aliens and god. a few questions-

[Glockmatic]

WTF? Whats wrong with that? you continue discovering things LOL. You either prove what the book said is true or prove that its false.

When people think the book is 100% true why would they try to prove it wrong?

If i said right now there is a similar solar system to ours far away and in this solar system there is a planet very much like Earth. and wrote a book about it. Am i preventing you from discovering this solar system? No, you go on trying to prove this solar system is true or not.

We can say that with any book. Do dwarves and elves and a world called Middle Earth exist? Can you prove it doesn't exist?

No i'm opening the door for science

No you're not because you already have your mind set on the answer, all evidence given to you will be looked upon with that bias.

Umm No, Its all resources and money buddy, Religion has fuck all to do with it

get 3 people who are equally as smart. a Muslim a Christian and a Non-believer, Give them the same resources they'd all impress us. religion or not.

keyword: SMART
Muslims couldn't learn more about the human anatomy because it was taboo to handle dead bodies. Hundreds of years without any advancment of anatomical knowledge because of religion.

Science can't prove or disprove God, but science can distinguish true from false from the many of things he has told us in his scripture about our world and our universe, so yes they can mix.

And what will that answer? Nothing, because there are many things in books that are wrong as well.

 

[Jokerman]

Thats not what my answer would be though. so discussion continues..

That might not be your literal answer, but your answer would basically come down to that. Discussion closed.

But this evidence would prove our faith to be true. so discussion continues. .

How does us surviving death prove your faith to be true? It wouldn't necessarily mean there was a God, a Heaven, or anything else your religion believes.

There are questions that science will never give us an answer to, Like what happens after we die for example.

Yeah, especially if nothing happens. That's like saying, science will never gives us the answer I want because it's simply not true. As if that somehow weakens science. However, if something does happen to us after we die, why won't science ever give us the answer? Science believes everything is energy. If any part of us survives, it will be in some form of energy that we've yet to discover. What's to stop us from discovering it? If it's there, it's discoverable. It's not like science has gone as far it it's going to go. However, religion has gone as far as it's going to. It knows all the answers.

 

[TecK NeeX]

When people think the book is 100% true why would they try to prove it wrong?

They're not trying to prove it wrong, you are.

We can say that with any book. Do dwarves and elves and a world called Middle Earth exist? Can you prove it doesn't exist?

Umm no, But that doesnt prevent someone from trying to prove that to be true or not. Like when you said religion stops us from discovering things since they already give us the ultimate answer.

No you're not because you already have your mind set on the answer, all evidence given to you will be looked upon with that bias.

No, the evidence wouldnt. LOL you seem to know me very well. how, i dont know. Like i said many times, Religion doesn't give us an answer to every god damn thing.

Muslims couldn't learn more about the human anatomy because it was taboo to handle dead bodies. Hundreds of years without any advancment of anatomical knowledge because of religion.

Because of religion? At one point people from every region of the world flocked to muslim countries unrivaled intellectual activity in all fields known at that time to educate themsleves while Islam was practiced more than any other point in time. Religion was very strong. What happend? Many things took place that put and end to advancement and knowledge, Islam was not one of them.

And what will that answer? Nothing, because there are many things in books that are wrong as well.

Not all books.

 

[TecK NeeX]

That might not be your literal answer, but your answer would basically come down to that. Discussion closed.

Not even close.

How does us surviving death prove your faith to be true? It wouldn't necessarily mean there was a God, a Heaven, or anything else your religion believes.

I didnt know surviving death was evidence of part of us still existing after we die.

Yeah, especially if nothing happens. That's like saying, science will never gives us the answer I want because it's simply not true. As if that somehow weakens science.

I never said that weakens science, I'm not against science.

However, if something does happen to us after we die, why won't science ever give us the answer? Science believes everything is energy. If any part of us survives, it will be in some form of energy that we've yet to discover. What's to stop us from discovering it? If it's there, it's discoverable. It's not like science has gone as far it it's going to go. However, religion has gone as far as it's going to. It knows all the answers.

If that happens, that also proves part of religion to be true since most religions tell us about spirits, jins etc, in other words 'energy'. So i dont see where you're going with this.

 

[Glockmatic]

They're not trying to prove it wrong, you are.

because i'm an athiest. Why would a religious person try to prove their book is wrong? That would mean there would be doubt in their own faith, they would only pick and choose which evidence would fit to prove that their book is right.

Umm no, But that doesnt prevent someone from trying to prove that to be true or not. Like when you said religion stops us from discovering things since they already give us the ultimate answer.

But there is nothing to test with the scientific theory (that we know of) to discover the ultimate answer. That doesn't make religion the answer.

No, the evidence wouldnt. LOL you seem to know me very well. how, i dont know. Like i said many times, Religion doesn't give us an answer to every god damn thing.

it gives you the answer to how man was created, so all evidence against that is incorrect to you because it goes against what you believe. I remember a post saying that life may have started in mud pools and a muslim poster said that was proof that the quran was right, see how things can be twisted to fit their beliefs?

Because of religion? At one point people from every region of the world flocked to muslim countries unrivaled intellectual activity in all fields known at that time to educate themsleves while Islam was practiced more than any other point in time. Religion was very strong. What happend? Many things took place that put and end to advancement and knowledge, Islam was not one of them.

Why did i know that this would be brought up? Once again, MUSLIMS MADE NO ADVANCEMENT IN HUMAN ANATOMY, they excelled in many other fields but in anatomy they made NO progress because they weren't allowed to.

Not all books.

i didn't know they had books written by robots yet

 

[ill-matic]

To actively argue the non-existence of a higher entity such as God you are effectively acknowledging his possible existence. Going as far as attempting to disprove his existence is also acknowledging that he does exist - enough to be the subject of discussion and debate.

Real non-believers do not acknowledge the existence of God. Essentially, athiests and so forth can't necessarily say "I do not believe in God" because that doesn't make sense. By saying you do not believe in something acknowledges the possibility it exists. Athiests are not like that - and neither are people who just don't "believe in God".

 

[TecK NeeX]

because i'm an athiest. Why would a religious person try to prove their book is wrong? That would mean there would be doubt in their own faith, they would only pick and choose which evidence would fit to prove that their book is right.

wtf are you talking about, really? When did i say religious people should try and prove their religion wrong?

But there is nothing to test with the scientific theory (that we know of) to discover the ultimate answer. That doesn't make religion the answer.

Again that shouldnt stop anyone from discovering things. jesus. regardless of what religions say.

it gives you the answer to how man was created, so all evidence against that is incorrect to you because it goes against what you believe. I remember a post saying that life may have started in mud pools and a muslim poster said that was proof that the quran was right, see how things can be twisted to fit their beliefs?

Just like how you reject evidence against evolution and accept anything that supports it, right? is that what you mean by twisting things to fit your beliefs?

Why did i know that this would be brought up? Once again, MUSLIMS MADE NO ADVANCEMENT IN HUMAN ANATOMY, they excelled in many other fields but in anatomy they made NO progress because they weren't allowed to.

There are many Islamic scientific manuscripts showing meticulous studies on human anatomy, Studies on human anatomy is not against Islam, however, some harsh clericalism did forbid such studies, not because it was against the religion

i didn't know they had books written by robots yet

Neither did i?

 

[Jokerman]

If that happens, that also proves part of religion to be true since most religions tell us about spirits, jins etc, in other words 'energy'. So i dont see where you're going with this.

How does the existence of one thing that might exist (an energy of our minds), which has a known model to start with (us), equal proof of the existence of the energy of something made up, in other words, for something there is no living model of: jinns, spirits. That's like saying since electricity (which is energy) exists, that proves spirits and jinns exist, in other words "energy."

I've noticed that your ability to think logically always stops at a certain point. Not surprising, with the religious mind.

 

[Hymnz]

if its from the recent years (6 years) i haven't watched it

it's the one where troy teaches billy about how meat is processed. it was made like 8 years ago, in the golden era...

i don't know.

yet you KNOW that we have a creator

i believe we have a creator...

They do not mix because one is based on facts while the other is based on faith. Science can say "we don't know", religion cannot

you actually quoted me saying "i don't know"

So we should fill the void of unknown with some higher being because we cannot answer it?

you are given POSSIBLE answers... religion is a choice.
some people believe the answers to be true, others do not. they are free to choose.
it is like believing in string theory. plenty of scientists dont like it, others welcome it as truth. not every religious person has the same beliefs. the same can be said for scientists.
both are similar in a way.

 

[TecK NeeX]

How does the existence of one thing that might exist (an energy of our minds), which has a known model to start with (us), equal proof of the existence of the energy of something made up, in other words, for something there is no living model of: jinns, spirits. That's like saying since electricity (which is energy) exists, that proves spirits and jinns exist, in other words "energy."

The model for spirits is us? These spirits are the souls of dead people, maybe? Which religion speaks of.

 

[TecK NeeX]

Questioner: "But there is some evidence that some part of us still exists

What evidence are you talkin about here anyway?

 

[Illuminattile]

To actively argue the non-existence of a higher entity such as God you are effectively acknowledging his possible existence. Going as far as attempting to disprove his existence is also acknowledging that he does exist - enough to be the subject of discussion and debate.

Real non-believers do not acknowledge the existence of God. Essentially, athiests and so forth can't necessarily say "I do not believe in God" because that doesn't make sense. By saying you do not believe in something acknowledges the possibility it exists. Athiests are not like that - and neither are people who just don't "believe in God".

Acknowledging an idea doesn't mean you accept that it might exist. I can tell a small child that there's no such thing as Santa Claus (and I regularly do, it's sort of a hobby), doesn't mean I accept that he might exist. You act as if people who don't believe in god should just pretend they've never even heard of him.

it is like believing in string theory. plenty of scientists dont like it, others welcome it as truth. not every religious person has the same beliefs. the same can be said for scientists.
both are similar in a way.

No it's not, because string theory is falsifiable. If someone disproved string theory, [most] scientists wouldn't still cling to it in spite of the evidence.

 

[Glockmatic]

wtf are you talking about, really? When did i say religious people should try and prove their religion wrong?

jesus christ are you fucking serious?

WTF? Whats wrong with that? you continue discovering things LOL. You either prove what the book said is true or prove that its false.

post #41.

Again that shouldnt stop anyone from discovering things. jesus. regardless of what religions say.

thats why i said "that we know of", we may find it, but should we fall back on a creator explanation? No

Just like how you reject evidence against evolution and accept anything that supports it, right? is that what you mean by twisting things to fit your beliefs?

Because the "evidence" given against evolution is refuted but is still used by creationists to use against evolution. There are dinosaur bones at Liberty University in the US that date back to 3000 years, should that be evidence that dinosaurs were around 3000 years ago? No, they used bad science and liked the number they got and now display it. Quite a disgrace to the scientific community.

There are many Islamic scientific manuscripts showing meticulous studies on human anatomy, Studies on human anatomy is not against Islam, however, some harsh clericalism did forbid such studies, not because it was against the religion

The only knowledge Europeans recieved from muslims about anatomy was passages of a greek named Galen in arabic of the anatomy of a dog (the originals were actually burned by because they were deemed heresy, good ol religion). No other knowledge of anatomy was transferred. It was not until a few hundred years later that we discovered that the middle of the foot had 7 bones.

Neither did i?

Well then a person must have written the quran then

 

[Jokerman]

What evidence are you talkin about here anyway?

This was a hypothetical questioner saying he knew of evidence, which is why I would be open to discussing it with him. That was the point of the whole thing, not whether there is evidence or not.

 

[Glockmatic]

What evidence are you talkin about here anyway?

people usually bring up the "Well people lose (insert number) kilograms when they die, so that must be how much a soul weighs"

 

[Jokerman]

The only knowledge Europeans recieved from muslims about anatomy was passages of a greek named Galen in arabic of the anatomy of a dog (the originals were actually burned by because they were deemed heresy, good ol religion). No other knowledge of anatomy was transferred. It was not until a few hundred years later that we discovered that the middle of the foot had 7 bones.

What about this:

http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/anatomy_of_mehfil.html

 

[TecK NeeX]

jesus christ are you fucking serious?

WTF? Whats wrong with that? you continue discovering things LOL. You either prove what the book said is true or prove that its false.

There are many verses in the Qur'an that instructs us to learn about achaelogoy, astronomy, nature, botany, geology, zoology and such. Islam encourages science, and what you discover will either support your religion or prove it wrong.

You seem to be confident that what this peson finds will prove his religion to be false. Get over yourself.

Because the "evidence" given against evolution is refuted but is still used by creationists to use against evolution. There are dinosaur bones at Liberty University in the US that date back to 3000 years, should that be evidence that dinosaurs were around 3000 years ago? No, they used bad science and liked the number they got and now display it. Quite a disgrace to the scientific community.

Yup just like the evidence given insupport of evolution is refuted but is still being used by evolutionists as evidence to support evolution. It goes both ways man.

The only knowledge Europeans recieved from muslims about anatomy was passages of a greek named Galen in arabic of the anatomy of a dog. No other knowledge of anatomy was transferred. It was not until a few hundred years later that we discovered that the middle of the foot had 7 bones.

And what does that have anything to do with religion being against the studies of human anatomy?

Well then a person must have written the quran then

And So?

This was a hypothetical questioner saying he knew of evidence, which is why I would be open to discussing it with him. That was the point of the whole thing, not whether there is evidence or not

But since there isn't, you are open to discussing theories thrown out without evidence yet not open to religious theories thrown around without evidence?

 

[Jokerman]

But since there isn't, you are open to discussing theories thrown out without evidence yet not open to religious theories thrown around without evidence?

Why do you keep twisting things so that it no longer resembles anything being discussed? In the hypothetical situation that questioner said he knew of evidence. I would be willing to hear him out. If it turned out he was mistaken, I would tell him so. If a religious person said he knew of evidence, I would be willing to discuss it with him. If he said his holy book tells him about it, there's nothing to discuss. What are you not getting?

 

[TecK NeeX]

Why do you keep twisting things so that it no longer resembles anything being discussed? In the hypothetical situation that questioner said he knew of evidence. I would be willing to hear him out. If it turned out he was mistaken, I would tell him so. If a religious person said he knew of evidence, I would be willing to discuss it with him. If he said his holy book tells him about it, there's nothing to discuss. What are you not getting?

You've just explained what I was not getting. Both discussions would stop without evidence

 

[Glockmatic]

There are many verses in the Qur'an that instructs us to learn about achaelogoy, astronomy, nature, botany, geology, zoology and such. Islam encourages science, and what you discover will either support your religion or prove it wrong.

You seem to be confident that what this peson finds will prove his religion to be false. Get over yourself.

No, I have confidence that person will try to prove that his/her religion is wrong to strengthen their belief. Will what they discover change their mind? Depends if the person can let go something or not

Yup just like the evidence given insupport of evolution is refuted but is still being used by evolutionists as evidence to support evolution. It goes both ways man.

Whats this evidence?

And what does that have anything to do with religion being against the studies of human anatomy?

You didn't copy/quote my edit, but I also added that the roman catholic church also burned the works of Galen because it was considered heresy. There is no doubt that anatomy was hampered in the muslim world when other sciences excelled. You said before that clericalism forbade such studies and religion has nothing to do with it, but these people went to these clerics (who study religion their whole lives) for answers and they told them not to do it. Religion has nothing to do with it how? And i don't mean "The books say you can't do it!" i mean how people interpret it, how the people at the top of the religious ladder dictate what people can or cannot do using religion.