Page 2 of 4 [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Ambrose_Rotten
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 453
Location: Madison, WI

09 Nov 2010, 10:54 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Rather, why do people consider invisibility to be equivalent to nonexistence? Air is invisible, yet it exists. Most forms of light are invisible to us with our human eyes, with the exception of about 300 nanometers to 700 nanometers. Atoms are invisible to us, since they are smaller than the wavelengths of light our eyes have the ability to perceive.


Air is invisible, but it can be detected, inhaled, felt (wind), etc...

People used to deny the existence of radio waves, but we have developed instruments that can be used to detect and measure non-visible forms of light. Were it not for microwaves, for example, WiFi would be impossible, etc...

Atoms may not always be observable, but they have been proven to exist through the scientific observation of their effects. If it were not for these atoms, the cold war/end of WWII would have been entirely different.

God cannot be detected through technology, or any other form of evidence other than the flawed circular logic of the bible.

It is not the mission of Science to prove or disprove the existence of any type of god. God is completely irrelevant to science/logic/observable reality, and should not be mixed in with such things.



pgd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,624

09 Nov 2010, 11:30 am

Ambrose... posted (in part): Air is invisible, but it can be detected, inhaled, felt (wind), etc...

People used to deny the existence of radio waves, but we have developed instruments that can be used to detect and measure non-visible forms of light. Were it not for microwaves, for example, WiFi would be impossible, etc...

Atoms may not always be observable, but they have been proven to exist through the scientific observation of their effects. If it were not for these atoms, the cold war/end of WWII would have been entirely different.

God cannot be detected through technology, or any other form of evidence other than the flawed circular logic of the bible.

It is not the mission of Science to prove or disprove the existence of any type of god. God is completely irrelevant to science/logic/observable reality, and should not be mixed in with such things.

---

God is as real as Harry Potter, Superman, and Mary Poppins (all imaginary theater characters)(my view).

Some people (actors/actresses) get paid good money to bring those imaginary characters to life.

Mickey Mouse has made zillions and no one believes Mickey is real.

---

Regarding God, it does seem to me that there are laws which govern how the earth works/how physics/chemistry work.

What is behind those sets of laws?

What God/Force invented those laws or were those laws always around (infinite time)?

Does time have no beginning and no end?

Is the whole universe simply an accident?

Is the whole universe simply the whole universe? It's there and humans deal with it for limited periods of time (called lifespans)?

Other?

Is it explainable or unexplainable?

What sort of explanation would Ripley from Ripley's Believe-It-Or-Not give today?

Other?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Nov 2010, 12:17 pm

Ambrose_Rotten wrote:
]

Air is invisible, but it can be detected, inhaled, felt (wind), etc...



Light detection is not the only form of detection. There is more to detecting and perceiving than seeing.

ruveyn



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,603
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

09 Nov 2010, 2:19 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Jono wrote:

At the time of Moses, cameras weren't invented.


Graven images are three d. made of stone, wood or metal all of which existed during the time of Moses.


ruveyn


Which are not photographs. I was replying to Sand's comment who said, and I repeat:

Sand wrote:
Since Islam also forbids any images of living things it might be related somehow to the superstition that photographs steal a bit of the soul.


Actually, that superstition only exists in some modern tribal cultures where people aren't traditionally educated in western science. So naturally, they come up with supernatural explanations about how certain modern technologies, such as cameras, work. It's like the quote from Arthur C. Clark: "Highly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".



JetLag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2008
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,762
Location: California

09 Nov 2010, 5:54 pm

Ambrose_Rotten wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Rather, why do people consider invisibility to be equivalent to nonexistence? Air is invisible, yet it exists. Most forms of light are invisible to us with our human eyes, with the exception of about 300 nanometers to 700 nanometers. Atoms are invisible to us, since they are smaller than the wavelengths of light our eyes have the ability to perceive.


Air is invisible, but it can be detected, inhaled, felt (wind), etc...

People used to deny the existence of radio waves, but we have developed instruments that can be used to detect and measure non-visible forms of light. Were it not for microwaves, for example, WiFi would be impossible, etc...

Atoms may not always be observable, but they have been proven to exist through the scientific observation of their effects. If it were not for these atoms, the cold war/end of WWII would have been entirely different.

No one has never seen a twenty-pound bag of justice or a three-foot length Love before, but it would be unwise for a person to deny their existence.
Quote:
God cannot be detected through technology, or any other form of evidence other than the flawed circular logic of the bible.

God, as the creator of time, is outside of time; therefore, scientists cannot put God in a test tube and heat Him over a Bunsen burner to see whether He's going to explode, liquefy, or evaporate. The scientific method of evaluating and comparing things is useful for measurable things only. The immeasurable things, such as God, love, and justice, can never be measured in a laboratory test tube.
Quote:
It is not the mission of Science to prove or disprove the existence of any type of god. God is completely irrelevant to science/logic/observable reality, and should not be mixed in with such things.

Actually, the founding fathers of modern science such as Isaac Newton, calculus; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Nicolaus Steno, geology and stratigraphy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics and also field theory; Gregor Mendel, genetics; and Charles Babbage, computer science, were all devout Christians. It was their worldview, which they based on the Bible - not on atheism or the theory of evolution, that made it possible for them make their great discoveries.


_________________
Stung by the splendor of a sudden thought. ~ Robert Browning


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Nov 2010, 7:55 pm

JetLag wrote:
Actually, the founding fathers of modern science such as Isaac Newton, calculus; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Nicolaus Steno, geology and stratigraphy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics and also field theory; Gregor Mendel, genetics; and Charles Babbage, computer science, were all devout Christians. It was their worldview, which they based on the Bible - not on atheism or the theory of evolution, that made it possible for them make their great discoveries.


Believers are now in the minority in the scientific community. Physicists, in particular are likely to be atheists or agnostics (wrt to religion). Perhaps there are more believers among the biologists.

In general the scientific community regard the Bible as a book of stories, which is exactly what it is. It is a bunch of tales and poems composed by late bronze age dudes who did not know that all terrestrial matter consists of atoms or subatomic particles.


ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

09 Nov 2010, 8:05 pm

ruveyn wrote:
JetLag wrote:
Actually, the founding fathers of modern science such as Isaac Newton, calculus; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Nicolaus Steno, geology and stratigraphy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics and also field theory; Gregor Mendel, genetics; and Charles Babbage, computer science, were all devout Christians. It was their worldview, which they based on the Bible - not on atheism or the theory of evolution, that made it possible for them make their great discoveries.


Believers are now in the minority in the scientific community. Physicists, in particular are likely to be atheists or agnostics (wrt to religion). Perhaps there are more believers among the biologists.

In general the scientific community regard the Bible as a book of stories, which is exactly what it is. It is a bunch of tales and poems composed by late bronze age dudes who did not know that all terrestrial matter consists of atoms or subatomic particles.


ruveyn


Precisely. The religious community in the West is proving to be a damn nuisance to politics and technology. It won't be long before the practical people in the West get too annoyed and decide to solve the problem by selling all religious people to the Islamic sector where they will all be used as sex slaves much to their own enjoyment.



DeaconBlues
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,661
Location: Earth, mostly

09 Nov 2010, 8:24 pm

The belief systems, real or supposed, of various historical scientists are no more relevant to the sciences themselves than, for instance, Newton intended the calculus he invented to support the existence of alchemy - in which he also believed.


_________________
Sodium is a metal that reacts explosively when exposed to water. Chlorine is a gas that'll kill you dead in moments. Together they make my fries taste good.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Nov 2010, 8:40 pm

DeaconBlues wrote:
The belief systems, real or supposed, of various historical scientists are no more relevant to the sciences themselves than, for instance, Newton intended the calculus he invented to support the existence of alchemy - in which he also believed.


Consider the state of scientific knowledge in Newton's time. He was being perfectly reasonable.

Newton was not only the first mathematical physicist, he was one of the last of the alchemists.

ruveyn



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,873
Location: temperate zone

09 Nov 2010, 9:23 pm

JetLag wrote:
Ambrose_Rotten wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Rather, why do people consider invisibility to be equivalent to nonexistence? Air is invisible, yet it exists. Most forms of light are invisible to us with our human eyes, with the exception of about 300 nanometers to 700 nanometers. Atoms are invisible to us, since they are smaller than the wavelengths of light our eyes have the ability to perceive.


Air is invisible, but it can be detected, inhaled, felt (wind), etc...

People used to deny the existence of radio waves, but we have developed instruments that can be used to detect and measure non-visible forms of light. Were it not for microwaves, for example, WiFi would be impossible, etc...

Atoms may not always be observable, but they have been proven to exist through the scientific observation of their effects. If it were not for these atoms, the cold war/end of WWII would have been entirely different.

No one has never seen a twenty-pound bag of justice or a three-foot length Love before, but it would be unwise for a person to deny their existence.
Quote:
God cannot be detected through technology, or any other form of evidence other than the flawed circular logic of the bible.

God, as the creator of time, is outside of time; therefore, scientists cannot put God in a test tube and heat Him over a Bunsen burner to see whether He's going to explode, liquefy, or evaporate. The scientific method of evaluating and comparing things is useful for measurable things only. The immeasurable things, such as God, love, and justice, can never be measured in a laboratory test tube.
Quote:
It is not the mission of Science to prove or disprove the existence of any type of god. God is completely irrelevant to science/logic/observable reality, and should not be mixed in with such things.

Actually, the founding fathers of modern science such as Isaac Newton, calculus; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Nicolaus Steno, geology and stratigraphy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics and also field theory; Gregor Mendel, genetics; and Charles Babbage, computer science, were all devout Christians. It was their worldview, which they based on the Bible - not on atheism or the theory of evolution, that made it possible for them make their great discoveries.


And those same discoveries subverted this same worldview and replaced it with the modern synthesis based on evolution. We all know that.

By the way- you conveniently forgot to list Galileo- who almost got whacked by the Religous authorities of his time for his discoveries.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Nov 2010, 10:20 pm

naturalplastic wrote:

By the way- you conveniently forgot to list Galileo- who almost got whacked by the Religous authorities of his time for his discoveries.


But at all times, Galileo was a devout Catholic. He never ceased being Catholic. What he wanted was for the Church management not to confuse Scripture with observed fact. Galileo's problem with the Church management was that he was a Smart Ass. In his book -Dialogs on the Two World Systems- he mocked Pope Urban, and this at a time when the Church was under a great deal of pressure from the Protestant uprising. Had Galileo been more politic, and less anxious to show how smart he was, he might have lead a more peaceful life. The man who inspired Galileo, Copernicus, managed not to p*ss off the Church management when he published his book on the heliocentric theory. The Church did not interfere with its publication at the time Copernicus died.

ruveyn.



DeaconBlues
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,661
Location: Earth, mostly

10 Nov 2010, 1:11 am

To review: The scientific worldview is one which examines natural occurrences, constructs and tests hypotheses to explain them, and discards old hypotheses when they are disproved by new information (this last part is perhaps the most important).

God, assuming He exists, is supernatural - that is, existing beyond and to some degree outside of nature. Thus, science is not concerned with the existence or nonexistence of God, any more than a bookkeeper really cares whether pi is indeed a transfinite nonrepeating decimal - it's beyond the bounds of his inquiry.

Question: Why is everyone here still debating the false premise that the God Moses went to visit on Mt. Sinai was invisible? I know it makes it really easy for hardcore athiests to dismiss God as "some invisible guy in the sky", but nothing in the Bible claims God is invisible, just that you're not allowed to look at Him. (Theologians over the centuries have come up with their own explanations for this, but since the Bible never gives any reason other than "you're not permitted", it's all a bunch of fanwanking. Fanwanking given gravitas by the centuries, perhaps, but fanwanking nonetheless.)


_________________
Sodium is a metal that reacts explosively when exposed to water. Chlorine is a gas that'll kill you dead in moments. Together they make my fries taste good.


Ambrose_Rotten
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 453
Location: Madison, WI

10 Nov 2010, 2:39 am

JetLag wrote:
Ambrose_Rotten wrote:
It is not the mission of Science to prove or disprove the existence of any type of god. God is completely irrelevant to science/logic/observable reality, and should not be mixed in with such things.

Actually, the founding fathers of modern science such as Isaac Newton, calculus; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Nicolaus Steno, geology and stratigraphy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics and also field theory; Gregor Mendel, genetics; and Charles Babbage, computer science, were all devout Christians. It was their worldview, which they based on the Bible - not on atheism or the theory of evolution, that made it possible for them make their great discoveries.


Those are scientists. Not science itself. Science and Religion are irrelevant to one another.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Nov 2010, 3:52 am

Ambrose_Rotten wrote:

Those are scientists. Not science itself. Science and Religion are irrelevant to one another.


Not exactly. Newton formulated his laws of physics in order to seek out and to comprehend the will and mind of the Creator God. Albert Einstein had similar motives. He wanted to read God's Mind. Neither Newton nor Einstein were churched believers. Newton was an Arianist who denied the Holy Trinity.

However, Newton's theological beliefs were part and parcel of his science. In fact the Scholium in Book III of -Principia Mathematic- contains a praise and a pean to the Creator God. This is something you will not see in any modern scientific treatise.

ruveyn



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

10 Nov 2010, 4:37 am

JetLag wrote:
Actually, the founding fathers of modern science such as Isaac Newton, calculus; Louis Pasteur, bacteriology; Nicolaus Steno, geology and stratigraphy; Robert Boyle, chemistry; Michael Faraday, electromagnetics and also field theory; Gregor Mendel, genetics; and Charles Babbage, computer science, were all devout Christians. It was their worldview, which they based on the Bible - not on atheism or the theory of evolution, that made it possible for them make their great discoveries.


You might claim some were empiricists, but they were not scientists in the modern sense because they did not have the hypothetico-deductive method ("the scientific method") to use.

Further, in order to be a scientist one must be willing and able to set their preconceptions aside. If those men were able to say "Now I will set my faith aside and find truth from results", they might be called scientists. But then the issue isnt that they were Christian Scientists, it is that they were lousy Christians. What kind of good Christian says "Now I will disregard my faith" or "right now the results are true and my religious convictions are false".

Because a good Christian isn't supposed to reject faith and god like that. You cannot for a second pretend or assume that you are outside his whim and purview. And you cant be an honest Scientist if you dont. Your faith must sooner or later predominate and invalidate your data.

More telling is that you are setting them up as paragons of virtue, figures to be idolized. Your Catholicism is showing. It isnt the first time you have venerated them at WP, and it probably wont be the last.

You havent even shown HOW their faith led to their discoveries. You just claimed it. Probably because you are a lousy scientist: you work on faith.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

10 Nov 2010, 5:03 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Rather, why do people consider invisibility to be equivalent to nonexistence? Air is invisible, yet it exists. Most forms of light are invisible to us with our human eyes, with the exception of about 300 nanometers to 700 nanometers. Atoms are invisible to us, since they are smaller than the wavelengths of light our eyes have the ability to perceive.


Atoms are NOT invisible. What the heck do you think you are looking at when you look at stuff? Atoms(protons actually). Individual atoms are simply too small for us to see directly. But thats true of molecules, viruses, bacteria and even some animals.

So air is NOT invisible either. We are normally unable to see its index of refraction and its atoms are too sparse to create noticeable color.

Most forms of light: surely you mean most forms of electromagnetic radiation? (Visible) light by its very definition falls into the ~ 300-700 range.

And your claim that "people consider invisibility to be equivalent to nonexistence" is deceptive wording. All these things have secondary and tertiary effects. Like ionizing radiation?

We actually consider anything with no discernible influence to be equivalent to nonexistence. But thats a no brainer, isnt it? You had to bend the concept to make it seem reasonable. The effects of the idea of god(s) is very real; an actual god is not.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.