Conversations About Science

[Laura Knotek]

I often find in most countries it seems once you're out of a city the trend for religious thinking increases. The smaller the town the higher the chance of highly religious communities to flourish. I've seen this in many countries, it is a bit anecdotal but so far I'm hitting about 100%.

That actually makes sense, based upon history. I watched Mankind: The Story of All of Us from The History Channel. People started living in bigger cities during the Enlightenment era.

Another interesting thing that was mentioned in that show is how transportation has contributed to genetic diversity in humans. People were less racially/ethnically diverse prior to the invention of railroads, cars and airplanes, since they could not travel to locations were other racial/ethnic groups lived. Now that we are able to travel, we come into contact with more people, which results in more diversity.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Science and faith are not mutually exclusive.

No comment. I'll be nice.

 

[mjrtoo]

No comment. I'll be nice.

You can be civil and still.have these discussions. If you can't 'be nice' in conversations then you made the right choice.

 

[N_LaRUE]

You can be civil and still.have these discussions. If you can't 'be nice' in conversations then you made the right choice.

It's not that I cannot be civil I just often find when getting into faith and science discussions it usually draws away from the science and can easily turn into discussions which people may find offensive with out meaning to. Simply because saying anything negative about religion or faith can be seen as offensive.

If compatibility makes you comfortable, that's fine. However, I don't need it. Nature is wonderful enough with out the extras. I've heard every reason and then some why I should think otherwise and it hasn't convinced me.

 

[mjrtoo]

It's not that I cannot be civil I just often find when getting into faith and science discussions it usually draws away from the science and can easily turn into discussions which people may find offensive with out meaning to. Simply because saying anything negative about religion or faith can be seen as offensive.

If compatibility makes you comfortable, that's fine. However, I don't need it. The nature is wonderful enough with out the extras. I've heard every reason and then some why I should think otherwise and it hasn't convinced me.

No one can convince you of faith, it's something you have to discover on your own.

Believe it or not, God created everything, every particle, every reaction, and every law of the universe. I find it hard to imagine one can believe they are seperate.

 

[N_LaRUE]

No one can convince you of faith, it's something you have to discover on your own.

Believe it or not, God created everything, every particle, every reaction, and every law of the universe. I find it hard to imagine one can believe they are seperate.

I don't need faith of that sort. I find it empty.

If that makes you happy then that's fine, nothing about that statement for me is at all satisfying. It leaves more questions than answers as far as I'm concerned.

 

[mjrtoo]

I don't need faith of that sort. I find it empty.

If that makes you happy then that's fine, nothing about that statement for me is at all satisfying. It leaves more questions than answers as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I hope you find what you're looking for.

 

[worldspy99]

Here is a good read for today...
M 106: Photo by Andre van der Hoeven.

 

[worldspy99]

The guy who proposed the Big Bang theory was actually a Jesuit priest. One more reason faith and science can co-exist.
Georges Lema?tre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[worldspy99]

The Big Bang theory does not provide any explanation for the initial conditions of the Universe.
This is something that has always perplexed me....
Also the probability of the conditions to be just right for the existence of the universe - Just Six Numbers explains it pretty well - also is a pretty intriguing point.

 

[worldspy99]

This is so darn cool. It is art and technology mixed together. Might not quite belong in this thread but anyway here it goes...
Kurt H?rbst photographs people around the world in his project, ?People_Scans.?

 

[a5cent]

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I hope you find what you're looking for.

He's found what he is looking for. He doesn't have to look for anything more. He's just found beauty and meaning in different places than you have.

Ultimately, both believers and non-believers must learn and understand that we can all legitimately derive inspiration, meaning and morality from different sources. Religion does not own a monopoly on those things.

For each of us as individuals, I completely agree that religion and science can coexist. On the other hand, that's only possible now because Christianity has retreated from those areas of public discourse where science has proven some traditional religious views to be utterly unmaintainable. Christianity has been adopted and cherry picked into something very different from what it was two thousand years ago, 300 years ago, and even 50 years ago. Christianity has luckily proven to be very flexibly in that regard.

When we focus on entire societies however, not on individuals, it's a lot more difficult for science and religion to coexist. We must decide what our children are taught at school. We must decide what laws citizens should abide by. We must decide how important it is to protect the planet and preserve it for future generations. For people that believe Jesus will return in the next 20 years, most of those issues are (rationally based on their beliefs) unimportant wastes of time. That is of course an extreme example, but I think the point stands either way. In the public space, I don't think religion and science can coexist, or at least not without both sides constantly waging a war of ideas and values.

 

[Laura Knotek]

[WARN]Let's keep this discussion on topic about science and keep debates on religion elsewhere, such as the Beliefnet forums.

Keep in mind that there are many different religions, each with different adherents, but this is not the place to debate religion.[/WARN]

 

[worldspy99]

Perfect blend of science and art. Heard this segment during the evening commute today and I thought I'd share this here.
http://www.npr.org/2015/02/16/38606...ies-arts-to-stir-hearts-regarding-earths-fate

 

[worldspy99]

Another interesting topic that was covered today and also heard this during the evening commute.
http://www.npr.org/2015/02/16/38675...limate-change-debate-back-into-wyo-classrooms

 

[N_LaRUE]

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I hope you find what you're looking for.

Yes, yes I have. It's a wonderful world, universe and life. I feel privileged to be alive and breathing. I plan to enjoy the rest of my time in this brief blip of my existence. I'll revel in the mind blowing things we have learned and gape in awe at the new things we will do an learn in the future. I love life and the here and now.

The magic of reality is enough for me. The love, family and friendships (both new and old) I have is all I need. That and my continued development and desire to learn as I wander this wonderful landscape called life.

Are science and faith compatible? That's up to the individual to decide. To me they are polar opposites because one teaches to be satisfied with answers and the other seeks to question everything. They couldn't be more different in my eyes. They also don't require a compatibility, both can exist happily without the other. You don't need faith in science and you don't need science in faith. As humans we are able to compartmentalize our minds to accept both. Many people do this, including some scientists. I just can't.

I'll leave it there. I could go on about the conflicts but I feel a5cent tackled that well enough.

We are all here on this thread to enjoy science in all it's forms. I think we should continue in that vein.

I tend to view history as a science as well. Not sure what other think of that.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Is it... aliens?

Mystery Mars haze baffles scientists - BBC News

 

[a5cent]

I'd say that anything you can apply the scientific method to is a science.

Archeology in that sense is certainly a science. Those that study ancient roman stories, taxation- and legal documents and use those to piece together a picture of what those societies looked like and how they functioned are certainly scientists. The only real difference is the level of certainty we can achieve. If we have nothing to verify the occurrence of an event with, other than two slightly contradictory ancient documents, then we can never be 100% sure about the events' truthfulness. Science has never been about claiming 100% truth though. It's always been about discovering as much as we can and only ever claiming to 'know' something if it is supported by a large amount of evidence, and although potentially being disprovable, has resisted all such attempts. As a result, history just tends to deal with a lot more uncertainties than, say, mathematics or chemistry.

Bible scholars have also turned the study of the bible into a science, and although almost every statement comes with a probability attached to it, it's fascinating regardless.

So yes, I'd agree with you. Likely for similar reasons I'm guessing...

 

[a5cent]

Is it... aliens?

Mystery Mars haze baffles scientists - BBC News

Damn kids took my spacemaster5000 for a joyride and just couldn't take it easy on the accelerator.

 

[N_LaRUE]

I'd say that anything you can apply the scientific method to is a science.

Archeology in that sense is certainly a science. Those that study ancient roman stories, taxation- and legal documents and use those to piece together a picture of what those societies looked like and how they functioned are certainly scientists. The only real difference is the level of certainty we can achieve. If we have nothing to verify the occurrence of an event with, other than two slightly contradictory ancient documents, then we can never be 100% sure about the events' truthfulness. Science has never been about claiming 100% truth though. It's always been about discovering as much as we can and only ever claiming to 'know' something if it is supported by a large amount of evidence, and although potentially being disprovable, has resisted all such attempts. As a result, history just tends to deal with a lot more uncertainties than, say, mathematics or chemistry.

Bible scholars have also turned the study of the bible into a science, and although almost every statement comes with a probability attached to it, it's fascinating regardless.

So yes, I'd agree with you. Likely for similar reasons I'm guessing...

There's a great BBC series called Bible Buried Secrets. It's got three parts. I highly recommend the series. The host is a bible scholar who has an interesting twist on things and I can't help but agree with most of what she says. It's makes a lot of sense.

Not saying she's 100% correct as with all things with these short series they get chopped up so you never know if you've been given the complete picture.

If you can find it definitely watch it.