bad, bad, terrible science. It is so obvious, to me, that I am surprised more people are not questioning this.

Are you a scientist?