Belief in a God, the existence of a higher power, and the concept of an afterlife. Science or Religion?

[HikerGuy83]

That's nice.

So what is your point? Can you not state it?

Are you dense ?

I asked if there was a third, fourth or fifth alternative or if those were his only two alternatives.....

That, of course, assumes that the choice of Magic (which means what ?) or religion (which means what ?) are not explainable and are defined in terms of things not explained by physics.

I was looking for clarrification.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I asked if there was a third, fourth or fifth alternative or if those were his only two alternatives.....

Oh, the answer is no.

 

[Dadoalex]

So splitting the red sea, was it magic or religion?

Neither.
It is a myth.
Religion is believing myths are reality.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Right, it's a myth. Not a fact, not allegory, not a fable. A myth.

 

[Grumblenuts]

The matter wasn't created from nothing, it was created from energy. As Einstein showed, matter is 'frozen' energy. I think we're finding that 95% of the mass of the universe is in the form of energy.

Great start. There's actually no reason to presume "nothing" ever existed. Locally and temporarily? Sure. Einstein's frozen energy analogy was no doubt useful for his purposes at the time but it's awful in hindsight nonetheless. Your last assertion assigning mass to energy is weird, but go ahead and add flesh to it..

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There's actually no reason to presume "nothing" ever existed.

True. But there is no good reason to rule it out (Ontological parlor tricks notwithstanding).

And we keep finding so much "nothing". A possible net zero-energy universe. Particles forming spontaneously in net zero-energy reactions.

It's hard to put the idea down. Maybe it's just a shiny toy, but maybe not.

 

[Grumblenuts]

So if, "As Einstein showed, matter is 'frozen' energy." Then "particles" must be "frozen" energy as well since "particles" have mass (like matter). Else their motion could create no momentum.. kinetic.. inertial.. energy. N'est ce pas?

 

[Woodznutz]

Maybe so. Maybe Not. But if that creation idea is denied or ignoref, it makes no difference whatsoever.

Deny science, amd you are sticking forks in electric outlets and trying to jump off your roof and fall up.

Religion doesn't deny real science. Many scientists are religious.

 

[Crepitus]

I am asking you if you are claiming there is no science that could have produced that result.

is that a yes?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Religion doesn't deny real science.

It consistently has and does. Did you mean, your version of religion? Because I assure you, for plenty of other people's versions, it does precisely that (deny real science). I'm talking a LOT of people. Billions, even.

 

[Woodznutz]

Neither can the rest of us. As Dawkins says, whether or not God exists is a scientific question.

Science has already answered that question, for themselves..

 

[Woodznutz]

It always strikes me as odd how the faithers will, at one moment, claim to he so proud of their faith...

...then, in the next moment, claim they are producing sound arguments and evidence for the truth of their faith based beliefs. As if they have a moment of clarity and are embarrassed by their faith.

That makes no sense.

 

[Woodznutz]

It consistently has and does. Did you mean, your version of religion? Because I assure you, for plenty of other people's versions, it does precisely that (deny real science). I'm talking a LOT of people. Billions, even.

The ToE isn't real science. Other than that, we like science. Without science I wouldn't be enjoying the Modelo I'm drinking.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The ToE isn't real science.

Don't waste my time.

 

[Woodznutz]

That's where the faithers ALWAYS get it wrong. Every single time. Ass backwards wrong.

As predictable as the sunrise.

A fine illustration of the utter incompatibility of science and faith.

It doesn't take a lot of faith to see science in the creation, it's all around us. What takes faith is believing that what God says about the human condition is true and applies to everyone, even (gasp) unbelievers.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So if, "As Einstein showed, matter is 'frozen' energy." Then "particles" must be "frozen" energy as well since "particles" have mass (like matter). Else their motion could create no momentum.. kinetic.. inertial.. energy. N'est ce pas?

Negative energy in the universe can balance that equation.

 

[Woodznutz]

Don't waste my time.

That's all I have to say about it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It doesn't take a lot of faith to see science in the creation, it's all around us. What takes faith is believing that what God says about the human condition is true and applies to everyone, even (gasp) scientists. Even then God grants the faith to believers.

That's all well and good. But either you agree God did it via evolution, or you're wrong. This debate is over. Has been for a long long time.

 

[Woodznutz]

Neither.
It is a myth.
Religion is believing myths are reality.

Religion is primarily a set of moral and ethical codes, among other things, and is more needed today than science.

 

[Woodznutz]

That's all well and good. But either you agree God did it via evolution, or you're wrong. This debate is over. Has been for a long long time.

I agree that it's over.