Quote:

"Science doesn't know the cause for phenomenon X. My religion knows the cause for X: it's a god. My religion obviously gives an answer where science has none. Thus I don't understand why scientists are so narrow minded that they are not content with god as the cause for X and are still looking for another cause."



No, my problem is that they've turned science into absolute idiocy.

Science used to deal with only the observed, and if something couldn't be directly observed, its effects at least had to be directly observable. If science went beyond that, at least it would be admitted, and they wouldn't shove conjecture down our throats as fact.

Radiation and red shift does not automatically mean the big bang is fact. The big bang is just an idea based off of these two observations. Nowhere in science does the big bang automatically replace God. If I assume that God created the universe generally the way we see it now, then I could make the exact same observations, and come to the wrong conclusion that it started with a big bang. Don't get me wrong, I don't think its wrong to hypothesize an alternative, but just because its been hypothesized doesn't mean it should then automatically turn into fact.

Furthermore, there are far too many problems with the big bang theory, despite that the problems are never brought up, and the big bang is still discussed as fact.

The big bang requires cosmic evolution in order to acheive the state that its at right now. Yet this is in an even more dire state than biological evolution because we never even see cosmic reproduction. So should I just accept that it happens on faith? I don't get what the difference between your faith and my faith is. Except that yours doesn't offend you with a god.

Furthermore, scientists are finally willing to admit that there was something before the big bang. In other words, they've finally caved to the objections that theists have made for years. The Big Bang cannot occur out of nowhere. So this more primordial state of the universe, where did that come from? Furthermore, if this pre-universe is an assumption based on an assumption, why don't you or other scientists admit that?

You haven't given certain alternatives to God. You've simply given possible alternatives to God. Why should I abandon God when you don't even know for sure what happened. And the fact is the only reason you're sure it happened that way, is because you know God didn't do it. You can't allow for God anywhere in the picture.

Quote:

Science began at the state of knowing nothing. The cause for everything was "a god". If we had left it at that, we'd still live on trees. The beginning of science was the very thing you're complaining about: Not accepting "a god" for an answer anymore, and looking further.



That's the problem of science then, because even early followers of God (like way way back in the day...shortly after we believe the earth was created) knew better.



From what I can see, your argument sounds like this. "Some idiots a long time ago thought that there was a giant hand in the sky that moved the sun, but now we know better. Since then, we've made a lot of really great, unverifiable guesses to a lot of other things. So eventually we can make some educated guesses based on other guesses to eventually lead us to a possible cause that excludes God. In which case we'll know for sure it happened that way."

Quote:

Your god is out of the universe and out of time and space. He has no resorts in nature anymore.




His existence is, but how does that mean He can't make Himself a part of the universe.


Basically atheists have the monopoly on what unverifiable, and wildly imaginative (though mathematically correct) guesses can be made about the universe. But that doesn't mean they're 100% correct. I think what offends people like you so much is that unlike the other namby pamby religions who tickle scientific egos by caving in, we point out that the fact of the matter is you don't know for sure. And you never will. There are some answers science cannot definitively know. And it never will know. You can call guesses factual all you want, but it doesn't change anything.

Furthermore, if all scientists were theists, we would probably admit that the more we look at the universe, the more it looks like there's a creator.


The problem isn't that science has replaced God for all the answers, its that it doesn't have all the answers but we're constantly told it does. Scientists are trying to push science beyond its limits, because it appears the ultimate goal isn't discovery (if it was then they wouldn't care about something they'll never know for sure anyway), but to replace God with nature.

Last edited by Irish_Farmer; 06/04/06 19:00.
"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."