shroomer33
Active Member
God is outside of time. Hence, there is NO beginning and NO end to God.
We need to thank Dr. Einstein for this one!!!
We need to thank Dr. Einstein for this one!!!
There Is No Devil.
- Thread starter BrotherJay
- Start date
shroomer33
Active Member
I'd like some of that stuff you're smoking. Whew!
ok i think bout tis when not high
P
PadawanBater
Guest
You may be a scientist in the sense you have earned a degree in a field of science, but you clearly show that doesn't make a person a scientist. To a scientist, nothing is outside of time, as that's NOT WHAT SCIENCE DEALS WITH. Science ONLY deals with the reality we occupy, which includes time. Science has absolutely nothing to say about anything outside of space or time, which you already admitted includes God, so how would you suggest a 'scientist' like yourself observes it/him? Answer that.
And just as a side note, what kind of bullshit non answer is that anyway? He's outside of space and time... Shroomer, dude, can't you see that's just a fallback they came up with designed SPECIFICALLY so that that question cannot be answered logically? That is clear as day.
Statistics are against you my friend.
http://www.physorg.com/news102700045.html
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm
The first one says that 52% of scientists have no religious affiliation, compared to 14% of the general public.
The second one surveyed "greater" scientists (defined as those belonging to the National Academy of Sciences). It found that 65% of biological scientists expressed a "disbelief in a personal God", and 79% of physical scientists. Most of the others were agnostics. Only 7% expressed a "belief in a personal God."
Also, the scenario was essentailly... "believe in God or die", whether you actually believe or just "believe"... it's that or die. Hey uhh... I choose "believe"! No question. If that were the scenario today, you don't think I'd lie out my ass about how much I believed in God to not be killed by all the crazy people around me?? Think it through buddy, you'd do the same.
Don't get me wrong, that's not to say those men weren't actually truly believers in their faith, I'm just saying that was the law back in the day, you can't rule anything out.
Also, check the dates;
Newton - 17th century
Kepler - 16th century..
A lot of what is known today about evolutionary theory and biology was not known to them.
Though none of that even matters... argument from authority. Doesn't hold any water with me... it doesn't matter to me what any other 'scientist' believed, or what anyone thinks they may have believed. Fact is, they could be extremely smart but incredibly ignorant, anyone could be. Someone else's belief or disbelief in a God doesn't mean and shouldn't mean anything, it does not have the power to influence my decisions. Those men you listed were no doubt geniuses in their fields and contributed a ton to humanity, but not everyone is right about everything all the time.
DING DING DING! Give this man some +rep!
shroomer33
Active Member
Get it right. 3 degrees.
This shows how ignorant you are, along with CrackerJax. The dream of a unified field theory is one that is independent of a background space-time, one that at least explains the origin of space-time. Hence, a field theory independent of space-time, so to speak. This is the Holy Grail of physics. You are just as ignorant as CrackerJax on this one. You have no idea what high energy physics is about. I do. I have a degree in it. CERN has computer programs that I wrote, tracking particles through CMS's endcaps. Their cooling system for their electronics is partially my work. I am tired of you fools trying to tell me what science is really all about. I live it!!
Try reading Lee Smolin's Three Roads to Quantum Gravity. He does a good job of explaining what I am talking about, and he is an atheist, as far as I can tell. He actually has theories about cosmology and natural selection that you would enjoy. You'll see what I am talking about. The point is:
YOU ARE WRONG.
Science, at its highest level, that is, high energy physics, is ALL about what happens outside of time. If we understood that, we could fully understand the big bang, or any other singularity.
An explanation of the origin of space-time would only explain how God did things. It wouldn't necessarily explain who or what he is. I don't understand the question.
You are a fool. The fact that God is outside of time is an incredible scientific breakthrough. THIS IS WHAT GENERAL and SPECIAL RELATIVITY IS ALL ABOUT!!!! Ever hear of them? You certainly don't understand them.
This is a perfect example of how science solved biblical paradoxes that have perplexed theologians for centuries and/or millenia. This is why I am in love with science and always will be. Too bad you don't understand the first thing about it.
whoopdee freaking do. I can tell you what I have seen: many great physicists are "religious", by your definition. 7% is still a large amount. Are these 7% bad scientists????
That was my point.
Stop reacting in emotion and deal with logic.
This is not an appeal to authority. A statement was made that stated that good scientists aren't religious. My counterexamples proved the statement wrong.
Also, Schrodinger and Heisenberg were after Darwin.
Dear God, you are not very logical.
Again. I'm not trying to appeal to their authority as 'scientists.'
Someone else's belief or disbelief in a God doesn't mean and shouldn't mean anything, it does not have the power to influence my decisions. Those men you listed were no doubt geniuses in their fields and contributed a ton to humanity, but not everyone is right about everything all the time.
DING DING DING! Give this man some +rep!
CrackerJax
New Member
What does that have to do with Religion?
This sort of skewed perspective is EXACTLY why the vast majority of scientists don't carry a faith with them. It alters perceptions before they even begin. The space time continuum should be studied and theorized WITHOUT an objective already in mind. I hope you don't bring that altered perception to work with you.
General and special relativity are NOT a scientific breakthrough FOR the existence of G*D. Now I'm starting to think you are working in your garage.
Seems you don't understand the role of science.
7% is NOT large. it is very small. Very. 93% are not religious....that would be called, the VAST majority. Rightfully so of course....rightfully so. Unless a scientist is in a protected position, they will keep mum about their religious beliefs, if they want to be taken seriously that is.
No, 7% means you are wrong.... incredibly wrong.
Again, a few needles in the haystack. Far more (thankfully) go the other way.... the way of true logic, sans religion, which is empty of logic.
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Good post CJ, I can't +rep you but you deserve it!
Explain to me how high energy physics explains what happens outside of time.
That seems like a bit of a conflict of interest in the persuit of genuine knowlege to me buddy...
So when you get to the end of the rabbit hole and there's no magic man to give you marshmallows, do you think your mind would be able to handle it, or would there be one there regardless of what reality had to say about it?
Didn't really address the point I made, that is, how authors of these texts inserted things like that, illogical reasoning and circular logic, the fact one must have faith, and essentially believe because someone told you to believe and nothing else, just so people would feel comfortable with themselves about lying to themselves. Fact is, most of them don't even ever realize it, they don't think about it, they think they're being good believers and they're going to be rewarded in the end, thoughts like that don't pass through your mind until you start questioning your actual belief system, reality, existence.
Howbout all the other seemingly contradictory claims the bible makes that science slaps back in it's place and the churches have to apologize for or admit defeat?
Your point is stupid. So what if a religious scientist is good. What the hell does that prove?? Same thing it would about an atheist scientist being good. Nothing... The point being made here is that there are clearly more scientists who do not believe in a personal God.
What that is saying is that the more a person is educated, the smarter a person is, the less likely they are to hold a religious position. Now think about that... why would more intelligent people, you know, the ones who have studied the sciences of the earth, geology, astronomy, chemestry, physics, biology, etc. believe there is no God, and the less intelligent people, that of the general public, believe there is?... This is where I'd say "it doesn't take a rocket scientist.." but you have three science degrees! You might actually be one!
How far after Darwin? You realize there are plenty of people today who do not accept the theory of evolution... the MODERN theory.. yeah...just sayin'.. (...like, I know a couple of them.. that's pretty damn common if you ask me)
As I said...
I think you missed my point. The tools we have today, at present, do not have the ability to measure anything outside of our universe. You already admitted this would include God. How do you suggest a scientist like yourself would measure the existence of God? Pretty simple question right?
Explain to me how high energy physics explains what happens outside of time.
wtf are you talking about? An explination of the origin of space-time wouldn't explain anything about a God at all. If we figured out exactly how everything happened, you're saying it would all lead right back go "God did it!"!?
That seems like a bit of a conflict of interest in the persuit of genuine knowlege to me buddy...
So when you get to the end of the rabbit hole and there's no magic man to give you marshmallows, do you think your mind would be able to handle it, or would there be one there regardless of what reality had to say about it?
Well, first problem with that is... yeah, we have not positively identified God yet so uhh.. how would that be considered an "incredible scientific breakthrough"? Going by that standard, I have tons of "incredible scientific breakthroughs" sitting in my living room!
Didn't really address the point I made, that is, how authors of these texts inserted things like that, illogical reasoning and circular logic, the fact one must have faith, and essentially believe because someone told you to believe and nothing else, just so people would feel comfortable with themselves about lying to themselves. Fact is, most of them don't even ever realize it, they don't think about it, they think they're being good believers and they're going to be rewarded in the end, thoughts like that don't pass through your mind until you start questioning your actual belief system, reality, existence.
Howbout all the other seemingly contradictory claims the bible makes that science slaps back in it's place and the churches have to apologize for or admit defeat?
What world do you live in where 7% is a "large amount"???
Your point is stupid. So what if a religious scientist is good. What the hell does that prove?? Same thing it would about an atheist scientist being good. Nothing... The point being made here is that there are clearly more scientists who do not believe in a personal God.
What that is saying is that the more a person is educated, the smarter a person is, the less likely they are to hold a religious position. Now think about that... why would more intelligent people, you know, the ones who have studied the sciences of the earth, geology, astronomy, chemestry, physics, biology, etc. believe there is no God, and the less intelligent people, that of the general public, believe there is?... This is where I'd say "it doesn't take a rocket scientist.." but you have three science degrees! You might actually be one!
lol, bringing your religion into it again? Didn't you say earlier how I argue from a position of emotion?.. (that argument being common among believers, again.. *seriously I've heard everything before.. this is kind of dissapointing..*, I'm angry at God! I don't want him infringin' on the way I live my life so I'm going to choose to not believe in him.. yeah, I just wanna sin man.. I love it, I love sinning, it makes me feel great...)
How far after Darwin? You realize there are plenty of people today who do not accept the theory of evolution... the MODERN theory..
yeah...just sayin'.. (...like, I know a couple of them.. that's pretty damn common if you ask me)
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
with god, it's not just a question of beliefe or not, it's the question of just why do i want or need him in my life? all these christians saying "oh life is so good knowing that god is with me everywhere i go, i feel content and blah blah".
well you know what, i feel no different to you in any way, except that you seem to need to rely on someone to get through your day, i just get through it. are we stronger people, emotionally and mentally than christians then? as we're both getting the same out of life, yet you need someone to point you the right way, well, his way, etc etc
as said, i see no reason to accept god into my life whether he be real or not, he's got nothing to offer me
well you know what, i feel no different to you in any way, except that you seem to need to rely on someone to get through your day, i just get through it. are we stronger people, emotionally and mentally than christians then? as we're both getting the same out of life, yet you need someone to point you the right way, well, his way, etc etc
as said, i see no reason to accept god into my life whether he be real or not, he's got nothing to offer me
fish601
Active Member
About two-thirds of scientists believe in God Nearly 38 percent of natural scientists -- people in disciplines like physics, chemistry and biology -- said they do not believe in God. http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html
.
shroomer33
Active Member
It doesn't!
That is not what I said.
What I said was that a theory independent of a space-time background is the dream of high energy theorists. Smolin's book does a great job of explaining what I am talking about.
This is important because if we can get a good theory that's independent of space-time, we can understand quantum gravity and how the big bang singularity came into being. By extension, we will also understand black holes.
So. Yes. This is a very important question to physics, and it is all outside of time.
You stated earlier that:
I am simply stating that science, at its deepest level (high energy theory), is desparately looking for a theory that describes exactly what happened outside of time that gave rise to all space-time.
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Yeah? Find me a source. Everything I typed into google came up more atheist scientists, less religious ones.
And Shroomer, address the rest of my post please. I made a few points I wanted you to specifically reply to.
fish601
Active Member
you didnt like the link i gave you?
P
PadawanBater
Guest
All it was was a page saying what you stated, 38%.. I looked for the poll the information was gathered from, couldn't find it, looked for the guys background information, couldn't find that.. It was just a story this guy wrote up with no sources to independently confirm any of the information.
Every single thing I've ever read or seen says there are far more atheist scientists than there are religious ones, this is the only thing I've seen that says otherwise, but it doesn't cite anything. What is the name of the poll this paper is based on?
Like I said, try to find me another source that says otherwise.
fish601
Active Member
Based on previous research, we thought that social scientists would be less likely to practice religion than natural scientists are, but our data showed just the opposite," Ecklund said.
according to a new survey by University of Buffalo sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund,
According to the study nearly 38% of natural scientists physics, chemistry, biology, etc said they did not believe in God, and only 21% of social scientists do not believe
i dont think you looked to hard
In separate work at the University of Chicago
, released in June, 76 percent of doctors said they believed in God
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Based on previous research, we thought that social scientists would be less likely to practice religion than natural scientists are, but our data showed just the opposite," Ecklund said.
according to a new survey by University of Buffalo sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund,
According to the study nearly 38% of natural scientists physics, chemistry, biology, etc said they did not believe in God, and only 21% of social scientists do not believe
i dont think you looked to hard
In separate work at the University of Chicago
Doctors aren't scientists.
Are you making the claim that there are more religious scientists than there are atheist ones?
If not, what is the point of that poll?
I'm making the claim that there are much more atheist scientists than religious ones. Or agnostic scientists, the type that would say they're 'spiritual' but do not believe in a personal God.
shroomer33
Active Member
All of this started because CrackerJax said that you can't be a good scientist and be religious at the same time, which is now proved wrong, whether it's 7% or 62% or whatever.
You can be a great scientist and be religious. You can also be an atheist and be a great scientist.
Your worldview doesn't define your scientific ability.
Case closed.
You can be a great scientist and be religious. You can also be an atheist and be a great scientist.
Your worldview doesn't define your scientific ability.
Case closed.
CrackerJax
New Member
I never said EVERY scientist is an atheist. The polls do bear out that the OVERWHELMING majority of scientists are not religious, which again makes sense. Going in with a predisposition is never a good way to stay objective. Religious beliefs can skew perspectives and is almost always met with disdain in the scientific community.
Case closed.
Case closed.
shroomer33
Active Member
ummm.....
Sounds logically equivalent to:
"Every good scientist is an atheist"
Lets break it down logically.
If you have no religious beliefs, you are an atheist. TRUE, right?
If you are an atheist, you have no religious beliefs. TRUE, right?
OK then. The phrase 'has no religious belief' is equivalent to 'atheist'.
So we now have:
A good scientist is an atheist.
Better phrasing:
Any good scientist is an atheist.
For any element of the set GS, say gs, gs is an element of the set A. So GS is a subset of A.
GS - set of all good scientists
A - set of all atheists
fish601
Active Member
i am not making the claim, someone else is.
you dont get the point?
so you dont believe this?
Based on previous research
38% of natural scientists physics, chemistry, biology, etc said they did not believe in God, and only 21% of social scientists do not believe
shroomer33
Active Member
No they aren't. At least not in math or physics. You are speaking out of ignorance again.
Religious beliefs are rarely met with disdain in the scientific community. It does happen though, I will admit that, but it isn't a common thing. Most of my fellow physicists are laid back and mellow and have a 'go your own way, and i'll go mine' attitude.
How much time have you spent in the scientific community?
You are forcing your worldview on the scientific community.
shroomer33
Active Member
That is exactly what you said.