Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 187

Thread: The equivalence of religion and science?

  1. #21
    Registered User SteveK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cairns, Australia
    Posts
    365
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    On this basis I would advocate that ALL children are taught about literal creationism, evolutionary theory and the hybrid I’m proposing (I don’t know… let’s call it) The Harmonized Evolutionary And Creationistic Theory. THE ACT. All the theories would be given a fair and equal hearing and every child in conjunction with their parents (or maybe exclusive of their parents if need be…) would have the information to make their OWN minds up without being subject to the propaganda, misinformation and political machinations that currently cloud these issues.

    That’s fair enough isn’t it?
    No problem with this - although I do insist that you include (in addition to literal creationism, evolutionary theory and the hybrid you're proposing) for fairness the alternative creation viewpoint of Pastafarian thinking. Has your research included investigating this alternative viewpoint:

    "All evidence for evolution was planted by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, in an effort to test Pastafarians' faith—a form of the Omphalos hypothesis. When scientific measurements, such as radiocarbon dating, are made, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage"

    Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

  2. #22
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Its in the Mail on Sunday - it must be true Course if it was an advert, surely there are grounds for complaint to the standards board? I think she's now been publicly outed as a charlatan for quite some time.

  3. #23
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveK View Post
    No problem with this - although I do insist that you include (in addition to literal creationism, evolutionary theory and the hybrid you're proposing) for fairness the alternative creation viewpoint of Pastafarian thinking.
    I was touched by his noodly appendage in a Pizza Express. There was a distinct presence and some Parmesan cheese suddenly descended onto my pasta. Praise be.

  4. #24
    Registered User timbp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    544
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    It's long but hopefully readable - please have a go and tell me what you think. Is it too complicated? Do you think it's rubbish? OR Do you think it has value?
    Very interesting post.

    I know quite a few scientists who accept something much like your harmonised theory (except they don't distort relativity theory).

    The problem is simply that the scientific theory works without God. Maybe God exists; maybe not. But it is possible to give a theory that works very well without God.

    Yes, there are holes in the scientific viewpoint. But the scientists working in those areas know where the holes are, and what evidence they need to plug them (even if we don't yet [and maybe never will] have the technology or understanding to find that evidence).

  5. #25
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveK View Post
    No problem with this - although I do insist that you include (in addition to literal creationism, evolutionary theory and the hybrid you're proposing) for fairness the alternative creation viewpoint of Pastafarian thinking. Has your research included investigating this alternative viewpoint:

    "All evidence for evolution was planted by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, in an effort to test Pastafarians' faith—a form of the Omphalos hypothesis. When scientific measurements, such as radiocarbon dating, are made, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage"

    Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
    Pastafarians are tragic deluded creatures - it's well known that His Noodly Appendage is one of the many disguises of the Purple Oyster. As can be revealed by The Casting of the Parmesan.

    The only true faith is, of course, in the Invisible Pink Unicorn (pbuh (mhhhnbs)).

  6. #26
    Registered User SteveK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cairns, Australia
    Posts
    365
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    Pastafarians are tragic deluded creatures - it's well known that His Noodly Appendage is one of the many disguises of the Purple Oyster. As can be revealed by The Casting of the Parmesan.

    The only true faith is, of course, in the Invisible Pink Unicorn (pbuh (mhhhnbs)).
    So what you're essentially saying is that the Invisible Pink Unicorn is responsible for such disgusting or annoying things as Jar Jar Binks, Kerry Katona and putting pineapple on pizza. I'd rather have a bowl of spaghetti thank you!!

  7. #27
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveK View Post
    So what you're essentially saying is that the Invisible Pink Unicorn is responsible for such disgusting or annoying things as Jar Jar Binks, Kerry Katona and putting pineapple on pizza. I'd rather have a bowl of spaghetti thank you!!
    Exactly. We're very inclusive*, whereas Pastafarians are divisive. Where does cous-cous fit in to your creed, for example?

    I will pray for you on one of our Holy Days.

    *except on the issue of Pepperoni and Mushroom pizza, of course

  8. #28
    Registered User SteveK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Cairns, Australia
    Posts
    365
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart M View Post
    Exactly. We're very inclusive*, whereas Pastafarians are divisive. Where does cous-cous fit in to your creed, for example?

    I will pray for you on one of our Holy Days.

    *except on the issue of Pepperoni and Mushroom pizza, of course
    Do you think creating Jar Jar Binks is a positive acheivement for your religion? I'd be ashamed and rather embarassed to have to admit creating such an abomination!

  9. #29
    An Eclectic Toaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    2,042
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveK View Post
    Do you think creating Jar Jar Binks is a positive acheivement for your religion? I'd be ashamed and rather embarassed to have to admit creating such an abomination!
    Clearly Pastafarians have a problem with tolerance, if they can't even cope with a purely fictional character.

    I will consult my texts to see whether I still have to pray for you, or whether a smiting is now in order.

  10. #30
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveK View Post
    So what you're essentially saying is that the Invisible Pink Unicorn is responsible for such disgusting or annoying things as Jar Jar Binks, Kerry Katona and putting pineapple on pizza. I'd rather have a bowl of spaghetti thank you!!
    HERETIC..BLASPHEMER...etc...(cont.p94)

  11. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Gratifying, I must say, to see the rush of forumites onto this thread in order to assist Rocky with a bunch of helpful answers to his questions.

  12. #32
    Registered User Beowulf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    The Beoverse
    Posts
    7,985
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    ok... how come my reply comes BEFORE the post I replied to

    This is Rocky's thread.. not mine something a little out of order here.. I think something went a bit "off" when my post was moved

  13. #33
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Doolan View Post
    Rocky, after yesterday this argument has become so f***ing boring; this is the cerocscotland.com forum, it should be about DANCE related subjects not about you or Barry trying to impress each other !!!!!.
    Umm... presumably you have seen the statement at the top of this page?

    Chit Chat; Talk about anything not related to dancing...

    ..or maybe you just didn't notice it because it didn't use QR code...


    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadful Scathe View Post
    ...but that reads as a lovely intro paragraph donchaknow.
    What can I say... it is wot it is, to be an writist..

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    All I can do is point to the length of Rocky's post and say that this is, in my experience, what happens when you try to incorporate science into dogma. You have to make continual adjustments to the dogma - "OK, well I'll add this bit to cope with that problem; and then that to cope with that problem; and now those two additions cause another problem so I need to add another bit here to deal with that..." Und so weiter.

    And before you know you need ten bibles worth of text to explain how science fits alongside holy scripture.

    But my most insistent thought is this - why bother?
    Fundamentalism on all sides is the cancer of our planet. And what the fundamentalist are too blind to accept is that you cannot solve the problem by creating more division. And yet this is what we see in our schools, in our papers and on our TV's on a regular basis.

    Instead, what you have to do is create a common ground that draws them closer together. And that's all I've tried to do in creating this thread. I don’t believe in a personal God or in dogmatic organized religion, so for me to put foreword a religious viewpoint is difficult: but I felt it was important to point out that there could be a way of drawing the two ideologies closer together rather than just to criticize, and thus perpetuate the division. I might not have achieved much, and I might not have got all the little points right - but at least I've tried to open our minds a little.

    The Eastern philosophies that a certain forumite so despises and says is 'full of sh1t' have at their heart one fundamental premise: that we are all connected, and that whilst we are all individuals, we are yet still one and the same. This is in any event shown in science, and there are huge similarities between what quantum mechanics says about connectivity and how that relates to something like Buddhism – so it shouldn’t be too much of a leap for the intelligent, free thinking individuals amongst us..

    This has been written about on numerous occasions, by both scientists, who are experts in physics and also by spiritualists, who have a more intuitive sense of the metaphysical connection. Erwin Schrödinger believed this and he was one of the main architects of the Quantum revolution - and there are many books on the subject written by physicist’s: Fritjof Capra’s, Tao of Physics, being just one example. Another notable case of the application of quantum physics to topics outside physics is the case of Deepak Chopra, who was awarded the 1998 Nobel Prize in physics for "his unique interpretation of quantum physics as it applies to life, liberty, and the pursuit of economic happiness." A spiritualist winning The Noble Prize in Physics… think about that for a moment…

    Contrary to what our friendly forumite says, these forms of ‘religious’ beliefs are also not as dogmatic and/or as rigid as he would have you believe. The Dali Lama has also written books on the correlation between science and Buddhism: most notably, The Universe In A Single Atom: The Convergence Of Science and Spirituality. Wherein he says: "If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims," Oh, and he also won The Noble Peace Prize in 1989…

    So, our Forum 'friend' says that spiritualism is a cop out and that it is full of sh1t and that spiritualist’s don’t know squat. Umm… but spiritualist’s and many of the greatest scientists and Nobel Laureates of our time disagree..

    Who do you believe?

    If we can create common ground by openly looking for connections to some of form of unity, rather than the divisions that perpetuates ALL forms of fundementalism, we create a better future for our children.

    That's why one would bother.
    Last edited by Rocky; 22nd-January-2008 at 03:31 PM.

  14. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    {Eastern mythology Barry...}says is 'full of sh1t'
    That isn't what I said, you donkey, and I've grown tired of you spewing forth invective based on misunderstanding and carelessness.

    I put a great deal of effort into understanding what other people are posting and trying to ensure I'm not being unfair to them when I respond. Since I feel you are no longer extending that courtesy to me I withdraw from this discussion.

  15. #35
    Commercial Operator Rocky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    1,895
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    That isn't what I said, you donkey, and I've grown tired of you spewing forth invective based on misunderstanding and carelessness.

    I put a great deal of effort into understanding what other people are posting and trying to ensure I'm not being unfair to them when I respond. Since I feel you are no longer extending that courtesy to me I withdraw from this discussion.
    No you're right, you didn't just say that. Let me therefore respectfully point out what you did say:

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post

    'intuitive understanding' - PAH! What cobblers.

    But you can't learn a thing about how the universe works BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND DIDDLY-SQUAT when they were making this sh1t up.
    The 'donkey' bit was funny though, even if it wasn't accurate. No surprise there then...

  16. #36
    Registered User stewart38's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ambrosden it gets
    Posts
    7,480
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    I put a great deal of effort into understanding what other people are posting and trying to ensure I'm not being unfair to them when I respond. Since I feel you are no longer extending that courtesy to me I withdraw from this discussion.




    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    1. Nonsense.

    2. Even if true,

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    Nonsense. No one is 'expected' to believe
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    Are you NUTS? Of course it isn't,
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov View Post
    I think what the less articulate posters on this thread are getting hung up on

  17. #37
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Beowulf1970 View Post
    ok... how come my reply comes BEFORE the post I replied to
    Because you replied to his equivalent post on the other thread, which was before his post on this thread, and posts are ordered chronologically.

    You thread-hijacker you

    EDIT: come on, let's have some more juicy insults, I want to go for the hat-trick
    Last edited by David Bailey; 22nd-January-2008 at 05:48 PM.

  18. #38
    Registered User David Franklin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,426
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    Another notable case of the application of quantum physics to topics outside physics is the case of Deepak Chopra, who was awarded the 1998 Nobel Prize in physics for "his unique interpretation of quantum physics as it applies to life, liberty, and the pursuit of economic happiness." A spiritualist winning The Noble Prize in Physics… think about that for a moment…
    Unfortunately, he didn't win the Nobel prize.

    The Nobel Prize winners for 1998: Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer, Daniel C. Tsui

    And in fact searching the entire list of Laureates doesn't give a single match for Chopra.

    But it gets worse, I'm afraid.

    Because it's actually an Ig Nobel prize that Deepak Chopra was awarded in 1998. Which is a parody award rather than something to be proud of.

    Sorry, Rocky, but you're not covering yourself with glory here.

  19. #39
    Registered User RedFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    121
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...As regards the concept of teaching creationism in schools (which is what was at the start of this thread): Well, no sane person would argue against the concept of choice would they?


    Probably not if creationism is presented as one of many competing religious beliefs in RE, and evolution as the universally accepted current scientific theory in science.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...However, choice can only be exercised if ALL the theories are explained within the same time frame and within the same format, so that individuals can objectively compare them side by side.
    Should this be about exercising choices, or about understanding different perspectives? Presumably you would use a scientific process to objectively assess religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...On this basis I would advocate that ALL children are taught about literal creationism, evolutionary theory and the hybrid I’m proposing (I don’t know… let’s call it) The Harmonized Evolutionary And Creationistic Theory. THE ACT. All the theories would be given a fair and equal hearing and every child in conjunction with their parents (or maybe exclusive of their parents if need be…) would have the information to make their OWN minds up without being subject to the propaganda, misinformation and political machinations that currently cloud these issues.
    So this would be restricted to a single version of creationism + your version? What about other religious creationist beliefs and freedom of choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...scientists don’t have to abandon any part of their doctrine on evolution to accept this possibility either. They wouldn’t of course, because it admits the possibility of God being the organizing force that set the whole system in motion rather than the (to be frank) slightly unbelievable concept that it all happened spontaneously and without direction.

    Whereas the idea that there is a god who created everything is believable? If so, how did He/She/It/Them get there? Was She/It/Them/He created, did It/Them/
    He/She evolve, or did They/He/She/It spontaneously come into existence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...
    Adapted Religious Summary
    <snip>

    Adapted Simplistic Scientific Summary
    <snip>
    So you re-write selective bits of the bible. And use Einstein’s Theory of Relativity selectively too. Sure to be popular all round then.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocky View Post
    ...And finally:
    All you need do is read it with an open mind and make a decision in your own mind as to whether or not the concept is possible.

    I'm sure it would be an interesting philosophical exercise for students in a theology college, but I somehow can't see it making the National Curriculum.
    'The answer' isn't to force religion and science together, and certainly not to pretend that religious belief has an equivalence to scientific theory - it doesn't. It would be better to encourage an understanding of both science and religions (in the plural), recognising that each comes from a different world view, with a different heritage.

  20. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,709
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: The equivalence of religion and science?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Franklin View Post
    Unfortunately, he didn't win the Nobel prize.

    The Nobel Prize winners for 1998: Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer, Daniel C. Tsui

    And in fact searching the entire list of Laureates doesn't give a single match for Chopra.

    But it gets worse, I'm afraid.

    Because it's actually an Ig Nobel prize that Deepak Chopra was awarded in 1998. Which is a parody award rather than something to be proud of.

    Sorry, Rocky, but you're not covering yourself with glory here.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •