God vs Science

[Wildo7]

But where did all that stuff come from?

who knows?

 

[Lifer]

who knows?

the point exactly.

 

[Wildo7]

the point exactly.

what point is that? That none of us have an answer to that? I agree, which is why science doesn't claim to have an answer to that. Religion does, which is why it's a bunch of poop.

 

[Lifer]

what point is that? That none of us have an answer to that? I agree, which is why science doesn't claim to have an answer to that. Religion does, which is why it's a bunch of poop.

Two different arguments. And this is the problem.

The Evolutionists freak out at the mention or thought that we dont know, because that might open the door for the Creationist who say Evolution is all wrong, it has nothing to do with Science, and God created everything so we must freak out at the mention of Evolution.

its like our extremist politics, its mad.

The idea that Evolution does exist, and Science is wonderful, and that we dont know how life began, and maybe, just maybe, there is a Creator, or higher power if that makes you more comfortable, who started it all, and gave us to power to use our brains and become Scientists..is a totally different argument. One that many, many, people, both believers in God, and believers in Evolution agree with.

But you cant mention this idea to Evolution Nazis, or else they label it religious. Its not religious, its an openess to the fact that we dont know, and it could be.

The trouble with extremists on both sides of any issue, is you cant discuss rationally without triggering their fear that you are somehow "opening pandora's box". Well, next thing you know they'll force a Bible down my throat or... next thing you know they will outlaw religion or...next thing you'll know they will take ALL our guns away or...next thing you'll know they'll outlaw all abortions.....

Forget the "Religion believes that..."
Forget them. Focus on this issue. Not Religions point of view or yours.
on the idea that Evolution and science are real, and that can exist even while not knowing for sure that something greater didnt start it.
Dont let your mind start fighting with someones theology...its irrelevant to the above point.
leave it there, and see the insanity of a world that cant find the common ground many people on both sides of the aisle have been able to come to.

 

[Wildo7]

Two different arguments. And this is the problem.

The Evolutionists freak out at the mention or thought that we dont know, because that might open the door for the Creationist who say Evolution is all wrong, it has nothing to do with Science, and God created everything so we must freak out at the mention of Evolution.

its like our extremist politics, its mad.

The idea that Evolution does exist, and Science is wonderful, and that we dont know how life began, and maybe, just maybe, there is a Creator, or higher power if that makes you more comfortable, who started it all, and gave us to power to use our brains and become Scientists..is a totally different argument. One that many, many, people, both believers in God, and believers in Evolution agree with.

But you cant mention this idea to Evolution Nazis, or else they label it religious. Its not religious, its an openess to the fact that we dont know, and it could be.

The trouble with extremists on both sides of any issue, is you cant discuss rationally without triggering their fear that you are somehow "opening pandora's box". Well, next thing you know they'll force a Bible down my throat or... next thing you know they will outlaw religion or...next thing you'll know they will take ALL our guns away or...next thing you'll know they'll outlaw all abortions.....

Forget the "Religion believes that..."
Forget them. Focus on this issue. Not Religions point of view or yours.
on the idea that Evolution and science are real, and that can exist even while not knowing for sure that something greater didnt start it.
Dont let your mind start fighting with someones theology...its irrelevant to the above point.
leave it there, and see the insanity of a world that cant find the common ground many people on both sides of the aisle have been able to come to.

Evolution has nothing to do with Abiogenesis. Evolution is a scientific fact. Any religious beliefs or dogma that gets in the way of evolution are incorrect. Period.

As for the bolded part, I have never suggested anything other than that. This conversation started when I said as long as religion stays out of the way of science that is fine. When religion starts attempting to answer questions that are explained by science is when it's a problem. As usual with religious people, someone asserted incorrectly that believing in evolution requires the same leap of faith that believing in a a creator does, I merely pointed out that this is completely incorrect.

My personal distaste for religions, who claim to have answers to things they do not have answers to and who provide no evidence whatsoever for their assertions is a different argument. As is abiogenesis, which the religious always confuse with the Big Bang and Evolution.

And there is no such thing as an "extremist scientist" or an "extremist evolutionist" that's like saying you are an "extremist for the truth." If you want to have a discussion about science's coexistent with a general belief in some kind of creator that's fine, and my only contribution to the discussion was that they can coexist as long as religion doesn't get in the way of science. That is not an extreme statement, it's the overwhelming consensus of the majority of "rational people" around the world. When someone like lostjumper steps in and starts equating evolution with faith in god, that is exactly the type of religious interference in scientific fact that I'm talking about.

I have never once said anything along the lines of "science disproves god." What I have said is that I personally believe that it's ludicrous to believe in something that you have zero evidence for, and if you are going to believe out of some kind of fear, or hope or whatever, then that's fine, as long as it doesn't portend to be factual.

 

[Lifer]

Evolution has nothing to do with Abiogenesis. Evolution is a scientific fact. Any religious beliefs or dogma that gets in the way of evolution are incorrect. Period.

As for the bolded part, I have never suggested anything other than that. This conversation started when I said as long as religion stays out of the way of science that is fine. When religion starts attempting to answer questions that are explained by science is when it's a problem. As usual with religious people, someone asserted incorrectly that believing in evolution requires the same leap of faith that believing in a a creator does, I merely pointed out that this is completely incorrect.

My personal distaste for religions, who claim to have answers to things they do not have answers to and who provide no evidence whatsoever for their assertions is a different argument. As is abiogenesis, which the religious always confuse with the Big Bang and Evolution.

So we agree on the subject of Evolution and Science and even on the idea something larger could have started it all.

Me personally, being a Christian, I believe it was God. You, not being one, dont. We can agree to disagree on that.

But on this issue of Science we seem to be on the same page, right?
ive never refuted that Evolution exists. Just that people who believe life possibility started from something greater are not lunatics for saying that.

 

[Wildo7]

So we agree on the subject of Evolution and Science and even on the idea something larger could have started it all.

Me personally, being a Christian, I believe it was God. You, not being one, dont. We can agree to disagree on that.

But on this issue of Science we seem to be on the same page, right?
ive never refuted that Evolution exists. Just that people who believe life possibility started from something greater are not lunatics for saying that.

Sorry for the edit.

I don't believe we disagree on anything except the existence of a deity/creator.

If you look back at this conversation I haven't said anything else but the statement, "science and religion can coexist as long as religion doesn't get in the way." lostjumper didn't agree with that statement, do you?

Beyond that statement I don't really think there's anything else to discuss as far as science coexisting with religion goes.

 

[Lifer]

Sorry for the edit.

I don't believe we disagree on anything except the existence of a deity/creator.

If you look back at this conversation I haven't said anything else but the statement, "science and religion can coexist as long as religion doesn't get in the way." lostjumper didn't agree with that statement, do you?

Beyond that statement I don't really think there's anything else to discuss as far as science coexisting with religion goes.

well, its weighted toward the Scientific side in tone , but for the sake of not breaking the peace we have made here today ( Vito Corleone, Godfather I) I will say yes I agree in the spirit of what you said, that they can co-exist.
How is that?
there is a side that would say, in the end, if there is a God, he reigns over everything so be careful who you tell to get out of the way

But we agree! we agree! It can co-exist!!!

 

[Wildo7]

well, its weighted toward the Scientific side in tone , but for the sake of not breaking the peace we have made here today ( Vito Corleone, Godfather I) I will say yes I agree in the spirit of what you said, that they can co-exist.
How is that?
there is a side that would say, in the end, if there is a God, he reigns over everything so be careful who you tell to get out of the way

But we agree! we agree! It can co-exist!!!

Ok, I appreciate your conciliatory effort, but it's automatically weighted towards science since a scientific explanation of something is inherently more accurate than any religious explanation that would contradict it. Science and Religion aren't two separate but equal categories, they are incomparable. One of them seeks to find answers by proving or disproving a hypothesis based on evidence and data while the other seeks to answer things based on faith. It's not devaluing the latter to say that if it contradicts the former it is always wrong.

 

[Lifer]

Ok, I appreciate your conciliatory effort, but it's automatically weighted towards science since a scientific explanation of something is inherently more accurate than any religious explanation that would contradict it. Science and Religion aren't two separate but equal categories, they are incomparable. One of them seeks to find answers by proving or disproving a hypothesis based on evidence and data while the other seeks to answer things based on faith. It's not devaluing the latter to say that if it contradicts the former it is always wrong.

im just glad we made the progress we did.

 

[Synovia]

The Evolutionists freak out at the mention or thought that we dont know, because that might open the door for the Creationist who say Evolution is all wrong, it has nothing to do with Science, and God created everything so we must freak out at the mention of Evolution.

No, the evolutionists do not freak out over this. The Creationists say we freak out. Its a straw man.

 

[Synovia]

So we agree on the subject of Evolution and Science and even on the idea something larger could have started it all.

Me personally, being a Christian, I believe it was God. You, not being one, dont. We can agree to disagree on that.

Thats the point. They're two seperate things. Evolution, and what started it all. I believe it was abiogenesis, you, god, but neither one has anything to do with evolution.

 

[Synovia]

That's not true.
"Right-to-Lifers" are for the right to life. True RTL's oppose the death penalty as well. Are you one of those? If so, why? Where do you get the notion that the life of a rapist or murderer is worth keeping? Is there some sort of religious basis for that?

Yeah, there is. Forgiveness. Repentance.

 

[OldEngland]

Thats the point. They're two seperate things. Evolution, and what started it all. I believe it was abiogenesis, you, god, but neither one has anything to do with evolution.

I have trouble with this distinguishing factor between abiogenesis and evolution. Maybe I am missing your point?

The formation of atoms is arguable very complex. Hydrogen cooled early in the universe's time line and allowed larger elements such as carbon or iron to appear. But even very simple molecules took the crashing together of several atoms to occur in perfect harmony. But amino acids, nucleic acids, etc are very strange. In a laboratory all amino acids are equally left and right handed. In nature they are all left handed, and nucleic acids are all right handed. Much like the mystery of matter and anti matter. How did this happen?
Then suddenly a membrane appeared around these molecules and they began to self replicate, self splice? RNA, DNA, protein, which came first? Then they started to swap information.

It is a blurry line when abiogenesis stopped and evolution began. I think initiation occurred at the big bang, and evolution carried on from there, you may disagree?

Do you think it was random chance? The lines of "God" are also blurry, hence the confusion. Abiogenesis in my opinion does not negate the possibility of God.

P.s. To answer a previous question. Cairns-Smith "has estimated that 140 steps occur that go into the synthesis of RNA (that can self replicate) from simple prebiotic compounds. For each step there are 6 alternative reactions that could occur apart from the desired reaction that resulted in life". Cairns-smith estimated "the chance of this happening as 10 to the power of 109. This is back to the realm of monkeys with typewriters. The earth simply has not had enough time."

I don't dismiss this could have happened by random chance. But it seems to me that something was guiding life (and still does) I call it God, but I once called it Gaia before I found Christ. You can call it whatever you want.