Can Science and Religion co exist?
-
CenterBHSFan
For some reason, I can't get the quotes to work :/"Therefore, any zealotry is being misconstrued as championing the intellectual integrity of society"Agreed. -
CenterBHSFan
"Therefore, any zealotry is being misconstrued as championing the intellectual integrity of society"Agreed.
-
Heretic
I'm on board!Devils Advocate;1605222 wrote:
-
HitsRus
Originally Posted by sleeper
Again sleeper, I hate to destroy your self esteem again, but there is no logic that follows from faulty assumptions and premises. Further, you continue to make your case against anthropromorphisms used to help people's understanding ...as if they were to be taken literally.....making the same 'error' as those you criticize. Originally Posted by sleeper
I'll give you the logical answer. Prayer does nothing of real value but what it does do is give delusional people the hope that there is someone out there who is all powerful who can change it. If he chooses not to change it, then its part of his 'grand plan' for that person and it meant to happen. It's a coping mechanism, nothing more nothing less. If it held any real value, believers would just pray and never go to the doctor where science does all the actual work.
As far as bad things happening, don't you know its all the devil's fault? Believers don't really like talking about how god's plan involves killing millions of young children in Africa each year dying from HIV.
Do I really have to explain death and suffering again? I explained it to you last Friday. Go back and reread post #312.
As for the value of prayer and spirituality, not only is it a coping mechanism, but it appears to have value enough that 80 medical schools have added it to their cirricula since 1993....
http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/can-prayer-heal
Done.It looks like no one can/wants to refute that. -
BoatShoes
NO Jmog. The reason that mankind knows that the original isotope was Uranium is because there is a specific, scientific reason that Uranium atoms easily substitute for Zirconium Atoms...and you ought to know this since you're our resident "Scientist"...the reason is that Uranium and Zirconium both have the same ionic charge. Polonium does not share the same ionic charge as Zirconium and will not substitute for Zirconium atoms in the formation of a Zircon crystal.jmog;1605212 wrote:You forgot about the assumption that none of the lead comes from other radioactive elements that finish at lead as well. It is kind of convenient to forget an important assumption, especially when some of those elements like Polonium have half lives of seconds and days instead of billions of years.
Think about it, if the zircon had a mixture of the 8 main radioactive isotopes that all lead to lead when it started, since all of the others have MUCH shorter half lives, after just a couple years one would see ZERO zero concentration of the other isotopes and only uranium and lead would be left. Uranium because it hasn't had time to decay, lead from the small amount of uranium that has decayed AND from all the others that have fully decayed.
Again, there is a reason that humankind settled on Zircon...because the real scientists were able to think of all of the silly arguments pseudoscientists dream up in their Bible Study classes and rule them out. -
BoatShoes
You're right...it's an absolutely terrible stance/argument and yet it is the one being put out by the only Creation Science institute in the world because that is the best they can do despite their researchers with Ph.D's who are just as desperate for their wishful thinking to be true as you are. Anything is technically possible. A Teapot could be orbiting the sun, we could be in the matrix, there could be a flying spaghetti monster...but there's no good reason to believe any of that nonsense unless you want to take the Cartesian spiral and then you don't get anywhere anyway...you know nothing.jmog;1605223 wrote:While technically possible (if one assumes a god could create the laws of physics, the same god could change them), it is a bad stance/argument.
However, radioactive decay while VERY stable, is still a chemical reaction. Chemical reaction rates most certainly are affected by temperature, pressure, and chemical composition. Now, it has been tested, observed and theorized that radioactive decay changes VERY SLIGHTLY with these parameters compared to most chemical reactions. This means that it would require VAST changes in temperature or pressure to notice a change in the half life. In other words, to do what this creation science quote is suggesting is that EITHER God did it miraculously (just changed it) or that God miraculously changed the temperature and pressure (both much higher than normal) of the rocks...which would bring in a whole other list of problems. -
BoatShoes
New Rule. People who believe that an anthropomorphic God had a drunkard and giant rock monsters build a ship that housed all of the animals of the Earth including baby dinosaurs and repopulated the world on the promise (from a rainbow) that God wouldn't destroy mankind again with a flood don't get to call themselves scientists.jmog;1605245 wrote:I am no theologian, just a scientist. -
pmoney25
Is that really God listening and granting prayer wishes? Or just positive thinking/feeling lowering stress levels which in turn lowers risk for disease?HitsRus;1605614 wrote: Originally Posted by sleeper
Again sleeper, I hate to destroy your self esteem again, but there is no logic that follows from faulty assumptions and premises. Further, you continue to make your case against anthropromorphisms used to help people's understanding ...as if they were to be taken literally.....making the same 'error' as those you criticize.
Do I really have to explain death and suffering again? I explained it to you last Friday. Go back and reread post #312.
As for the value of prayer and spirituality, not only is it a coping mechanism, but it appears to have value enough that 80 medical schools have added it to their cirricula since 1993....
http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/can-prayer-heal
Done. -
Devils Advocate
When God intervenes
-
HitsRus
^^^again Pmoney...you are making God into a being that we can easily understand...that would act like a human...with the reasoning of a human whose pattern/method of thinking is largely confined to three spatial dimensions and one dimension of time. Clearly, "He" would be so much more than that. "Listening and granting" would be something that a humanlike entity with simply more abilities would do.
Or just positive thinking/feeling lowering stress levels which in turn lowers risk for disease?/
Amazing how primitive people knew what we are just discovering today!
Perhaps, connecting to the universal spirit has positive effects....like recharging your batteries.
I have stated oft on this and other threads that religion is a vehicle for that connection....that it could be fundamental Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, buddhism...it is a matter of what helps your understanding. -
WebFire
You didn't refute anything. You confirmed what sleeper said and added a link about school curriculum which doesn't answer anything.HitsRus;1605614 wrote:
Done. -
HitsRus
What didn't you understand? He said that prayer was nothing more than a coping mechanism. The link was about how science is studying prayer and it's effect on medicine. I added the statement about medical school curriculum because it is a related fact that shows that medical people take prayer and its ability to effect positive outcomes seriously....even if "sleeper" doesn't.You didn't refute anything.
Please note: sleeper did not include a link to any legitimate scientific organization or scientific study that shows the prayer is nothing more that a 'coping mechanism".
His remark is simply 'off the cuff' as are most of his blathering. -
jmog
You left out the fact that Thorium is one of those in the HFSE group with Zirconium and Uranium (aka compatible) as well as in the decay chain between Uranium and Lead.BoatShoes;1605617 wrote:NO Jmog. The reason that mankind knows that the original isotope was Uranium is because there is a specific, scientific reason that Uranium atoms easily substitute for Zirconium Atoms...and you ought to know this since you're our resident "Scientist"...the reason is that Uranium and Zirconium both have the same ionic charge. Polonium does not share the same ionic charge as Zirconium and will not substitute for Zirconium atoms in the formation of a Zircon crystal.
Again, there is a reason that humankind settled on Zircon...because the real scientists were able to think of all of the silly arguments pseudoscientists dream up in their Bible Study classes and rule them out. -
jmog
The only creation science institute? Come on...seriously?BoatShoes;1605618 wrote:You're right...it's an absolutely terrible stance/argument and yet it is the one being put out by the only Creation Science institute in the world because that is the best they can do despite their researchers with Ph.D's who are just as desperate for their wishful thinking to be true as you are. Anything is technically possible. A Teapot could be orbiting the sun, we could be in the matrix, there could be a flying spaghetti monster...but there's no good reason to believe any of that nonsense unless you want to take the Cartesian spiral and then you don't get anywhere anyway...you know nothing.
The best they can do? Seriously?
You are better than that, you have become rather adept at googling things you don't understand and copy/pasting it in this thread, would it have been that hard to google other creation science groups like AiG, etc...here, I'll google that for you...
http://creation.com/creationist-organizations-in-the-usa
I count over 130 creation science groups there.
Also, who said that "that was the best they can do"? It was one article by one guy giving his one opinion that I am sure you cherry picked because of its argument. I am sure that either that particular group, AiG, and/or many others have other discussable theories but you didn't spend more than 30 seconds googling. -
jmog
See, another example of you having no clue what you are talking about. You googled something, saw the descriptions of the movie Noah, and assumed the script writers followed the text in the Bible exactly.BoatShoes;1605619 wrote:New Rule. People who believe that an anthropomorphic God had a drunkard and giant rock monsters build a ship that housed all of the animals of the Earth including baby dinosaurs and repopulated the world on the promise (from a rainbow) that God wouldn't destroy mankind again with a flood don't get to call themselves scientists.
There were no "rock monsters" in the Bible, that was added (as well as MANY other things in that movie) for whatever reason.
New rule, I could give a rats ass what you say I can call myself. You can also stop being a pretentious pompous ass at any time -
BoatShoes
I figured you might say that but that doesn't help your case either! The half-life of thorium-232 is 14 billion years and none of the isotopes of thorium have a half life that would be compatible with an Earth that is 6,000 - 10,000 years old. And, either way, they know that Zircons only contain trace amounts of Thorium!jmog;1605639 wrote:You left out the fact that Thorium is one of those in the HFSE group with Zirconium and Uranium (aka compatible) as well as in the decay chain between Uranium and Lead. -
BoatShoes
No, Jmog I've read the Bible numerous times and I know there was no mention of the rock monsters...I just through that in there for funzies.jmog;1605647 wrote:See, another example of you having no clue what you are talking about. You googled something, saw the descriptions of the movie Noah, and assumed the script writers followed the text in the Bible exactly.
There were no "rock monsters" in the Bible, that was added (as well as MANY other things in that movie) for whatever reason.
New rule, I could give a rats ass what you say I can call myself. You can also stop being a pretentious pompous ass at any time
Oh and by the way this is the definition of pretentious:
^^^That's what I would call someone who constantly reminds people that he is "a scientist". Socrates was not pretentious. He just seemed that way because he spent his time revealing that pretentious people were actually full of shit.characterized by assumption of dignity or importance, especially when exaggerated or undeserved: a pretentious, self-important waiter. -
BoatShoes
RATE/Institute for Creation Research is the organization your charlatan Robert V. Gentry is associated with because you brought up their research earlier in this thread. They are completely full of shit and just assume miraculous interventions in the laws of physics. Feel free to bring up some other bogus wishful thinking from some of these other charlatans if you're so inclined.jmog;1605645 wrote:The only creation science institute? Come on...seriously?
The best they can do? Seriously?
You are better than that, you have become rather adept at googling things you don't understand and copy/pasting it in this thread, would it have been that hard to google other creation science groups like AiG, etc...here, I'll google that for you...
http://creation.com/creationist-organizations-in-the-usa
I count over 130 creation science groups there.
Also, who said that "that was the best they can do"? It was one article by one guy giving his one opinion that I am sure you cherry picked because of its argument. I am sure that either that particular group, AiG, and/or many others have other discussable theories but you didn't spend more than 30 seconds googling. -
sleeper
I want to see an experiment where they take two people, shoot them both in their femoral artery and have one person be sent to the hospital for doctors to heal and the other sent to church where an entire group just prays for them. Would you sign you or your children up for the one who gets the prayers? LOLHitsRus;1605614 wrote: Originally Posted by sleeper
Again sleeper, I hate to destroy your self esteem again, but there is no logic that follows from faulty assumptions and premises. Further, you continue to make your case against anthropromorphisms used to help people's understanding ...as if they were to be taken literally.....making the same 'error' as those you criticize.
Do I really have to explain death and suffering again? I explained it to you last Friday. Go back and reread post #312.
As for the value of prayer and spirituality, not only is it a coping mechanism, but it appears to have value enough that 80 medical schools have added it to their cirricula since 1993....
http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/can-prayer-heal
Done.
As far as your link, LOL. Coping mechanism do tend to have positive impacts on people but until you can provide evidence that prayer alone can solve real problems and not just improve the mental health of an individual, then we can talk. My experiment above would be an example. Please next time you are involved in a serious accident or obtain a serious illnesss, just pray and let your god save you. LOL -
sleeper
Again, god has special rules. Convenient. Tell me more about how you circumvent logic and reason to justify the existence of a made up character in your life.^^^again Pmoney...you are making God into a being that we can easily understand...that would act like a human...with the reasoning of a human whose pattern/method of thinking is largely confined to three spatial dimensions and one dimension of time. Clearly, "He" would be so much more than that. "Listening and granting" would be something that a humanlike entity with simply more abilities would do -
sleeper
They've done plenty of studies on prayer and found almost zero correlation with it affecting the health of individuals(or anything for that matter). Wikipedia has a great summary but feel free to read into each individual study. The reality is science is not going to waste their time on this kind of bullshit anymore.HitsRus;1605637 wrote:What didn't you understand? He said that prayer was nothing more than a coping mechanism. The link was about how science is studying prayer and it's effect on medicine. I added the statement about medical school curriculum because it is a related fact that shows that medical people take prayer and its ability to effect positive outcomes seriously....even if "sleeper" doesn't.
Please note: sleeper did not include a link to any legitimate scientific organization or scientific study that shows the prayer is nothing more that a 'coping mechanism".
His remark is simply 'off the cuff' as are most of his blathering.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studies_on_intercessory_prayer -
WebFire
The study merely concluded that people who believe in prayer think it helps to pray for people. I don't see where the study even had anything to do with God, which was the subject of my question.HitsRus;1605637 wrote:What didn't you understand? He said that prayer was nothing more than a coping mechanism. The link was about how science is studying prayer and it's effect on medicine. I added the statement about medical school curriculum because it is a related fact that shows that medical people take prayer and its ability to effect positive outcomes seriously....even if "sleeper" doesn't.
Please note: sleeper did not include a link to any legitimate scientific organization or scientific study that shows the prayer is nothing more that a 'coping mechanism".
His remark is simply 'off the cuff' as are most of his blathering. -
Devils Advocate
-
jmog
Nice google error...BoatShoes;1605653 wrote:I figured you might say that but that doesn't help your case either! The half-life of thorium-232 is 14 billion years and none of the isotopes of thorium have a half life that would be compatible with an Earth that is 6,000 - 10,000 years old. And, either way, they know that Zircons only contain trace amounts of Thorium!
The 2 Thorium isotopes that are in the U-Pb decay chain are Thorium 234 and Thorium 230 NOT Thorium 232.
What are the half lives of those 2 Thorium isotopes?
Th234 half life is 24.10 days.
Th230 half life is 75,000 years.
Neither of which are billions of years.
You are not very good at googling this sciency stuff, you should keep trying though...what copy/paste information or video can you put up next? It is your M.O. is it not? -
BoatShoes
You must have missed this part:jmog;1605700 wrote:Nice google error...
The 2 Thorium isotopes that are in the U-Pb decay chain are Thorium 234 and Thorium 230 NOT Thorium 232.
What are the half lives of those 2 Thorium isotopes?
Th234 half life is 24.10 days.
Th230 half life is 75,000 years.
Neither of which are billions of years.
You are not very good at googling this sciency stuff, you should keep trying though...what copy/paste information or video can you put up next? It is your M.O. is it not?
Which you thankfully provided as proof all on your own. LOL!none of the isotopes of thorium have a half life that would be compatible with an Earth that is 6,000 - 10,000 years old.