The difference between science and religion

[Moloch]

just to show you how off-base you are, the bush could have been next to a rock formation with special vibrational qualities. Some joker could have been hiding in the rock formation and tricking Moses. Moses didn't have to be hallucinating. He just might have been tricked.

I feel there is enough evidence to point to Moses hallucinating on DMT.  The only question is whether this was an accident, or intentional.

Moses, having been raised in Egypt, would likely have known about "the tree of life" (aka Acacia Nilotica, aka "the Egyptian Acacia")
The Egyptians Had Their Own Version Of Ayahuasca They Called “The Tree Of Life”
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/05/31/the-tree-of-life-acacia-nilotica/

The fact that the bible mentions the bush was burning, but did not burn up, implies knowledge of the vaporization of DMT.  DMT will degrade into other chemicals in a fire, which is why the story makes a point about the fire being small and not consuming the bush itself, only hot enough to vaporize the DMT in the plant, but not hot enough to destroy the chemical.

IMHO, this implies Moses understood DMT and its vaporization temperature.

Jews often wrote things down cryptically like this, so only those "in the know" would understand the meaning.  This is extremely common in the bible.  Other examples include astrology (Egyptians worshiped the bull [age of Torus 4000BCE-2000BCE], Abraham sacrificed the ram instead of his son Isaac [age of Aries 2000BCE-0CE], Jesus is symbolized by the fish Pisces [age of Pisces 0CE-2000CE]).  According to this theme, the next major religion should be symbolized by Aquarius [age of Aquarius 2000CE-4000CE]

Another example of Jews cryptic writings in the bible would be the number of the beast, 666/616, referring to Nero Caesar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast

Another example of hallucinogenic drug use in the bible would be manna/mushrooms.  Anyone familiar with psychedelic mushrooms can tell you the similarity between the description of manna from heaven, and magic mushrooms growing



The bible mentions that the priests gathered up a bunch of this "manna", and put it in a pot to keep in the "holy of holies" and eat it for 40 years...

[1714026445]

1714026445

[1714026445]

1714026445

[criza]

One of the most, if not the most evident difference between science and religion I think is mainly its nature. The concept of religion is primarily based on faith and beliefs while the concept of science is mostly based on discovered facts and principles. Furthermore, one of tge most obvious difference between science and religion is its influence to people. Out of almost eight billion population in the world, almost 100% of it believes in science more than the percentage of people who believes in religion; and even those percentage of people believe, they surely does have different religions --- and that's how the third difference comes in. Science is universal, while religion is not.

[BADecker]

just to show you how off-base you are, the bush could have been next to a rock formation with special vibrational qualities. Some joker could have been hiding in the rock formation and tricking Moses. Moses didn't have to be hallucinating. He just might have been tricked.

I feel there is enough evidence to point to Moses hallucinating on DMT.  The only question is whether this was an accident, or intentional.

Moses, having been raised in Egypt, would likely have known about "the tree of life" (aka Acacia Nilotica, aka "the Egyptian Acacia")
The Egyptians Had Their Own Version Of Ayahuasca They Called “The Tree Of Life”
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/05/31/the-tree-of-life-acacia-nilotica/

The fact that the bible mentions the bush was burning, but did not burn up, implies knowledge of the vaporization of DMT.  DMT will degrade into other chemicals in a fire, which is why the story makes a point about the fire being small and not consuming the bush itself, only hot enough to vaporize the DMT in the plant, but not hot enough to destroy the chemical.

IMHO, this implies Moses understood DMT and its vaporization temperature.

Jews often wrote things down cryptically like this, so only those "in the know" would understand the meaning.  This is extremely common in the bible.  Other examples include astrology (Egyptians worshiped the bull [age of Torus 4000BCE-2000BCE], Abraham sacrificed the ram instead of his son Isaac [age of Aries 2000BCE-0CE], Jesus is symbolized by the fish Pisces [age of Pisces 0CE-2000CE]).  According to this theme, the next major religion should be symbolized by Aquarius [age of Aquarius 2000CE-4000CE]

Another example of Jews cryptic writings in the bible would be the number of the beast, 666/616, referring to Nero Caesar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast

Another example of hallucinogenic drug use in the bible would be manna/mushrooms.  Anyone familiar with psychedelic mushrooms can tell you the similarity between the description of manna from heaven, and magic mushrooms growing

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NKItwp7-H5I/UFxM92vdVBI/AAAAAAAAECc/RRA1SgErqNM/s1600/62036.jpg

The bible mentions that the priests gathered up a bunch of this "manna", and put it in a pot to keep in the "holy of holies" and eat it for 40 years...

This is almost exactly the kind of thing that I am trying to say in this thread.

Notice that the things in the post I am quoting, are full of DMT and other science, even though some of it is from ancient Egypt. But all of this science is pointing at a happening - the burning bush, Moses - that we have no first-hand fact about. All we have is writings in the Bible.

What does this mean? It means that scientific facts are being combined with scientific ideas which are being combined with something that we have to proof for. Yet people believe this thing that we have no proof for.


Again, the science may be 100% accurate. But when we apply this science to happenings that we don't know that it should be applied to...

or if we think that the happenings are fictional but we apply the science to them anyway...

and then we say that we believe the science applications to the unknown happenings...

aren't we turning science into a religion?


Consider. The science of DMT is known to be reasonably accurate.
The science of Moses and the burning bush is really religion.
When we apply real DMT science to religion, aren't we turning science into religion?
After all, since we don't have any provable data to the Moses thing,
how can we have provable science with it?
The whole operation falls into the religious realm.
We are turning science into a religion!

If this thread was about Moses and DMT, the whole thing might be a different story. But since it is about science and religion, the quoted post is a great example of how easily one can turn science into a religion without even realizing that he is doing so.

[Moloch]

When we apply real DMT science to religion, aren't we turning science into religion?

No, science is hypothesizing that Moses hallucinated via known mechanisms.  This is based on the facts which I already presented.  There is no request to "take it on faith" or any of that jazz.  I presented facts and evidence.  The evidence I presented could be tested by anyone.

That's the whole point of science.  You can test it for yourself.  Unlike religion, where you are asked to trust the writings of an ancient desert dwelling tribe without the ability to test any of their claims.

[tracymik]

Science can be proven physically whilst religion cannot be proven physically.   Science aims to solve physical problem of mankind whilst religion seeks to solve the spiritual problems of mankind. I think both are helpful to make humans complete.

[darklus123]

When we apply real DMT science to religion, aren't we turning science into religion?

No, science is hypothesizing that Moses hallucinated via known mechanisms.  This is based on the facts which I already presented.  There is no request to "take it on faith" or any of that jazz.  I presented facts and evidence.  The evidence I presented could be tested by anyone.

That's the whole point of science.  You can test it for yourself.  Unlike religion, where you are asked to trust the writings of an ancient desert dwelling tribe without the ability to test any of their claims.

Then why science "can't explain the existence of life and why science can't explain if where did the evolution begins". That can simply tell us that science can't explain everything. Just imagine how did they concluded that we came from apes based on charles darwin's theory yet he cannot explain the core of evolution that he presented.

If we came from apes then where did the ape came from? From the fussil? Where did the fussil came from? So basically science cannot dig in deeper to that which makes science not completely rational IMO.

I just hate the fact that people thinks that science is perfect which is obviously not.

Everytime I ask some atheist to why science can't just simply explains everything they will always tells me that because science is still progressing. Lol seriously? That is just a pure common sense that because there is someone who created everything

[BADecker]

When we apply real DMT science to religion, aren't we turning science into religion?

No, science is hypothesizing that Moses hallucinated via known mechanisms.  This is based on the facts which I already presented.  There is no request to "take it on faith" or any of that jazz.  I presented facts and evidence.  The evidence I presented could be tested by anyone.

That's the whole point of science.  You can test it for yourself.  Unlike religion, where you are asked to trust the writings of an ancient desert dwelling tribe without the ability to test any of their claims.

Hypothesizing is not what you are doing when you say that a religious person did something. Are you now stating that you don't really know what Moses did, and that you were making up a story about what he might have done?

Why didn't you say your were talking science fiction, right from the start? After all, hypotheses are not know to be facts. So, you contradict yourself, and right in the same, short paragraph.

In addition, the evidence you presented could not be tested on Moses and the burning bush. Or do you actually have time travel?

You are kinda outside thinking ability, aren't you.

[Spendulus]

....

Moses was mentally ill because he 'heard" God talking to him or he made the whole thing up just to gain power over other poor schmucks.

We have plenty of "Moses like" conditions in mental hospitals today.  Mentally ill people claim all kinds of unbelievable things, and when you talk to them they sound very intelligent and well spoken; and yet they are insane.

Medicine has made progress in the last 2000 years so we can identify these conditions.  Back in Moses times, nobody knew what paranoia or schizophrenia is and how to identify it.

You are using these terms loosely and not in the correct sense scientifically. You're likely looking for "paranoid schizophenia."

I have not seen evidence of paranoid schizophrenia in the handed down reports of behavior of Moses.

People in mental hospitals ..... let's just say that they are the extremes of the spectrum of mental illness. Today, most are at home taking drugs, which control their illness until they forget to take them, and then perhaps they go shoot up a Schoo.

LOL.  Having hallucinations and delusions is a textbook example of schizophrenia.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml

He did have delusion/hallucination of talking to God.   So the only question is how severe were his symptoms.

No, those are not "textbook examples." Schizo. is defined by disassociation of cognitive patterns primarily. Halluc. / delusions can have many causations.

Have you ever known or associated with such people?

[Spendulus]

.....
I worked with a guy who was later diagnosed with schizophrenia.  Really smart guy, real genius, nobody knew he had mental issues.
He was undoubtedly the smartest guy on my team.  Then he had a breakdown/episode, and was hospitalized.

We visited him in a hospital, he was half a man after all the drugs they were feeding him, hard to say if what he was saying was due to drugs or his condition.  He wondered, could not recognize half of the people who visited him.  He was talking nonsense about his girlfriend in Sweden, that she will come to visit him next week, shit like that.  He never had a girlfriend, nor been to Sweden.

Years later he was released, I saw him on linkedin, he was working as an IT manager.  Then he disappeared again.
 

Wow. Okay, you know then. It's a tragic thing.

Where I was coming from really, was more like being unable to relate (what we know of ) the behavior, thoughts and writing of Moses with people I have known that had various mental conditions including schizophrenia.

But as you know, the guy could have been totally sane and then turned.

[o_e_l_e_o]

LOL.  Having hallucinations and delusions is a textbook example of schizophrenia.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml

He did have delusion/hallucination of talking to God.   So the only question is how severe were his symptoms.

No, those are not "textbook examples." Schizo. is defined by disassociation of cognitive patterns primarily. Halluc. / delusions can have many causations.

Have you ever known or associated with such people?

Schnieder's First Rank Symptoms for schizophrenia include both auditory hallucinations and primary delusions.

Similarly, both hallucinations and delusions are among the DSM-V list of symptoms required for a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

Yes, there are other causes, but af_newbie is right - hallucinations and delusions are literally textbook schizophrenia.

[Atlantic12]

Science is rooted in evidence-base that is experimentation and observation. But religion is based on beliefs and faith.So they are two different phenomena altogether.

[Spendulus]

LOL.  Having hallucinations and delusions is a textbook example of schizophrenia.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/schizophrenia/index.shtml

He did have delusion/hallucination of talking to God.   So the only question is how severe were his symptoms.

No, those are not "textbook examples." Schizo. is defined by disassociation of cognitive patterns primarily. Halluc. / delusions can have many causations.

Have you ever known or associated with such people?

Schnieder's First Rank Symptoms for schizophrenia include both auditory hallucinations and primary delusions.

Similarly, both hallucinations and delusions are among the DSM-V list of symptoms required for a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

Yes, there are other causes, but af_newbie is right - hallucinations and delusions are literally textbook schizophrenia.

They do NOT in and of themselves permit a diagnosis of scizophrenia.

Let's take a look at the symptoms.

https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/schizophrenia/what-is-schizophrenia

Positive psychotic symptoms: Hallucinations, such as hearing voices, paranoid delusions and exaggerated or distorted perceptions, beliefs and behaviors.

Negative symptoms: A loss or a decrease in the ability to initiate plans, speak, express emotion or find pleasure.

Disorganization symptoms: Confused and disordered thinking and speech, trouble with logical thinking and sometimes bizarre behavior or abnormal movements.

Impaired cognition: Problems with attention, concentration, memory and declining educational performance.

So with Moses you have the first but not the other three?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Schnieder's First Rank Symptoms for schizophrenia include both auditory hallucinations and primary delusions.

Similarly, both hallucinations and delusions are among the DSM-V list of symptoms required for a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

Yes, there are other causes, but af_newbie is right - hallucinations and delusions are literally textbook schizophrenia.

They do NOT in and of themselves permit a diagnosis of scizophrenia.

Yes they do.

The DSM V criteria is two or more of the following, and at least one of them must be 1, 2, or 3:

• Delusions
• Hallucinations
• Disorganized speech
• Grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior
• Negative symptoms, such as diminished emotional expression
  

So delusions and hallucinations together would be enough for a diagnosis provided other causes had been excluded.

[Spendulus]

.....

So delusions and hallucinations together would be enough for a diagnosis provided other causes had been excluded.

We're pretty much in agreement if you read what I said.

Who has excluded other causes?

[Moloch]

When we apply real DMT science to religion, aren't we turning science into religion?

No, science is hypothesizing that Moses hallucinated via known mechanisms.  This is based on the facts which I already presented.  There is no request to "take it on faith" or any of that jazz.  I presented facts and evidence.  The evidence I presented could be tested by anyone.

That's the whole point of science.  You can test it for yourself.  Unlike religion, where you are asked to trust the writings of an ancient desert dwelling tribe without the ability to test any of their claims.

Then why science "can't explain the existence of life and why science can't explain if where did the evolution begins". That can simply tell us that science can't explain everything. Just imagine how did they concluded that we came from apes based on charles darwin's theory yet he cannot explain the core of evolution that he presented.

If we came from apes then where did the ape came from? From the fussil? Where did the fussil came from? So basically science cannot dig in deeper to that which makes science not completely rational IMO.

I just hate the fact that people thinks that science is perfect which is obviously not.

Everytime I ask some atheist to why science can't just simply explains everything they will always tells me that because science is still progressing. Lol seriously? That is just a pure common sense that because there is someone who created everything

Nobody says science is perfect...

When science doesn't know the answer, scientists say, "I don't know", which is a much better answer than religious people pulling an answer out of their ass...

I'd rather have someone say, "I don't know" than claim to have an answer they don't have, with no evidence to back up their claim.

If you want to know about evolution and where apes came from, google it... science has those answers... science can trace the path of human evolution for a billion years, basically since we were bacteria.  There is enough evidence to convince anyone if you simple look (obviously you have not looked)

If you are truly interested (you did ask the question after all), here is a video series by Aron Ra explaining it all to you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXQP_R-yiuw&list=PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW

Aron has compiled a series of 34 videos so far, tracing human evolution from bacteria to the current day... after 34 videos, he is almost up to where humans evolved... almost

Why would you even expect science to have every answer to every question?  Is that a reasonable expectation?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Science knows it doesn't know everything, because otherwise, it would stop.


The Ancestor's Tale by Dawkins is also a great resource. It follows human evolution all the back to the origin a life. A great read for any one interested.

[BADecker]

When we apply real DMT science to religion, aren't we turning science into religion?

No, science is hypothesizing that Moses hallucinated via known mechanisms.  This is based on the facts which I already presented.  There is no request to "take it on faith" or any of that jazz.  I presented facts and evidence.  The evidence I presented could be tested by anyone.

That's the whole point of science.  You can test it for yourself.  Unlike religion, where you are asked to trust the writings of an ancient desert dwelling tribe without the ability to test any of their claims.

Then why science "can't explain the existence of life and why science can't explain if where did the evolution begins". That can simply tell us that science can't explain everything. Just imagine how did they concluded that we came from apes based on charles darwin's theory yet he cannot explain the core of evolution that he presented.

If we came from apes then where did the ape came from? From the fussil? Where did the fussil came from? So basically science cannot dig in deeper to that which makes science not completely rational IMO.

I just hate the fact that people thinks that science is perfect which is obviously not.

Everytime I ask some atheist to why science can't just simply explains everything they will always tells me that because science is still progressing. Lol seriously? That is just a pure common sense that because there is someone who created everything

Nobody says science is perfect...

When science doesn't know the answer, scientists say, "I don't know", which is a much better answer than religious people pulling an answer out of their ass...

I'd rather have someone say, "I don't know" than claim to have an answer they don't have, with no evidence to back up their claim.

If you want to know about evolution and where apes came from, google it... science has those answers... science can trace the path of human evolution for a billion years, basically since we were bacteria.  There is enough evidence to convince anyone if you simple look (obviously you have not looked)

If you are truly interested (you did ask the question after all), here is a video series by Aron Ra explaining it all to you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXQP_R-yiuw&list=PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW

Aron has compiled a series of 34 videos so far, tracing human evolution from bacteria to the current day... after 34 videos, he is almost up to where humans evolved... almost

Why would you even expect science to have every answer to every question?  Is that a reasonable expectation?

Science has to be perfect. If we run a DC current through water, and use the same current and the same cind of water every time, we have to get the same result every time. Science is perfect.

[BADecker]

Science knows it doesn't know everything, because otherwise, it would stop.


The Ancestor's Tale by Dawkins is also a great resource. It follows human evolution all the back to the origin a life. A great read for any one interested.

Great sci-fi story.   

[darklus123]

Nobody says science is perfect...
When science doesn't know the answer, scientists say, "I don't know", which is a much better answer than religious people pulling an answer out of their ass...

Exactly they can't answer everything  then the last thing you can think is there "might" or should" be someone who created everything and that is where the religion start to take actions.

I'd rather have someone say, "I don't know" than claim to have an answer they don't have, with no evidence to back up their claim.

Are you talking about theist?

If you want to know about evolution and where apes came from, google it... science has those answers... science can trace the path of human evolution for a billion years, basically since we were bacteria.  There is enough evidence to convince anyone if you simple look (obviously you have not looked)



If you are truly interested (you did ask the question after all), here is a video series by Aron Ra explaining it all to you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXQP_R-yiuw&list=PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW

Aron has compiled a series of 34 videos so far, tracing human evolution from bacteria to the current day... after 34 videos, he is almost up to where humans evolved... almost

I haven't watch the video yet but ok lets assume that this person is right. Did he explain where did the bacteria came from?

Why would you even expect science to have every answer to every question?  Is that a reasonable expectation?

Because it is also not reasonable to assume that a creator never existed based on the fact that not all things are explainable.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Science knows it doesn't know everything, because otherwise, it would stop.


The Ancestor's Tale by Dawkins is also a great resource. It follows human evolution all the back to the origin a life. A great read for any one interested.

Great sci-fi story.    

And there it is. There's the difference between science and religion:

Science - "here's a fully researched, peer reviewed, cross checked 800 page book laying out, in detail, the evolutionary tree of humans, with so much evidence that no sane person could doubt it".

Religion (without even reading the book) - "I'm not listening LALALALA".

This sums it up so perfectly. Logic and reason against irrationality and ignorance.