Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login - Register]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1    3  ..  7
Author: Subject: Religion thought as science
vmelkon
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 581
Registered: 25-11-2011
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: autoerotic asphyxiation

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 16:44
Religion thought as science


Hello chemistry amateurs and pros,
I uploaded this block of video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK5yxyspQe8

What do you think?
Is it up to us to fix up this kind of bad science.
Perhaps some of you are in favor of this. Let me know.

Note: I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this.




Signature ==== Is this my youtube page? https://plus.google.com/u/0/102731756100318541546/videos?tab...
We must attach the electrodes of knowledge to the nipples of ignorance and give a few good jolts.
Yes my evolutionary friends. We are all homos here.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Vosoryx
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 136
Registered: 18-6-2017
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 16:53


Personally, this disgusts me.

However, i'm not sure that this forum in general is the right place for discussion about religion - it's just too sensitive of a subject, and not pertaining AT ALL to amateur science.
There are many forums out there for this kind of talk, the "rationalskepticism" forum springs to mind.
Perhaps a discussion in the youtube comments section of the video you uploaded?

As much as I am itching to enter a discussion on this, I won't in an attempt to not start meaningless scuffles with my sciencemadness friends.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Bert
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 2149
Registered: 12-3-2004
Location: Blasted Hellish frozen Northern wastelands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Negative, I am a meat Popsicle.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 17:19


What part of the world is this school in. It doesn't sound like USA "bible belt".



Boom.
The explosion removed the windows, the door and most of the chimney.
It was the sort of thing you expected in the Street of alchemists. The neighbors preferred explosions, which were at least identifiable and soon over. They were better than the smells, which crept up on you.
-Terry Pratchett, "Moving Pictures"

It is essential that persons having explosive 
substances under their charge should never 
lose sight of the conviction that, preventive 
measures should always be prescribed 
on the hypothesis of an explosion.

Marcellin Berthelot - 1892 Explosives and their power - Page 47
View user's profile View All Posts By User
j_sum1
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3393
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Oz
Member Is Offline

Mood: Undergoing decantation and leaving all the crap behind.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 17:30


There is no necessary conflict between religious and scientific thinking. I am currently reading Inventing the Universe by Alister McGrath which goes into some detail on this matter. I doubt this school has got the balance correct since it is a fairly nuanced topic. Hang, they can't even differentiate between what is science and what is reading comprehension. Moreover, a 1 minute clip is insufficient to pass judgement fairly on the situation.

This is probably a topic that should be discussed some time but beginning with a clip such as this is not likely to enable the conversation to proceed in a measured and objective fashion.




A little shameless self-promotion: You are welcome to tour my newly-completed lab.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Magpie
lab constructor
*****




Posts: 5588
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 17:39


I watched the Part 1 that follows the "science" class. Part 1 is a 14 minute explanation of some of the book of Genesis. This is utter bullshit, suitable only for people with an IQ <50. I did not watch Part 2 as I couldn't take it any more. All I can say is that if people believe this tripe then "Science help us."

[Edited on 9-1-2018 by Magpie]




The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
View user's profile View All Posts By User
JJay
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2630
Registered: 15-10-2015
Location: the nitrate nodule (aka the batcave)
Member Is Offline

Mood: phosphorus

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 17:51


God in the classroom: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpWaVcTdcRU

It's too bad the dinosaurs were too big to fit on the ark. We're lucky we still have elephants!





View user's profile View All Posts By User
Vosoryx
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 136
Registered: 18-6-2017
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 17:59


Quote: Originally posted by JJay  
God in the classroom: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpWaVcTdcRU

It's too bad the dinosaurs were too big to fit on the ark. We're lucky we still have elephants!


On the topic of the ark, Eddie Izzard's genius:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tcjZl0vk9Y

The brilliant youtube channel "potholer54" has engaged in a lot of discussions about things like this. Worth checking out for a decent combination of science and (rather crass) comedy.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
vmelkon
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 581
Registered: 25-11-2011
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: autoerotic asphyxiation

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 18:34


Quote: Originally posted by Vosoryx  
Perhaps a discussion in the youtube comments section of the video you uploaded?

As much as I am itching to enter a discussion on this, I won't in an attempt to not start meaningless scuffles with my sciencemadness friends.


Yes, I understand what you mean. It can turn into a massive back and forth argument.

I was thinking more in line with "What is our responsibility for the community".

All of us are well aware that the majority of humans are not interested in science and math. I speak to a lot of people on those types on youtube channels. Some feel that science is a joke, a waste of time, full of corrupt scientists who want to steal their hard earned money, that they publish fraudulent white papers often to steal money from the public, that the majority are atheists (in their mind, this word represents corrupt people who don't care).

I think that there is a certain level of hate towards the science community just like their is for the LBGT community. Am I exaggerating?




Signature ==== Is this my youtube page? https://plus.google.com/u/0/102731756100318541546/videos?tab...
We must attach the electrodes of knowledge to the nipples of ignorance and give a few good jolts.
Yes my evolutionary friends. We are all homos here.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
vmelkon
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 581
Registered: 25-11-2011
Location: Canada
Member Is Offline

Mood: autoerotic asphyxiation

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 19:00


Quote: Originally posted by Bert  
What part of the world is this school in. It doesn't sound like USA "bible belt".


The original video is here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gqhlRdOxJg
It is a documentary from the UK called Dispatchers.
The school is in the UK. Apparently, there is a young earth creationist movement there. I hear that they follow the USA creationist curriculum.

There is also a young earth creationist movement in Alberta Canada. I am from Quebec and I think things are very dead around Quebec.




Signature ==== Is this my youtube page? https://plus.google.com/u/0/102731756100318541546/videos?tab...
We must attach the electrodes of knowledge to the nipples of ignorance and give a few good jolts.
Yes my evolutionary friends. We are all homos here.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
JJay
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2630
Registered: 15-10-2015
Location: the nitrate nodule (aka the batcave)
Member Is Offline

Mood: phosphorus

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 19:14


I know geneticists who claim that the earth is 6000 years old and say they don't believe in evolution yet have no problem applying it as a scientific theory. Eventually the various lines of barbarous fiction called religion will be entirely discredited and go out of style (except for the One True Religion, which is the one I follow, of course), but they defy efforts to wipe them out. For the most part it's best to let myths die naturally.



View user's profile View All Posts By User
Magpie
lab constructor
*****




Posts: 5588
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 19:28


Has anyone read "God, the Most Unpleasant Character in All of Fiction" by Dan Barker?



The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
View user's profile View All Posts By User
SWIM
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 184
Registered: 3-9-2017
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 20:13


I think Zoroastrianism is the best option for the modern chemist.

They were obviously an advanced religion as they worshiped a rotary engine equipped car, the Mazda, centuries before Felix Wankel was even born.

Also, they worship by sitting around indoors and staring at a flame.

How many of us already do that more than most people?





The problem with quotes on the internet is that it's hard to determine their authenticity. -Abraham Lincoln.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Bert
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 2149
Registered: 12-3-2004
Location: Blasted Hellish frozen Northern wastelands
Member Is Offline

Mood: Negative, I am a meat Popsicle.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 20:31


Cowboys are modern practitioners of Zoroastrianism, it is very popular in the western USA.

The original tennets as taught to boys in ancient Persia were: To ride, shoot the bow and abhor the lie.

The modern version? To ride, shoot straight and speak the truth. Plus, you will notice our cowboy zoroastrians spend a good bit of time looking into campfires, and they all carry the requisites to start a fire...

[Edited on 9-1-2018 by Bert]




Boom.
The explosion removed the windows, the door and most of the chimney.
It was the sort of thing you expected in the Street of alchemists. The neighbors preferred explosions, which were at least identifiable and soon over. They were better than the smells, which crept up on you.
-Terry Pratchett, "Moving Pictures"

It is essential that persons having explosive 
substances under their charge should never 
lose sight of the conviction that, preventive 
measures should always be prescribed 
on the hypothesis of an explosion.

Marcellin Berthelot - 1892 Explosives and their power - Page 47
View user's profile View All Posts By User
j_sum1
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3393
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: Oz
Member Is Offline

Mood: Undergoing decantation and leaving all the crap behind.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 20:31


Aaah. Much to say. And I suspect I would take issue with much of your position, Magpie. No I have not read that book but its title sounds like it might equally have been written by Hitchens whom I regard as shallow in his analysis of religious thought and a cherry-picker of lines of evidence to conform to his preconceived notions.

But I am going to respectfully bow out of this particular conversation -- not because I feel I have nothing to add: I do, and from an informed position. And not because I an unable to defend my position. Rather it is because such conversations need to be well-framed to facilitate objective, respectful and mutually-beneficial exploration of what is often a highly charged topic. This one is not so well framed and I cannot see it going anywhere productive.

I'll leave with a quote by Stephen J Gould on noting that his evolutionary biologist colleagues stood on bith sides of the fence with respect to adoption of the Christian creation narrative:

"Either half my colleagues are enormously stupid, or else the science of Darwinism is fully compatible with conventional religious beliefs – and equally compatible with atheism."


How easy would it be to misrepresent a coherent, well-reasoned Christian world view if you are judging it by the material given to a six year old or by the shallow apologetic given by members of one school to a non-sympathetic reporter. The topic is far deeper and more nuanced than it is reported – whether reported by the media, by religious critics or even the reports given by religious adherents (unfortuantely. They should know better.)

To quote McGrath, "This 'science versus religion' narrative is stale, outdated, and largely discredited. It is sustained not by the weight of evidence, but merely by its endless uncritical repetition, which studiously avoids the scholarship of the last generation… It is clear that there is a plurality of narratives for understanding the relation of science and faith, none of which have the privilege of being self-evidently true or intellectually normative."

And with that I will slip out of this discussion. Perhaps I will raise a thread at a later date to present what I feel is a fair assessment of the debate. But I will run my ideas by the mods first. In the meantime I predict that this thread will slide downhill pretty quickly and may end up in detritus.




A little shameless self-promotion: You are welcome to tour my newly-completed lab.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Corrosive Joeseph
National Hazard
****




Posts: 360
Registered: 17-5-2015
Location: Europe
Member Is Offline

Mood: Cyclic

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 20:55


Quote: Originally posted by Magpie  
Has anyone read "God, the Most Unpleasant Character in All of Fiction" by Dan Barker?


http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=21DB3A8CF2624198D38...


/CJ




MSDS Addict and OTC Slut
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Assured Fish
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 174
Registered: 31-8-2015
Location: Bird land, southeast of Aus
Member Is Offline

Mood: Photodegradable

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 20:56


Ive always been quite supprised (and pleased) with how the members of this forum tread when it comes to religion, for the most part its avoided as it will almost always drive a wedge between individuals.
Heres hoping that doesn't happen here.

As for the video, if you watch the original video, at one point the teacher is seen teaching the kids that "before Christ, people who sinned were turned into a pillar of salt, which really really really happened in the old testament".
surfice to say, these people should be extinct.
It is sad that even today in the western world such reckless stupidity is allowed to be taught in schools. Even if they are private, which im not sure if this school qualifies as since it is funded by the government.

I somewhat agree with j_sum1 in that both religion and science can coexist within the same mind, however i think there needs to be a clear boundary between both for them not to clash.
The only exception of this would be a extreme religious individual whom does not believe in evolution and yet is a biologist.
Given that even the nomenclature in biology is based on evolution.

However im pretty sure Christianity and organised religion as a whole is slowly being driven to extinction, the newer generations are becoming more and more atheistic as time goes on.
We will never see atheism or the lack of organised religious ideologies take precedence over religion within our lifetimes, however i suspect in a few centuries, religion will make up the minority.

I do not mean to offend any members with my gibberish. Please do not take it to heart.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Magpie
lab constructor
*****




Posts: 5588
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Chemistry: the subtle science.

[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 21:18


Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  
Aaah. Much to say. And I suspect I would take issue with much of your position, Magpie. No I have not read that book but its title sounds like it might equally have been written by Hitchens whom I regard as shallow in his analysis of religious thought and a cherry-picker of lines of evidence to conform to his preconceived notions.


No, not Hitchens, but his crony (disciple) Dawkins, a biologist.

Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  

But I am going to respectfully bow out of this particular conversation -- not because I feel I have nothing to add: I do, and from an informed position. And not because I an unable to defend my position. Rather it is because such conversations need to be well-framed to facilitate objective, respectful and mutually-beneficial exploration of what is often a highly charged topic. This one is not so well framed and I cannot see it going anywhere productive.


This can be a good conversation if we stick to the facts and do not resort to name calling and mud slinging.


Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  

And with that I will slip out of this discussion.


Oh, please don't. I hope that all religious believers, especially Christians, will fervently participate. Let's keep the conversation in a spirit of good will.

Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  

In the meantime I predict that this thread will slide downhill pretty quickly and may end up in detritus.


It doesn't have to if we keep it civil and adhere to forum guidelines. We need one rule to make that happen: Roscoe is not permitted in the room.




The single most important condition for a successful synthesis is good mixing - Nicodem
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ELRIC
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 177
Registered: 23-2-2015
Location: Kentucky
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 21:29


I too would like this thread to continue in a peaceful manner.

Although, at the moment I have nothing useful to contribute.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
PirateDocBrown
National Hazard
****




Posts: 360
Registered: 27-11-2016
Location: Minnesota
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 8-1-2018 at 22:38


Since physical science relies totally, and biological science overwhelmingly, upon application of empiricism, and religion cannot be made subject to empirical analysis, religion has little place in those branches of inquiry.

It is in social science that religion can make an impact, as the subjective cannot be ignored there.




Phlogiston manufacturer/supplier.

For all your phlogiston needs.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chemplayer...
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 104
Registered: 25-4-2016
Location: Currently all over the place
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 9-1-2018 at 00:36


The history of the world is "3 steps forward 2 steps back". Get ready for the back part.



Watch ChemPlayer on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/ChemPlayer
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Chemetix
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 237
Registered: 23-9-2016
Location: Oztrayleeyah
Member Is Offline

Mood: Wavering between lucidity and madness

[*] posted on 9-1-2018 at 02:08


I will wade in, mainly because I abhor a disdain for logic. I won't be drawn into such nonsense as going fact for fact with biblical based arguments, that's like analysing the physics of a dream, but will say this.
If you believe in something then you can believe in anything.
Only logic, backed up with testable evidence that can act to predict an outcome has any value to the advancement of civilisation. Religion has the same benefits to society as playing sports or a round of canasta, doing beer bongs or Tai Chi in the local park, it's just a social thing with it's own weird cultural quirks that it's members think is awesome and get something out of it. Why religion thinks it can tell the rest of us to base our lives around their delusions of grandeur and interfere with science and politics when it is nothing more than a glorified hobby is the epitome of obnoxiousness.

And that's why I won't tiptoe around and be accommodating to a viewpoint that says I need to respect something that has an equal place as science in society as a valid explanation to the nature of existence. Unless of course a bunch of biblical scholars are able to predict the resultant rest mass of a Tau-neutrino boson interaction at relativistic velocities, or design and fabricate a lightweight metalic polymer based on their findings that suggest the existence of an exotic stable allotropic form of aluminium, or show new insight into the Sturm-Liouville theorem using non-euclidean Hilbert space geometries, or just accurately predict something, anything at all.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Fulmen
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 941
Registered: 24-9-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: Bored

[*] posted on 9-1-2018 at 03:28


I find the claim that there is no conflict between religion and science puzzling at best. Science is based on reason and empirical evidence, religion on faith in the absence of evidence and arguments from authority. How can they be compatible? In my view they are diametrical opposites.

On the other hand, the empirical evidence tells us that many good scientists does manage to combine the two. But is that because they are compatible, or simply evidence that humans are good at dealing with cognitive dissonance?
I think the first step is to realize that compatibility isn't a binary phenomena. The term religion is extremely broad, you can't judge all beliefs as one. There is a huge difference between a wishy-washy belief in something spiritual and a die-hard absolutist faith in the stories of your holy books and priests.

My view on religion is quite simple. Not only can it be rejected due to a complete lack of evidence, it just doen't work. When has religion ever produced any useful knowledge? It's a hypothesis based on no evidence and with no predictive power whatsoever.




We're not banging rocks together here. We know how to put a man back together.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DrP
National Hazard
****




Posts: 413
Registered: 28-9-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: exothermic

[*] posted on 9-1-2018 at 03:58



Quote: Originally posted by Assured Fish  
for the most part its avoided as it will almost always drive a wedge between individuals.


That is because one side of the argument is based on observable facts and science... the other side ignores facts and observation in favour of an old book with many provable flaws and errors in it and won't entertain that it could be wrong even when shown the many flaws in it. I'm done making excuses for god.

Quote: Originally posted by Fulmen  
I find the claim that there is no conflict between religion and science puzzling at best. Science is based on reason and empirical evidence, religion on faith in the absence of evidence and arguments from authority. How can they be compatible? In my view they are diametrical opposites.


Quite - which is why I have converted in recent years to atheism from Christianity (after a 35 years of it). I still believe in loving your neighbour and showing mercy, not being quick to judge etc, etc... but ALL of the claims made by the religious with regard to the very existence of god - even ones about the holy spirit and all - can be explained in detail by psychology and other sciences. It is demonstrably false. I am done making excuses for this god that clearly doesn't exist.

I do forgive myself for falling for it - it is quite tricky. If you are taught it at an early age then why wouldn't you believe it? I used to believe I had a close personal relationship with god and the holy ghost... but now I know it to be pure delusion. Some say it is needed to promote good living... hmm... it's like Dumbo's feather - you don't really need it to fly - it's just a feather.




\"It\'s a man\'s obligation to stick his boneration in a women\'s separation; this sort of penetration will increase the population of the younger generation\" - Eric Cartman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DrP
National Hazard
****




Posts: 413
Registered: 28-9-2005
Member Is Offline

Mood: exothermic

[*] posted on 9-1-2018 at 04:07


PS - just to add ONE example of how we have been retarded morally by religion.... it has only JUST become illegal to rape your spouse hear in the UK. Seriously - 1997 - laws introduced by the EU - you can no longer claim that your wife is part of you or a belonging or whatever reason it was considered OK to just take your spouse without asking. This stems from religion - the law change was secular and obvious and common sense. Women still get treated like shit all over the world - mainly due to what is written in religious books.

Once you make the jump from blind faith to reason it all seems so obvious. (just like it seemed so obvious when I was a believer). I understand why people on both sides of the argument do not budge.... it will take centuries I reckon for it to be eradicated thoroughly.... then the world can move on as we evolve our ideas and thinking around to progressing our species. As an ex Christian - I hope we grow in peace and love and understanding.... but alas - I think there are still some horrific wars to come.

Quote: Originally posted by Magpie  
No, not Hitchens, but his crony (disciple) Dawkins, a biologist.

I actually quite like them - they speak a lot of sense. I find it very difficult to refute anything they say about religion. Any argument I have seen against their view has been pretty laughable.



[Edited on 9-1-2018 by DrP]




\"It\'s a man\'s obligation to stick his boneration in a women\'s separation; this sort of penetration will increase the population of the younger generation\" - Eric Cartman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
woelen
Administrator
********




Posts: 6217
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: interested

[*] posted on 9-1-2018 at 05:20


Quote: Originally posted by Fulmen  
[...]When has religion ever produced any useful knowledge? It's a hypothesis based on no evidence and with no predictive power whatsoever.
If this is the only criterion for assessing the usefulness of a certain phenomenon, then only very few things have value. Arts, such as certain prose, music, paintings, drama, fiction also do not have any predictive value, but still they have value in moving people's emotion, displaying certain moral values, social cohesion, entertainment, and many more.
Religion also can have value, even if it does not predict future events precisely or does not provide answers to how things were exactly in the (far) past. It can give confidence, it can console people, it even can provide answers to difficult questions.

To my opinion science and religion can coexist perfectly. However, you must not try to understand the religious texts and experiences as if they are written as science text books. Unfortunately some religious people try to interpret religious texts as if they are an exact scientific report of what happened or what will happen (e.g. think of creationists in certain christian denominatons). This is a pity, they do no right to the sometimes beautiful texts. Unfortunately, some atheists make the same mistake. They try to read religious texts as accurate scientific reports of what happened and then they conclude it is bullshit, because scientific observations give strong evidence that things were very different. Again, no right is done to the religious texts.

There are many ways to understand the world around us. Science is one of them, and a very valuable one. But there are many more ways to look at the world and religion to my opinion is one of those ways. Everyone, who just uses one way to look and try to understand the world makes a big mistake. So, overzealous religious people who interpret everything in terms of the bible make a big mistake, but the person who only deems science valuable makes a mistake as big as the overzealous religious people.

I myself can perfectly believe in evolution and the results of modern cosmology, and at the same time really enjoy the beautiful account of Genesis about God's creation. It is a mystery to man and tells us a lot about God, ourselves and the world we live in. For me, the fantastic results of science complement what I read in texts like the Genesis-account and these results of science make God even more awe-inspiring to me.




The art of wondering makes life worth living...
Want to wonder? Look at http://www.oelen.net/science
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1    3  ..  7

  Go To Top