Osama Flops in USA

[sharkman]

Here is the problem with creationists and religion. It is this way, or no way. Science says, well it is this way for now, because the evidence we have discovered so far adequetly defines that it is this way. But science also reserves the right to change the answer when the evidence now proves otherwise. Science has not been exact in the past, and that is due to what we understand about our world around us. The more we discover the more we understand. Religion and creationism is this nice little box you can stuff it all into and present it as fact and everything that ever was. I think the answer is more complex than a so called god doing everything.

Science bases it's opinions on what it knows. But what it doesn't yet know always makes a fool of it down the road. BTW, now a study informs us that cell phone usage is harmful to fetuses. Who knew?

Nothing would be more complex than saying God didn't create the universe, it created itself. The complexity involved in that theory is so impossible I discard it as silly. Maybe I'm missing something.

Edited May 19, 2008 by sharkman

[GostHacked]

The only problem with this conclusion is that in the end, science is always lacking the final answer (and spirituality) that many people desire. The very origin of the universe cannot be answered by science, because its methods only serve to parse answers into more questions. Those seeking a more immediate and less fussy answer can file it under "God".

I might be a rare human in which I think spirituality must come from within one's own being through life experiences. Ones spirituality has to come from within because science will never give you spirituality. Science does give you mechanical understanding of what happens in your world around you. It describes it as best as it can given the tools and information currently available. This is part of the reason I see science and religion incompatible. Nor god, nor Jesus, nor any religion will ever bring you a true sense of spirituality. Only you will be able to. Only you will open your mind to something more than what you see on the surface. If you choose not to have an open mind, then this philosophical discussion can be moved to another part of the board, and I will gladly carry it on there. since we are way off topic anyways here as it is.

Have any of you ever gotten things wrong?

Now did you learn from those mistakes?

[bush_cheney2004]

...Have any of you ever gotten things wrong?

Now did you learn from those mistakes?

I think that context discounts the role and value that religion or belief systems have played in peoples lives, with or without science. There is the practical matter of explaining or trying to understand things while "science" plods along to the rear.

Several years ago I was at a dark site "star party" with fellow amateur astronomers when an intense "Norhern Lights" (aurora borealis) event began; wave after wave of light swept down from the north in a very dramatic display. Intellectually, we knew exactly what the underlying mechanism was, so smug and comfortable were we with our "science".

But we also discussed how people would deal with this observation lacking any such "scientific" insight. Someone related Native American traditions and spirituality related to the aurora, and we agreed that such conclusions are only "wrong" for someone armed with spirituality killing science.

Science has no soul....but still makes mistakes.

[GostHacked]

I think that context discounts the role and value that religion or belief systems have played in peoples lives, with or without science. There is the practical matter of explaining or trying to understand things while "science" plods along to the rear.

Ahh more of the philysophical debate.

Religion was not mentioned when I asked the questions of making a mistake and learning from them. The context is, did you make a mistake, any mistake, and did you learn from it?

Religion may have a sole, and it has made mistakes as well. Since religion is a beleif system, I would say, actually a preconceived belief system. One instilled upon you to make you better spiritualy. Or that you hope it does. It has played an important role in peoples lives, that is not the debate here.

Science does not have spirituality, nor does it have a soul. That is something I never claimed. I doubt anyone else has ever claimed that either. Science is not about to explain nor can it ever seem to explain spirituality, or maybe our science is not advanced enough to know it. Simply put, science does not have enough data to conclude that it is true or false. This is where we can try to do experiments to see if A is actually A or not.

Trial and error. Science is full of it. That defines science, trial and error.

Several years ago I was at a dark site "star party" with fellow amateur astronomers when an intense "Norhern Lights" (aurora borealis) event began; wave after wave of light swept down from the north in a very dramatic display. Intellectually, we knew exactly what the underlying mechanism was, so smug and comfortable were we with our "science".

But we also discussed how people would deal with this observation lacking any such "scientific" insight. Someone related Native American traditions and spirituality related to the aurora, and we agreed that such conclusions are only "wrong" for someone armed with spirituality killing science.

Science has no soul....but still makes mistakes.

Again, most of you fail to understand that religion and science are not compatible. Simple as that. So to explain anything in terms of religion through science will not give you the results that can be duplicated through the same process.

Ever talk to a two year old? They have all sorts of questions... why why why why??? Then when you get sick of it enough, you just say 'that is the way it is' and be done with it. But the kid presses on, why why why. Sensing you do not have the answer, and possibly sensing that you are not giving the right answer, they continue with the questioning. So I guess that people who are tired of looking for answers will settle on the first one they think closely represents them. Remember, life is a life long journey of exploration of without, and within.

Only if you could live one way for the rest of your life. But as you all know, things change in life. Things happen in our lives that sometimes call for drastic decisions. Sometimes those decisions are wrong. So you need to think of another way to accomplish your goal. Or you find out that one goal is no longer attainable.

Religion is subject to change as well, but that process takes much longer than science. Religion and creationism cannot be explained through science. Incompatible. Again, this is where all of you fail in trying to match the two up. This is where you fail that our ever evolving science can explain everything right at this very moment. We will never know everything, there is too much to know. But we can come as close as possible. Religion is a nice little scapegoat into one thinks and really believes 'god did it', which warrents no further explanation. Nor can it get further explanation. Settle on this answer for now, but be prepared that it can change, if more evidence presents itself as such.

I can't tell you what to beleive. But I can present all the facts so you can make up your own mind. I have made up mine long ago, which is, I have no use for religion in my life. The only religion that comes close to my views would be Bhuddism. As far as I know, Bhuddism never puts a claim into an ever omnipotant entity which created everything. It does talk about karma and different realms of existence. But no mention of creationism or an all seeing god.

Maybe we should be talking about knowledge vs spirituality. But does not ones spirituality grow with more knowledge?