The scientific people are taking over....the religious people have not figured it out yet, because they do not believe in science, lol. I find it funny when someone believes in a big bearded man in the clouds, and yet fails to recognize scientific research.
depends who i am discussing with... sorry..to hurt...your...atheist...feelings...
Well, the oppinion that believers dont believe in science, or that they chose whi,h parts to believe in stems from....well, ...religious people not believing in science. You do the same thing though with science as you do bad christians "well I dont believe.that so its not actually scientific....well, those christians who dad bad stuff arent really christians because christians dont do bad stuff" circular reasoning. Shall we list scientific things that religion stands against orstood against? Evolution, stem cell research, medical marijuana, cloning technology, CARBON DATING, climate change, in the past, the heliocentric universe, the telescope, air travel, the.morning after pill...christianity has a loooong history of being a discouragement to science...i dont think that can be effectively counter argued....
^ Christian much?
This might be difficult because if "believers" means "any and all believers", one is dealing with a set of people as diverse as ... well, most of humanity.^ Christian much?
...Philthy, can you please post something that shows where "in the now" believers are blind to science? This is something that I still don't understand. And when you say 'all believers' you include me and I feel I have a slightly more scientific ilk than you give credit for. If Christianity is such an anti-scientific force and can do whatever the hell it wants to, then why does, say, nasa even exist? You'd think the 'ole poperüny would have killed it by now.
...christianity is a solar religion - phallic. Telescopes?? Come on man, they're shooting sight like sperm!
...thanks neer..er...cn
I know that particular agenda. As a catholic I face the 'heat' of the prodies, for certain. My neighbors' kids are mission types. They came back from near Malta, of all places and said "bah, they're nationalist catholics", effectively saying 'they're blind'. Don't get me wrong, they're great people and I respect what they do. To a point, to be honest.
Exactly. The extent to which christians can except the progression of science seems to depend on how pious a particular believer is to the bible. Many modern christians ignore most of the dogma in the bible, and are very good at compartmentalizing the rest from critical thought. They seem well able to apply critical thought/skepticism to most else in their lives, it's a neat trick. The closer a believer is to following the bible's actual teachings, the further they are from accepting the scientific method. I've observed that religion wants to be friends with science so badly, but it seems science wants to stay as far from religion as possible. I wonder why that is? Sam Harris speaks eloquently on this subject in this video:
You are correct, not all ,hristiansdisbelieve in science, but I would say the majority pick and chose what.science they believe in. I gave a long list of current things christianity discourages the scientific resear,h of as well as current theories they(as a group, not all individuals) believe in. I also said christianity in the past, was against telescopes, if you check your history books you will see gallaleo threatened with excommunication and burning at the stake for his promotion of the telescop....by the pope.(im pretty sure the details are correct, If you find otherwise i'll bow to it in recognition of my imperfect memory.)^ Christian much?
...Philthy, can you please post something that shows where "in the now" believers are blind to science? This is something that I still don't understand. And when you say 'all believers' you include me and I feel I have a slightly more scientific ilk than you give credit for. If Christianity is such an anti-scientific force and can do whatever the hell it wants to, then why does, say, nasa even exist? You'd think the 'ole poperüny would have killed it by now.
...christianity is a solar religion - phallic. Telescopes?? Come on man, they're shooting sight like sperm!
...anything that can be researched should be†. And thanks, for not tearing this apart.
I think we have found some agreement, and if you'll allow I would like to expand upon what you said...
Haha yes thats why the we are also trained in hand to hand combat
You do know people run out of ammunition right? not everything is a rambo movie where 10 chain linked rounds last 90000 shots. Little fyi since you seem ignorant on the fact and for that fact everything else you seem to be talking about.
Nice try buddy. All these things that the ARABS did was pre-mohammed, befor 630 s. When looking pre and post mohammed you see an almost drop off in technology from the area. Furthermore, muslims dont use alcohol as an antiseptic unless unknowingly as the TOUCHING of alcohol is harram (forbidden) yes, those advances were made in the same area, but it certainly wasnt islam
This is incorrect and has been discussed in many threads previously. Non-believer and atheist are synonyms. Atheism simply means lack of theism. If you aren't a theist, you are by definition an atheist. The problem comes from self-identification. People that don't believe in astrology don't call themselves non-astrologers. Atheist is an accusatory term created by theists. Agnosticism is about a different ontological question, that of knowledge. Theism and atheism are about belief, hence why non-belief makes you an atheist. Agnosticism is about knowledge and what if anything is knowable. They are related but different. The popular 'atheist' authors Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennet all say the same thing you do, that the theistic claim that there is a deity is not compelling so they are on the side of skepticism, but none of them make the positive claim that there absolutely is no god.
"Al-Hazen 965 -1038 is the person who first found the relationship between light source, lens and resultant image. That is why called as "Al-Hazen Theorem". He also explained how an eye can see. He said that we can only see when light falls on that object and reflect back to our eyes."
