Thomas Henry Huxley once said that science's objective is not to destroy the "unknown" but to increase our sphere of understanding and action. Those focusing on proving that God doesn't exist or anything like that through science should move the effort to something... useful to say the least.
Fact- anything that can be proven without a doubt.
also heres some numbers
Percentage of science that is Theory 99.9%
Percentage of science that is Fact 0.01%
I'm pretty damn sure that biology is more fact than theory, as are most natural sciences. You might be talking about physics, which has a large amount of theories, but also a very large amount facts.
@Tolkfan: Go
Science changes its bullshit constantly because they cant hold up to a religion thats been here for the past 5k years sure they make some good points on some things, and a lot I agree, but when they try to combat religion, they only seem to talk to morons who just cite bible verses instead of people who know about the BIBLE and scientific achievement, they proved already that jesus was alive, and that he was considered a healing man at one time.
Science doesn't completely change. It corrects itself as new discoveries are made and society/the world changes, which religion does not (Well, ok, women got a soul about a century or two ago.). Religions persisted for centuries withouth changing or adapting, and now we have bullshit like protests against gays and other lifestyles and/or choices.
I'm sorry, as I said, I don't like it when people are trying to force their opinions on me or others. You seem very pissed off at this thread, so please ignore it. This is what I was talking about earlier, why I linked Occams Razor and the Teapot, so that people would try and understand other peoples points of view and not make such posts.
Oh, and about biblical characters having been proven to exist... They aren't god. King Arthur existed, and I'm not entirely certain but I'm sure a Merlin existed as well, or at least a person the mythical character was based on. Does that mean magic and all those legends are real? Masyaf and Al Mualim existed, does that mean Assassins Creed tells a true story?
The bible may tell, to some degree, a true story. But stories are oftentimes exaggerated and just because the characters are real doesnt mean the entire story is. I haven't read the bible and I don't even recognize half the things you listed, but i don't doubt that whoever Noah was did actually build a ship and took some animals with him when the flood came, but I'm not gonna take that as proof that god exists.
This isn't a thread about science or religion. It's about life after death, no matter what it bases on. You can continue the "Argument" we started if you like, but I'd highly prefer we get back on topic and stop claiming one or another persons belief is wrong/right.
your opinions are yours opinions and mine are mine. People shouldn't argue about opinions/beliefs but instead merely compare them (And correct/adjust them if they believe they need to)
The Occam's Razor link was there to just tell religious people in this thread not to be offensive regarding atheist.
The Teapot was meant for the atheists not to become offensive towards the religious.
I try to stay away anyone who tries to define science, because most of the time they dip out of science, and go into philosophy how can science be correct about itself, as it claims to be correct on everything, if it cant define itself in a scientific way?
I believe in science, but I dont try to define it by philosophy after claiming philosophy is incorrect.
Just read the posts that were posted while I was writing my previous post...
TaintedWisp, calm down or this thread is getting closed.This thread is not a religious/atheist debate, no one is trying to prove anything here. This is an exchange of opinions, until you showed up everything looked very civil. If it doesnt continue that way, this thread is gone. Also, dont double post, there's a bloody edit function for a reason.
Lets return to life after death, shall we? I cant monitor this thread the entire day.
Was wondering when someone would officially ignite this powder keg, lol. Any time there is talk of life after death and that sort of thing, it quickly degenerates into this. No one's minds ever get changed, all that ends up happening is someone talks about how flawed science is, then immediately that person is proclaimed dumb, wrong, and all religious people are obviously stupid.
Anyways, may as well say my 5 cents while I am at it. I do believe in a God, a heaven, and a hell. Many people I know do not. I don't really try to persuade them one way or the other, although I am really the one with nothing to lose. See if they are right, there is nothing else after this, I'll be just as dead as they are. However, if I am right, it is unlikely they'll be enjoying themselves any.
With that, should try for a nice subject change. The new Battlenet 2.0 is AWESOME! Discuss!
I stand corrected, my deifinitions of Fact and Theory is completely wrong.
A theory is an idea that is supported by fact and has yet to be disproven
A fact is an idea that is supported by many facts and is renown as true
A LAW is a proven without a doubt statement. Not supposed to be changed, but still could possibly.
a few examples would be Heliocentric Theory, the idea that the earth orbits the sun, Believe it or not, this has not yet been recognized as fact...
still there are far more Theories then facts. And a lot of theories use other theories to back them up, because if a + b = c and C +D = f then a + b + D MUST equal f, though it math this does not hold true.
lol, i dont try to disprove science, just the idiots, that try to disprove religion... Science an art of knowledge to put it in basic terms, But knowledge changes, im not saying science is wrong, i'm just stateing that there isnt enough evidence to put atheism past Hypothesis.
Pretty much agree with deadzerg. I'm of the opinion that science has more backing it up than religion (mostly because science is all about backing stuff up, and such and such...). That (clearly) won't change anyone who believes to the contrary.
Going back to topic I agree with a previous post (I think it was Nebuli) that said the afterlife is just like the "beforelife" so its nothing. Your brain dies, maybe some physiological imprint stays for a while and then nothing. This idea of a physiological imprint is one of my friend's worst nightmare, he believes that if you have a painful death you will feel it until your brain cells die and can't feel it anymore.
But if there's a real afterlife I will come here and send you guys a ghot PM ok? You should do the same if you die and we can solve this issue.
I just had a revelation. I am now a sworn follower of the Greek Pantheon with Zeus as the father of all Olympian Gods ( I just slaughtered a bull in Zeus' name).
When it comes to the afterlife I believe that when we die we are sent to the shore or the river Styx where Charon charges a single coin to ferry us across to the entrance to the realm of Hades. The realm itself is divided into Tartarus, where the Titans are imprisoned (and always will, Zeus willing), the Elysian Fields where noble souls go (my prefered destination) and the Asphodel Meadows for common souls.
I personally am tired of all these movies and cartoons that portray Hades, God of the Underworld as some kind of evil Sauron guy. It offends me greatly.
I expect that all you nice agnostics will respect my beliefs and always say "we can't prove that there was no Hades".
Oh yeah, I guess I should mention that God doesn't need in any way to be proven incorrect to rationally believe he (or she or it, w/e) exists. The reason for that being that God is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. There's always an excuse to make as for why there's no evidence to support his existence. Due to that, it can't ever be proven incorrect because of the nature of the claim, but that doesn't mean that it can't be incorrect.
Going back to topic I agree with a previous post (I think it was Nebuli) that said the afterlife is just like the "beforelife" so its nothing. Your brain dies, maybe some physiological imprint stays for a while and then nothing. This idea of a physiological imprint is one of my friend's worst nightmare, he believes that if you have a painful death you will feel it until your brain cells die and can't feel it anymore.
But if there's a real afterlife I will come here and send you guys a ghot PM ok? You should do the same if you die and we can solve this issue.
That's really not much to worry about. If I recall correctly, the brain isn't known for having many nociceptors, which are what detect pain. Ergo, your brain doesn't feel pain from the brain being damaged.
@Nebuli2: Go Yes, but what I meant is that maybe you can feel the pain that killed you, not necessarily from brain damage. As one example if death by fire is painful, maybe the brain will feel that pain until the brain cells themselves are destroyed.
Err, what? Someone didn't pay attention in science class. A theory MUST be falsifiable to be a theory. A theory is mostly, though, an idea supported by sufficient evidence, not something which isn't falsifiable.
Given how consistently you make yourself look like a retard, I find it difficult to believe that you've ever gotten an A. Especially not in English, because you got "Strait As." A strait is a narrow passage of water, not an adjective.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Thomas Henry Huxley once said that science's objective is not to destroy the "unknown" but to increase our sphere of understanding and action. Those focusing on proving that God doesn't exist or anything like that through science should move the effort to something... useful to say the least.
Here, have a cookie.
I'm pretty damn sure that biology is more fact than theory, as are most natural sciences. You might be talking about physics, which has a large amount of theories, but also a very large amount facts.
Science doesn't completely change. It corrects itself as new discoveries are made and society/the world changes, which religion does not (Well, ok, women got a soul about a century or two ago.). Religions persisted for centuries withouth changing or adapting, and now we have bullshit like protests against gays and other lifestyles and/or choices.
I'm sorry, as I said, I don't like it when people are trying to force their opinions on me or others. You seem very pissed off at this thread, so please ignore it. This is what I was talking about earlier, why I linked Occams Razor and the Teapot, so that people would try and understand other peoples points of view and not make such posts.
Oh, and about biblical characters having been proven to exist... They aren't god. King Arthur existed, and I'm not entirely certain but I'm sure a Merlin existed as well, or at least a person the mythical character was based on. Does that mean magic and all those legends are real? Masyaf and Al Mualim existed, does that mean Assassins Creed tells a true story?
The bible may tell, to some degree, a true story. But stories are oftentimes exaggerated and just because the characters are real doesnt mean the entire story is. I haven't read the bible and I don't even recognize half the things you listed, but i don't doubt that whoever Noah was did actually build a ship and took some animals with him when the flood came, but I'm not gonna take that as proof that god exists.
This isn't a thread about science or religion. It's about life after death, no matter what it bases on. You can continue the "Argument" we started if you like, but I'd highly prefer we get back on topic and stop claiming one or another persons belief is wrong/right.
To repeat:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
@SoulFilcher: Go
I try to stay away anyone who tries to define science, because most of the time they dip out of science, and go into philosophy how can science be correct about itself, as it claims to be correct on everything, if it cant define itself in a scientific way?
I believe in science, but I dont try to define it by philosophy after claiming philosophy is incorrect.
Just read the posts that were posted while I was writing my previous post...
TaintedWisp, calm down or this thread is getting closed.This thread is not a religious/atheist debate, no one is trying to prove anything here. This is an exchange of opinions, until you showed up everything looked very civil. If it doesnt continue that way, this thread is gone. Also, dont double post, there's a bloody edit function for a reason.
Lets return to life after death, shall we? I cant monitor this thread the entire day.
Think I found a new signature.
@Taintedwisp: Go
Was wondering when someone would officially ignite this powder keg, lol. Any time there is talk of life after death and that sort of thing, it quickly degenerates into this. No one's minds ever get changed, all that ends up happening is someone talks about how flawed science is, then immediately that person is proclaimed dumb, wrong, and all religious people are obviously stupid.
Anyways, may as well say my 5 cents while I am at it. I do believe in a God, a heaven, and a hell. Many people I know do not. I don't really try to persuade them one way or the other, although I am really the one with nothing to lose. See if they are right, there is nothing else after this, I'll be just as dead as they are. However, if I am right, it is unlikely they'll be enjoying themselves any.
With that, should try for a nice subject change. The new Battlenet 2.0 is AWESOME! Discuss!
I stand corrected, my deifinitions of Fact and Theory is completely wrong.
A theory is an idea that is supported by fact and has yet to be disproven
A fact is an idea that is supported by many facts and is renown as true
A LAW is a proven without a doubt statement. Not supposed to be changed, but still could possibly.
a few examples would be Heliocentric Theory, the idea that the earth orbits the sun, Believe it or not, this has not yet been recognized as fact...
still there are far more Theories then facts. And a lot of theories use other theories to back them up, because if a + b = c and C +D = f then a + b + D MUST equal f, though it math this does not hold true.
lol, i dont try to disprove science, just the idiots, that try to disprove religion... Science an art of knowledge to put it in basic terms, But knowledge changes, im not saying science is wrong, i'm just stateing that there isnt enough evidence to put atheism past Hypothesis.
Pretty much agree with deadzerg. I'm of the opinion that science has more backing it up than religion (mostly because science is all about backing stuff up, and such and such...). That (clearly) won't change anyone who believes to the contrary.
The new b.net is looking pretty kickass :p.
@Taintedwisp: Go Plz read this: http://www.eknigu.com/get/P_Physics/PPop_Popular-level/Feynman%20R.%20The%20Meaning%20of%20It%20All%20(1963)(52s).pdf
This might shed you some light about what is science. (and probably all should read it, who is from USA...)
Going back to topic I agree with a previous post (I think it was Nebuli) that said the afterlife is just like the "beforelife" so its nothing. Your brain dies, maybe some physiological imprint stays for a while and then nothing. This idea of a physiological imprint is one of my friend's worst nightmare, he believes that if you have a painful death you will feel it until your brain cells die and can't feel it anymore.
But if there's a real afterlife I will come here and send you guys a ghot PM ok? You should do the same if you die and we can solve this issue.
@Deadzergling: Go
DONT YOU DARE TALK ABOUT THAT DEVILTRY!!!
Battle.net 2.0 is complete garbage, its cool with Cross game chat... and re-downloading games, other then that is complete poop.:D
Nice thread Rodrigo.
I just had a revelation. I am now a sworn follower of the Greek Pantheon with Zeus as the father of all Olympian Gods ( I just slaughtered a bull in Zeus' name).
When it comes to the afterlife I believe that when we die we are sent to the shore or the river Styx where Charon charges a single coin to ferry us across to the entrance to the realm of Hades. The realm itself is divided into Tartarus, where the Titans are imprisoned (and always will, Zeus willing), the Elysian Fields where noble souls go (my prefered destination) and the Asphodel Meadows for common souls.
I personally am tired of all these movies and cartoons that portray Hades, God of the Underworld as some kind of evil Sauron guy. It offends me greatly.
I expect that all you nice agnostics will respect my beliefs and always say "we can't prove that there was no Hades".
Are you getting the not so subtle message?
Lets hijack this thread a bit, for a better and nicer discussion:
If there is afterlife, what kind of afterlife would you like???
Oh yeah, I guess I should mention that God doesn't need in any way to be proven incorrect to rationally believe he (or she or it, w/e) exists. The reason for that being that God is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. There's always an excuse to make as for why there's no evidence to support his existence. Due to that, it can't ever be proven incorrect because of the nature of the claim, but that doesn't mean that it can't be incorrect.
That's really not much to worry about. If I recall correctly, the brain isn't known for having many nociceptors, which are what detect pain. Ergo, your brain doesn't feel pain from the brain being damaged.
@Nebuli2: Go Yes, but what I meant is that maybe you can feel the pain that killed you, not necessarily from brain damage. As one example if death by fire is painful, maybe the brain will feel that pain until the brain cells themselves are destroyed.
Err, what? Someone didn't pay attention in science class. A theory MUST be falsifiable to be a theory. A theory is mostly, though, an idea supported by sufficient evidence, not something which isn't falsifiable.
@Nebuli2: Go
I didnt pay attention in any of my classes, I got strait A's in the class and failed because I missed about 40% of the school year lol.
and I got in the top 3 on all my EOC's for each of my classes, just imagine if I had actually cared to pay attention, sometimes I wish I had.
@Taintedwisp: Go
Given how consistently you make yourself look like a retard, I find it difficult to believe that you've ever gotten an A. Especially not in English, because you got "Strait As." A strait is a narrow passage of water, not an adjective.