Is science a religion?

[Wilikon]

In Earth's history, CO2 levels have been above 8000 PPM... we are currently at  350 PPM and worried?!?  WHY?

Maybe because the earth was very different then? And nowhere we want to go back to.

I think its a complete scam to swindle tax-payers out of $20,000,000,000 every year (that's a lot of money for a claim with such poor evidence... like religion)

So you're saying scientists that look at the evidence are all in on it? Or incompetent? Maybe the 97% isn't accurate. But the vast majority agrees with anthropogenic climate change.

Not saying your wrong but..97% might want to keep there jobs?All about the money..

But i am all for believing just in case the 97% are right..Car fumes are like smoking if we can quit then why not..

That assumes a conspiracy. That any scientist with evidence man made climate change isn't real wouldn't be hired anywhere else. Anywhere in the world. Hard to believe. Would need coordination and cooperation of too many people. And in very different countries.

It only assumes a conspiracy if you are ignorant of the facts...

The 97% claim is not based on all scientists, it is based on 73 hand-picked "climatologists"... Who are all paid by the IPCC...

It's as much of a conspiracy as asking 73 priests if they believe God exists and 97% saying yes...

The evidence for anthropogenic global warming is lacking... I do not need to prove it doesn't exist until you first prove it does exist... I am not making the positive claim and am not obliged to provide the burden of proof...

A pseudo-consensus among 73 people on your payroll does not evidence make...
In what field of science does a scientist's opinion/belief count as evidence/proof?

Why must I prove gremlins don't exist when you haven't proven your claim that they do exist?

Yep.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=374873.msg9604149#msg9604149

 

[1714574066]

1714574066

[Tusk]

Here is a good example that shows how there can be vastly differing opinions within the scientific community, it's a very good presentation, ironically given by a bishop who highlights the growing schism between Orthodox mainstream science who feel that gravity if the fundamental driver of the universe and a new group who feel it is electricity.

Theoretical Alternatives in an Electric Universe | Space News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBWOH9Wu2c0&list=LL2SUmeAzu4qXRc5uQe4eZCw&index=2

While maths is unequivocal, how its applied is very subjective

[yenxz]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.         

its not religion,but mostly near to called like religion,the matters that science never called religion because all religion are have science in their view,islam,cristian,katholik,they have expert in science world.

[BADecker]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.         

its not religion,but mostly near to called like religion,the matters that science never called religion because all religion are have science in their view,islam,cristian,katholik,they have expert in science world.

... and people who are too lazy or ignorant about how to use spell checkers... or are trying to hide who they really are by changing their language style.

[moviebuff777]

Even if you believe in the big bang theory, the who made the mass that produced the planets?  Did it just appear on its own or did someone create it?  I don't think we can answer those kinds of questions.

[hasan7779]

Who denies the science of religion. Some mystery solution is not possible without religion, science, and religion is complementary to one another. Birth gives some sense atheism of science, it is not just those who are atheists atheist it for ever, and they assert that atheism in the name of science. So there is no conflict between science and religion.

[BADecker]

Who denies the science of religion. Some mystery solution is not possible without religion, science, and religion is complementary to one another. Birth gives some sense atheism of science, it is not just those who are atheists atheist it for ever, and they assert that atheism in the name of science. So there is no conflict between science and religion.

Well said. There is no conflict between science and religion.

But, you need to remember. There is some conflict between parts of religion and parts of science. After all, the atheism religion believes a lot of things that are not scientific, even though they may look scientific on the outside.

[organofcorti]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.         

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

[Champion Of PvP Humb]

I am catholic , is good and all world have o not have religion

[BADecker]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.          

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

Absolutely. Anything that you feel strongly enough about to make it part of your life theme, is part of your personal religion.

That's why so many atheists flock together in communications contact if not actual physical contact. Religious strength in numbers.

[organofcorti]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.          

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

Absolutely. Anything that you feel strongly enough about to make it part of your life theme, is part of your personal religion.

That's why so many atheists flock together in communications contact if not actual physical contact. Religious strength in numbers.

Ah, ok. I'm religious in the same way you're an atheist - as a matter of definition.

To quote my previous response to you:

Same logic as your definition of atheism as a religion:

If science is religion, you're an atheist. How can you tell? There are thousands of religions and many more gods that exist (with our without followers today), and we can realistically expect that in our prehistoric past that there have been many times this number. Yet you believe in only one.

One definition of an atheist is that it is someone who does not believe in gods. To believe in only one of thousands of gods means that you're 99.9% atheist.

Therefore you are approximately an atheist, and as the number of gods that have ever been claimed to exist approaches infinity, your atheism approaches 100%.

[PakistanHockeyfan]

I have always found Scientology to be a mock religion (a scam of sorts)/ fake religion. I never actually under why considering science to be a religion. It's more of a basic physical understanding of nature and physics.

[BADecker]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.          

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

Absolutely. Anything that you feel strongly enough about to make it part of your life theme, is part of your personal religion.

That's why so many atheists flock together in communications contact if not actual physical contact. Religious strength in numbers.

Ah, ok. I'm religious in the same way you're an atheist - as a matter of definition.

To quote my previous response to you:

Same logic as your definition of atheism as a religion:

If science is religion, you're an atheist. How can you tell? There are thousands of religions and many more gods that exist (with our without followers today), and we can realistically expect that in our prehistoric past that there have been many times this number. Yet you believe in only one.

One definition of an atheist is that it is someone who does not believe in gods. To believe in only one of thousands of gods means that you're 99.9% atheist.

Therefore you are approximately an atheist, and as the number of gods that have ever been claimed to exist approaches infinity, your atheism approaches 100%.

When a group of people get together to design a car, they all have to be on the same page. If they are not, the pistons won't fit the cylinders. The windows won't fit the holes made for them. The wiring will be all mixed up.

The point, and the fault of your thinking? The universe is so extremely complex that God must be One. If He weren't, it wouldn't have worked from the get-go.

Sometimes parts of a new car model don't fit together. The car has to go back to the drawing board until all the engineers and builders get on the same page. But there is one guy/gal who okays the new car. And it better be right this time, or heads will roll.

There is One God. The devil was the engineer who engineered imperfection in the universe. And he did it intentionally. He will be gone regarding the new universe... fired, so to speak.

People believe in many gods. Many people mistakenly believe wrong things about the only God. It looks like there are many gods. But there is only one real God.

[organofcorti]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.          

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

Absolutely. Anything that you feel strongly enough about to make it part of your life theme, is part of your personal religion.

That's why so many atheists flock together in communications contact if not actual physical contact. Religious strength in numbers.

Ah, ok. I'm religious in the same way you're an atheist - as a matter of definition.

To quote my previous response to you:

Same logic as your definition of atheism as a religion:

If science is religion, you're an atheist. How can you tell? There are thousands of religions and many more gods that exist (with our without followers today), and we can realistically expect that in our prehistoric past that there have been many times this number. Yet you believe in only one.

One definition of an atheist is that it is someone who does not believe in gods. To believe in only one of thousands of gods means that you're 99.9% atheist.

Therefore you are approximately an atheist, and as the number of gods that have ever been claimed to exist approaches infinity, your atheism approaches 100%.

When a group of people get together to design a car, they all have to be on the same page. If they are not, the pistons won't fit the cylinders. The windows won't fit the holes made for them. The wiring will be all mixed up.

The point, and the fault of your thinking? The universe is so extremely complex that God must be One. If He weren't, it wouldn't have worked from the get-go.

Sometimes parts of a new car model don't fit together. The car has to go back to the drawing board until all the engineers and builders get on the same page. But there is one guy/gal who okays the new car. And it better be right this time, or heads will roll.

There is One God. The devil was the engineer who engineered imperfection in the universe. And he did it intentionally. He will be gone regarding the new universe... fired, so to speak.

People believe in many gods. Many people mistakenly believe wrong things about the only God. It looks like there are many gods. But there is only one real God.

No, you've totally missed the point. I don't care about how many gods you think there are, just that there have been many claimed to exist and you (and other monotheists) claim that only one is real, and if that's the case then my point stands.

The logical error --  the "fault of thinking", if you will --  that I demonstrate here is an example of what happens taking a very narrow definition of a word and then attempt to generalise it beyond what the acceptable definition of that word is -- much as you do for the word "religion".

[BADecker]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.          

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

Absolutely. Anything that you feel strongly enough about to make it part of your life theme, is part of your personal religion.

That's why so many atheists flock together in communications contact if not actual physical contact. Religious strength in numbers.

Ah, ok. I'm religious in the same way you're an atheist - as a matter of definition.

To quote my previous response to you:

Same logic as your definition of atheism as a religion:

If science is religion, you're an atheist. How can you tell? There are thousands of religions and many more gods that exist (with our without followers today), and we can realistically expect that in our prehistoric past that there have been many times this number. Yet you believe in only one.

One definition of an atheist is that it is someone who does not believe in gods. To believe in only one of thousands of gods means that you're 99.9% atheist.

Therefore you are approximately an atheist, and as the number of gods that have ever been claimed to exist approaches infinity, your atheism approaches 100%.

When a group of people get together to design a car, they all have to be on the same page. If they are not, the pistons won't fit the cylinders. The windows won't fit the holes made for them. The wiring will be all mixed up.

The point, and the fault of your thinking? The universe is so extremely complex that God must be One. If He weren't, it wouldn't have worked from the get-go.

Sometimes parts of a new car model don't fit together. The car has to go back to the drawing board until all the engineers and builders get on the same page. But there is one guy/gal who okays the new car. And it better be right this time, or heads will roll.

There is One God. The devil was the engineer who engineered imperfection in the universe. And he did it intentionally. He will be gone regarding the new universe... fired, so to speak.

People believe in many gods. Many people mistakenly believe wrong things about the only God. It looks like there are many gods. But there is only one real God.

No, you've totally missed the point. I don't care about how many gods you think there are, just that there have been many claimed to exist and you (and other monotheists) claim that only one is real, and if that's the case then my point stands.

The logical error --  the "fault of thinking", if you will --  that I demonstrate here is an example of what happens taking a very narrow definition of a word and then attempt to generalise it beyond what the acceptable definition of that word is -- much as you do for the word "religion".

Dictionary.com attempts to show the definitions without excluding any part of them. Dictionary.com is not the only place that has the definitions that they use. So, check them out - http://www.dictionary.com/.

[Buffer Overflow]

People believe in many gods. Many people mistakenly believe wrong things about the only God. It looks like there are many gods. But there is only one real God.

How would you possible know that?
If God is omnipotent it could create more Gods with equal power.

Ahh but of course, you was just blindly speculating and wrongly presenting it as fact. AGAIN.

[organofcorti]

While many in main stream science claim to be atheist and believe in the Big Bang and the eventual Deep Freeze due to entropy. Is it not curious to consider that the very underpinnings of this belief is based on mathematics, was it too created in the big bang? if so how was it constructed? one digit at a time?

I think not it has always been there and will always remain its an eternal masterpiece that permeates every conceivable facet or reality yet in its self it is purely abstract. Without it nothing would exist, but it in itself it is nonexistent and existent at the same time. It is the language of the living universe. Its permutations are infinite, yet it did not grow, it has always been complete and eternal.          

I don't follow this. How does your statement suggest that science is a religion? How are you defining religion? A la BADecker ("Religion is anything you feel strongly about -- gods, war lawyers, that guy who cut in front of you in traffic on your way to work") or the usual way (requiring gods and belief in the supernatural etc).

Absolutely. Anything that you feel strongly enough about to make it part of your life theme, is part of your personal religion.

That's why so many atheists flock together in communications contact if not actual physical contact. Religious strength in numbers.

Ah, ok. I'm religious in the same way you're an atheist - as a matter of definition.

To quote my previous response to you:

Same logic as your definition of atheism as a religion:

If science is religion, you're an atheist. How can you tell? There are thousands of religions and many more gods that exist (with our without followers today), and we can realistically expect that in our prehistoric past that there have been many times this number. Yet you believe in only one.

One definition of an atheist is that it is someone who does not believe in gods. To believe in only one of thousands of gods means that you're 99.9% atheist.

Therefore you are approximately an atheist, and as the number of gods that have ever been claimed to exist approaches infinity, your atheism approaches 100%.

When a group of people get together to design a car, they all have to be on the same page. If they are not, the pistons won't fit the cylinders. The windows won't fit the holes made for them. The wiring will be all mixed up.

The point, and the fault of your thinking? The universe is so extremely complex that God must be One. If He weren't, it wouldn't have worked from the get-go.

Sometimes parts of a new car model don't fit together. The car has to go back to the drawing board until all the engineers and builders get on the same page. But there is one guy/gal who okays the new car. And it better be right this time, or heads will roll.

There is One God. The devil was the engineer who engineered imperfection in the universe. And he did it intentionally. He will be gone regarding the new universe... fired, so to speak.

People believe in many gods. Many people mistakenly believe wrong things about the only God. It looks like there are many gods. But there is only one real God.

No, you've totally missed the point. I don't care about how many gods you think there are, just that there have been many claimed to exist and you (and other monotheists) claim that only one is real, and if that's the case then my point stands.

The logical error --  the "fault of thinking", if you will --  that I demonstrate here is an example of what happens taking a very narrow definition of a word and then attempt to generalise it beyond what the acceptable definition of that word is -- much as you do for the word "religion".

Dictionary.com attempts to show the definitions without excluding any part of them. Dictionary.com is not the only place that has the definitions that they use. So, check them out - http://www.dictionary.com/.

Well, that *is* interesting. From that website, a definition of atheism is:

2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

This is exactly the attitude of a monotheist to all other gods. Therefore -- if you take just that single definition of atheism --  monotheists are almost completely atheist.

I hope this clearly illustrates the illogic in attempting to stretch a definition from a particular case to any use at all.

[AzibLala007]

yes it is true that if we think sientifically then science is a religion.
but if we do everything in our approach scientifcally then definetly science is a religion.
otherwise i don't think science is a religion.
it is totally a field that need to be explore.

[images]

yes it is true that if we think sientifically then science is a religion.
but if we do everything in our approach scientifcally then definetly science is a religion.
otherwise i don't think science is a religion.
it is totally a field that need to be explore.

And there is science in religion, off course there is science in all but i think in science it focuses on facts and real things discovered. where in religion dates back to ancient civilization where the only proof is a book.

[yunuzov]

Science as a religion is false attempt of not so wise people.
Those people believe scientific things are completely true, but there is no complete true till you find better truth.