Bwpz
Well-Known Member
Of course science can be used to kill, so can my thumb.
Another pointless religious/atheist thread.
- Thread starter Hepheastus420
- Start date
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
So science was wrong when people were engaged in mysticism prior to the enlightenment?
No one has ever said the results of science is always right. You cannot discount that the process of scientific discovery is head and shoulders above any and every other path to knowledge ever attempted.
Bwpz
Well-Known Member
Yeah, they sure could if they wanted to...
What exactly is it you're getting at? A pencil can kill man, you're just saying science can kill, no shit haha...
grizlbr
Active Member
The last Version of the book is correct until Revised! 1+1=2 or 1+1= sqroot of 2 depends retecangular or polar form? Just to expand on what I read here: So according to all written records 7500 years Weather change is trackable to man's industrialization? So the science is still out on this? Or is global warming just the result of all the heat from all the radiators cooling internal combustion engines? But A models were 1909? So we only have 102 years to observe that information. And I am the religious person saying when did temperature recording historically start to give a solid understanding of temperatures over a million year period?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Wanna hang out? If so meet ya at joe's bar. Doesn't work. Actually, that does work. You just have to stay in the bar a LOOOOONG time. Works for me!
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
mp, smoke a bowl! i think i have found out my issue with you, i just cant answer the way you do... i mean i try, but it just dont come out, so i just type something reasonable and leave it be...
I was not implying that science is always right either. All im saying is that science has had its fuck up as well and has lead people astray from real scientific work because the church banned all other types of study cause they were hell bent on getting shhgold!
I love science mp! it is a major part of my career and i really enjoy learning more about what i love to do for a living... If it means subscribing to all the really good journals to get the most up to date scientific data regarding how to train athletes for improve athletic performance, i am all for it... you see, you are an expert in a field that i am not, i am an expert in a field you are not, so you will misunderstand each other some times because we have different methods of getting our point across. sorry for the mix up and heated exchanges
I was not implying that science is always right either. All im saying is that science has had its fuck up as well and has lead people astray from real scientific work because the church banned all other types of study cause they were hell bent on getting shhgold!
I love science mp! it is a major part of my career and i really enjoy learning more about what i love to do for a living... If it means subscribing to all the really good journals to get the most up to date scientific data regarding how to train athletes for improve athletic performance, i am all for it... you see, you are an expert in a field that i am not, i am an expert in a field you are not, so you will misunderstand each other some times because we have different methods of getting our point across. sorry for the mix up and heated exchanges
Hepheastus420
Well-Known Member
alright I just had an idea, so here it goes...
Religious books are just books right? So then we have religious people saying this is right no doubt about it, then we have the atheists saying I just don't believe it, and then we have the skeptics that say bullshit you bunch of dumbasses. Before I go on I would like to point something out.
When I was in school we would have a shitload of textbooks about science, some of them were old editions. Anyways my biology/chemistry/physics teacher all taught from these books and would sometimes point out that some of the information in these older edition books have been proven wrong so they would teach you what was right. But think about it... These books were old editions so the past students had to learn that false crap but since the book never said was false they took it as fact since the book gave many of these so called "facts".
Now back to my initial point... Just like the science books the religious books are just books that don't say they are false but say they are true. (iforgot my point so im gonna come up with some bullshit point for now until my real point comes back to me, ha) Maybe they are wrong also but you can't say that science doesn't draw people astray from the truth just like religion supposedly does.
Religious books are just books right? So then we have religious people saying this is right no doubt about it, then we have the atheists saying I just don't believe it, and then we have the skeptics that say bullshit you bunch of dumbasses. Before I go on I would like to point something out.
When I was in school we would have a shitload of textbooks about science, some of them were old editions. Anyways my biology/chemistry/physics teacher all taught from these books and would sometimes point out that some of the information in these older edition books have been proven wrong so they would teach you what was right. But think about it... These books were old editions so the past students had to learn that false crap but since the book never said was false they took it as fact since the book gave many of these so called "facts".
Now back to my initial point... Just like the science books the religious books are just books that don't say they are false but say they are true. (iforgot my point so im gonna come up with some bullshit point for now until my real point comes back to me, ha) Maybe they are wrong also but you can't say that science doesn't draw people astray from the truth just like religion supposedly does.
Hepheastus420
Well-Known Member
Or maybe my point was that you shouldn't hate religion as a whole because it's not religions fault it's religious people's fault. IDK I'm super baked I'm getting more and more lost with my own posts... Ehh I'm gonna get some cereal.
mexiblunt
Well-Known Member
Ok cool meet ya there! If i'm not there when you get there just wait.
Luger187
Well-Known Member
they take core samples of ice and they know what was in the atmosphere however long the ice goes back. up to millions of years
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Why on earth would you try to answer like someone else?
I wouldn't have responded to your post at all if it was reasonable. Alchemy has nothing to do with science except for being the precursor to chemistry because of all of the discovery of the various elements. So saying science was wrong while linking it to alchemy just sounds like an attempt to disparage science for no particular reason even though you say you like science. You should ask yourself why you posted something like that, what was the point?
How does something the church did make it the fault of science? Maybe if it wasn't for the church scientific discovery would be 100 years further ahead than it is currently.
You say you love science but this was not the first time you have made a comment that attempts to belittle science. I'm glad you love science and try to be good in your field. I just wish you wouldn't try so hard to try to somehow make it on an equal footing with religion or whatever you are doing.
ThE sAtIvA hIgH
Well-Known Member
religion is something for the weak minded to cling to.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
why do you misunderstand my words? What i meant by that is me trying to you know, be at your level or rhetoric, which im not. i can be, but i just dont like to sound so smart, no offense.
that explains why you have ignored all my valid and "substance" filled posts on other threads... thats cool.
again, you misunderstand my words. what i meant by throwing alchemy into the mix was that alchemy is a part of science, but lead others not to follow what they believed in cause they had to spend their time in alchemy. i hate the catholic church for what they have done to the field of science, but that does not mean alchemy was not influential. I believe the idea of making ssshgold out of nothing came from so called scientists' way before the church found out, but as soon as the church heard about it, they tried to control that as well.
how is alchemy not a part of science? There are alchemist to this day trying to find new ways to make gold. they already have, but in minuet amounts, not worth the time and money. and this statement seems to me that you are hostile with all my posts, just trying to find something you see wrong with it and pointing in a smug fashion.
alchemists made up the idea of turning metals into precious metals before the church knew about, so you cannot say alchemy was not a fuck up of science and the church...
maybe if it werent for hitler or stalin, or the communist dictators of china or japan in the early part of the 20th century we would have even furthered our advances in all aspects of science, so to blame solely the church is ridiculous and preposterous!
please show me where i "belittled" science? If all i have done is give another point of view in some rather atheist fueled arguments in which their hatred for religion is absurd. You guys "belittle" peoples beliefs and what they write all the time, so i see no point in you brining this up. Why is that luger can bash on religion and believers and yet always side with muslims and what they want. that is exactly what you say i am doing, yet you do not bring this to his attention. again, the atheism bias.
what is life without striving to be the best you can be in what you love to do?
i am not trying to make anything equal, i am just giving to sides to the argument. There is all this religion does bad no good and science is all and mighty! well, people have to be informed of some misleads that science has done in our past history.
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
wow, did you copy and paste this? I have seen this by someone else
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
I didn't misunderstand you. This tells me you are trying to be like someone that you're not. I don't try to use any rhetoric or words in any special way, I just type the way I think. It seems that when you try to match other people, you make yourself harder to understand.
I haven't ignored posts of yours in other threads when they are reasonable.
What I meant by that was that I wouldn't have responded with criticism to reasonable posts. Of course if I had a response I would do so, but many of your posts were so unreasonable they deserve a comment just to straighten out misconceptions.
Again, I don't think that's my fault. I think you might need to choose different words.
What do you think science is? How do you think that alchemy was scientific, let alone part of science? Calling alchemists scientists would be like calling witches community leaders.
The correct question would be how is it part of science.
I'm not being hostile, I'm disturbed that you, someone that claims to love science, thinks alchemy is science. How about astrology? That was a precursor to modern astronomy, is astrology and horoscopes science?
I never solely blamed the church for anything. I made the connection based on what you said about the church and alchemy leading people away from scientific study.
Honestly, I think if it weren't for Hitler and Japan, we would be a few years behind where we are now. The war was very influential to the progress of atomic research.
Calling alchemy science in order to find fault is IMO, belittling science.
I don't think dislike of religion is absurd.
Questioning beliefs is not belittling them. However, some beliefs are worthy of criticism and disparagement. If you hold onto irrational beliefs, it's probably better to keep them to yourself or be prepared to defend them.
I am not luger so I can't answer for him. I will say that defending the rights of Muslims is not the same as defending Islam. I will also defend Muslims or Christians or Satanists, or whoever, against unfair treatment by the government. I will not however, defend their beliefs as rational.
mediocre?
Science doesn't pretend to be infallible. People that understand science also understand its limitations and no one is more familiar with the mistakes and blind alleys science has led us to in the past than scientists and the scientific literate. However, trying to find additional fault of science where it is actually blameless like linking it to alchemy is just wrong.
Hepheastus420
Well-Known Member
How? There's plenty of religions that don't believe in a afterlife. I personally believe I'm gonna go to a grave and that's it because I sin too much and don't really try my hardest to follow my religion. So how is that comfort?
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
i find that rather true and i thank you for pointing it out. It is just, i mean, im very intelligent so i want to respond in ways similar to yours, but as i have found out, it is a bit hard to understand.
to me science is the study and research of everything there is on this planet and beyond and trying to further our understanding of what we love to do. I know my definition is rather small, but i like to keep it that way for simplicity. please expand my definition if you will? I really dont get into other fields because of my own interest in my field of study.
why would it not? If it set the ground for modern chemistry, i believe it should be included in science. the great mathematician who was competing against einstein for the formula for the theory of relativity found the formula first, but gave all the credit to einstein, yet no one remembers him when they mention it, i dont know if that made sense to you.
again, why is it not science? alchemists were performing countless hours of study and research pertaining to all sorts of metals while trying to discover a new way to make gold. a lot of the first alchemist were into other fields as well, so what makes their work invalid? they followed their methods they used with other studies, but i think what makes it seem not a science to you is the relationship it had with the church. if you think about it, alchemy is used all throughout the scientific world because we are constantly changing compounds and creating new ones with different chemicals and what not or creating new drugs for pharmaceutical use and monetary benefits.
astrology is retarded, how does that relate to what we are discussing? astrology has to do with interpreting the stars and the cosmos and trying to relate to how we feel or what we are going through. although i do believe that it did contribute to science due to all the graphing and making of calendars by the position of the stars and what they shared with astronomy. i think the two worked hand in hand till they wanted to believe that astrology actually had an influence on you as a person due to the stars and whatever else they studied. You cannot say that astrology did not contribute to astronomy either.
yes, but you blame religion for most fuck ups today and how religion could have influenced a person to do such acts of whatever they may have done, the church does spread religion.
so what about stalin? and you are ok with all the lives lost during those tragic events? yes, only in the name of science right? it also shows how science was used to destroy life
calling people who believe and solely keep to themselves about their beliefs "religious nut jobs" is belittling my beliefs as well. That is an attempt to try and show you all the hypocrisy of your(not you in general, but if you have said it or thought it) claims about being "religious nut jobs!"
maybe that is your position on religion, dislike, but others i cannot say the same for. Just as you all associate anyone who believes in God as a "religious nut job" i have made the statement because you are associated with atheists. And what said to be absurd is the fact the you all associate all believers to "nut jobs" and people who "force their beliefs on others!"
so questioning science is?
why are you not defending islam when defending muslims? they believe in islam and follow alah, just like radical muslims do. So why persecute me, that i believe in the Christian God and do not force anything on anyone?
I would have to say less then mediocre. I believe the sole purpose of life is to become the best you can be at helping others in any way possible through what you have learned. Of course, learned i mean, what you have learned through your studies in your area of expertise.
then how is linking us to some past hominid without proper or sufficient evidence not wrong? I mean we do have very close similarities and features, just as alchemy and chemistry have, yet linking us to a hominid is accepted, while linking alchemy to science is not?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
In re astrology and alchemy:
Astrology and alchemy are both mystical pursuits. They are essentially witchcraft - trying to divine andor influence spirit power by assigning meaning to the shape of star and planet patterns ... or by a serious version of Potions class at hogwarts.
Alchemy predated chemistry in much the same way as astrology predated and drove astronomy before telescopes.
But neither has owt to do with science. They're both about trying to divine or recover occult magical knowledge, which is incompatible with scientific method and mindset.
cheers 'neer
Astrology and alchemy are both mystical pursuits. They are essentially witchcraft - trying to divine andor influence spirit power by assigning meaning to the shape of star and planet patterns ... or by a serious version of Potions class at hogwarts.
Alchemy predated chemistry in much the same way as astrology predated and drove astronomy before telescopes.
But neither has owt to do with science. They're both about trying to divine or recover occult magical knowledge, which is incompatible with scientific method and mindset.
cheers 'neer