Religion v.s. science? | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 276 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613472
Today 10
Topics 127501
  
 
Messageboard index
Religion v.s. science?
 

offline TroutMask from New York City (United States) on 2010-01-21 17:19 [#02361029]
Points: 472 Status: Regular | Followup to mohamed: #02360861



I don't care what's best for society. I care about what's
best for me, and it would be entirely immoral for me
to think otherwise.

Nevertheless, destruction is harmful for human survival if
it is a human that is being destroyed. (Being precise is not
the same as being an idiot, mohamed, but nice try). On a
more macro scale, it is harmful if it is done contrary to
the rational self-interest (meaning: if it is performed as
an initial aggression against another innocent human being)
of the destroyers.

The atom bomb was a poorly-implemented strategy of the US
military that treated life cheaply. Though it is not
technically a free nation's responsibility to worry about
the casualties on the opposing side, it was an unnecessary
muscle to flex, and did not really contribute to the
Japanese surrender days later. That doesn't mean all
destruction is contrary to human survival.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-21 18:38 [#02361041]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



infinite truth about jusis


 

offline MAXIMUSMISCHIEF from Canada on 2010-01-22 01:09 [#02361066]
Points: 128 Status: Lurker



no matter what you believe, it comes down to faith. science
is never going to be able to prove or disprove the existence
of god, so there is no point in arguing it.

people like to get really passionate about their hatred and
disdain for people with opposite beliefs but it shows a lot
more about them than it does the people theyre talking
about.

what you need to do is learn to respect everyone no matter
what their beliefs are, try to see things from their point
of view, without your negative/hateful bias, and realize
that they have just as much reason to believe in their thing
as you do, maybe even more.


 

offline JivverDicker from my house on 2010-01-22 01:16 [#02361067]
Points: 12102 Status: Regular | Followup to MAXIMUSMISCHIEF: #02361066



When you say "respect everyone no matter what their beliefs
are", you are including paedophiles, rapists and IDM
promoters?


 

offline Descent from the salt of Satan's sweat. (United Kingdom) on 2010-01-22 01:52 [#02361070]
Points: 2298 Status: Addict | Followup to JivverDicker: #02361067



The only way Gary Glitter can get any less popular is if he
starts making Intelligent Glam Music.


 

offline Descent from the salt of Satan's sweat. (United Kingdom) on 2010-01-22 01:55 [#02361071]
Points: 2298 Status: Addict | Followup to Descent: #02361070



Rock and Snare Rolls (Part 2)


 

offline MAXIMUSMISCHIEF from Canada on 2010-01-22 02:06 [#02361074]
Points: 128 Status: Lurker



no but you are very good at twisting things. if someone
believes in god, dont hate them for it. thats all.


 

offline Fah from Netherlands, The on 2010-01-22 05:32 [#02361083]
Points: 6428 Status: Regular | Followup to MAXIMUSMISCHIEF: #02361074



I feel he has all the right to dislike someone religious.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-22 05:40 [#02361089]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to MAXIMUSMISCHIEF: #02361074



What if someone's belief in God entails denying your right
to contraception, to dressing as you please, loving whom you
will, reading what you wish, and speaking your mind?

"prominent advocates of Christian Reconstructionism have
written that according to their understanding, God's law
approves of the death penalty not only for murder, but also
for propagators of idolatry[3][4][5], active homosexuals[6],
adulterers, practitioners of witchcraft, and blasphemers[7],
and perhaps even recalcitrant youths[8] (see the List of
capital crimes in the Bible)."


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-22 05:42 [#02361093]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



Fuck the skull of Jesus.

I can say that and laugh because I don't live in a
country run by god-fags.


 

offline Monoid from one source all things depend on 2010-01-25 07:28 [#02361847]
Points: 11007 Status: Regular | Followup to glasse: #02360882



THE PROBLEM IS NOT THAT THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY HAS SOME
FLAWS, OR INCONSESTNESIES. THE PROBLEM IS THAT INTELLIGENT
DESIGN DOES NOT EXPLAIN ANYTHING. CUZ TO DO SO, YOU HAVE TO
EXPLAIN HOW 'GOD' EXACTLY WORKS, AND THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

GET IT! IF YOU SMUGGLE 'GOD' INTO THE EXISTING SCIENTIFIC
DISCOURSE, YOU HAVE AN EXPLANATION FOR EVERYTHING :

GOD - EXPLAINS EVERYTHING!

THE CONSEQUNCE WOULD BE, THAT SCIENCE AND HUMAN PROGRESS
WOULD BECOME IMPOSSIBLE! WHY BOTHER RESEARCHING IF YOU KNOW
THAT 'GOD' IS RESPONSSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING?

YOU COULD JUST PRAY TO GOD! NO NEED FOR MEDICAL OR
TECHNOlOGiCAL INTERVENTIONS!

GE IT? GET IT? THATS WHY SCIENCE RELIES ON NATURALISM,
FALLIBILISM, SKEPTiCISM, ONTOLOGICAL REALISM, AND OKKHAMS
RAZOR!


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2010-01-25 10:25 [#02361864]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Followup to fleetmouse: #02361089 | Show recordbag



look i understand the problem of postmillennialism, the
family, the catholic church and all that. bear in mind that
no where in the new testament does Jesus call for a
theocratic, earthly rule post old testament israel, or prior
to His actual return. quite the opposite really, in the
world but not of the world, obey the earthly rulers so long
as they don't contradict me, and so on. of course that
doesn't mean that no christian group should be involved in
any sort of lobbying at all, because i think it is
appropriate to a degree. i don't see anyone complaining
about the type of lobbying groups like the ACLU do, or what
they try to force on people. forcing a christian owned mom
and pop copy store to accept satanic or pornographic copy
work they tried to refuse because of free speech or
whatever; going as far as to have once said porno should be
allowed to be shown on airplanes. crazy stuff like that,
and when morality is completely subjective and thus lost,
who will there be to stop it and on what grounds?

keep in mind that also that you could use your same logic to
say, well hitler was bad, stalin was bad, george w bush did
some bad stuff, so i am going have to say that having a
person as the main ruler is bad and maybe governments in
general are also bad. if you think it through you know it's
not true and what are you would be left with is anarchy.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-25 18:01 [#02361981]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



Ah, the three central figures of American Christian
theology: Hitler, porn and the ACLU.

When you get tired of repeating scare stories from Focus on
the Family, maybe you can hit the bong and have a nice wank
to relax, because you are the most porn-obsessed xltronician
besides Hanal, and he's a porn star so he has an excuse.


 

offline freqy on 2010-01-25 18:03 [#02361984]
Points: 18724 Status: Regular | Show recordbag




science is god. you have to obey.

freqy hath spoken .


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-25 18:09 [#02361985]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to freqy: #02361984



I love your Ponyo avy! Still haven't watched it tho (no
splrz plz)


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-25 19:24 [#02362019]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



Hey, if you see a Scientology ad on this page, click it.
Every click transfers a small amount of money away from
Scientology to Google and Phobiazero. It's better than
spitting at Tom Cruise!


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-25 22:13 [#02362052]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



So as long as one rejects the desire for metaphysical
curiousity, it's completely justified to act like a
mongoloid asshole. check.


 

offline ftc from Australia on 2010-01-26 05:54 [#02362069]
Points: 235 Status: Regular



religion vs science... no not compatible... the definition
of faith is believing in something with no evidence. that's
the opposite of science.

based on science the earth has been around for many millions
of years, if any of the sky wizard theories were correct and
care about whether the people believe them, then why does
each religion only last a few thousand years at the most.
surely if one of them were right we are either meant to know
about it, or not know about it. if we're meant to know
about it, then why limit it to the people born in the areas
preaching it, also why not show more evidence, how could that hurt?

if we're not meant to know about 'the religion', then surely
we wouldn't. either way, to believe in a magical sky wizard
that created the earth is to believe that he/she was just
sitting around bored for a few eleventy-five trillion years
being bored with their blank canvas, so they made like a
universe or some shit. where did the sky wizard come from
to begin with? they must have been bored for that time pre
humans.

even if they do exist, i'm sure they're not some petty 4
year old toddler that feels hurt if people don't follow some
wacky rituals in special buildings with the correct old
skool decorations based on some arbitrary year. why the
fuck would he/she care?

on caring, why would they care if we don't believe they exist when there is
no actual evidence? (watch the last 45 seconds of that
video). surely ye ole sky wizard wants us to use the brain
we're born with. we use our senses to do shit every day.
if we got to the gates i doubt they'd have a cry that we
didn't believe in something from an old fable book.



 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 06:11 [#02362073]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



monoid is a troll. trying to set up the community against
each other.

furthermore he's a classic troll, because of the themes he
chooses to do so with


 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 06:12 [#02362074]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



false dichotomy, yes


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2010-01-26 06:24 [#02362075]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



bottom line is this, if God is real, or even any gods for
that matter, then of course science and faith would be
compatible. science would by the set of means and tools
that man would use to observe the world that the higher
being created. in theory, if your science was good enough,
you could test all the way to heaven, nirvana, or whatever
we are going to say is real in this scenario, and see it to
be objectively true.

if God or any gods were not real, then of course they would
not be compatible. religion is a fairy tale made up by
people to deal with what they don't understand, or to deny
that reality is random chance, in which case there is
nothing to test. you could only test the phenomena by which
people came up with such beliefs, socially, psychologically,
etc.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 06:26 [#02362077]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to ftc: #02362069



4 year old toddler? they don't have the capacity to have
deep thoughts about historical or scientific evidence. thats
the point of them being young, they are ignorant to adult
problems. but they have a fresh understanding on the
preciousness of life. debate all you want but spirituality
has no bearing in a scientific debate anyway, it's like
saying "red vs, blue, which one is better/right."


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2010-01-26 06:28 [#02362078]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



Science will always exist, organised religion may not.

As far as one can gather from living in a Western democratic
country, religion is becoming less and less accepted as a
belief system with agnostic and aethestic beliefs rapidly
increasing.

I would imagine they will continue to increase through the
generations as society becomes wealthier and more secure in
itself, thus kicking away the psychological crutches that
religion feeds on for its very survival.

As religion becomes increasingly redundant, it will no
longer be able to sustain itself financially and the entire
model will collapse. Already it is struggling, continually
having to modify itself in order to co-exist with the wants
of modern society.

As certain cultures are more refined, better educated and
wealthier than others, the speed of that adaptation will be
determined by region. In Western society religion could be
all but wiped out within 200 years as the anti-relgious
thinking of man becomes a persuasive ulterior. People will
turn their back on religion rather then feel ridiculed and
outcast. Everybody wants to belong, and the majority find
security in belonging no matter what the thought process.

In poor, badly educated countries whose people continued to
be thought controlled, organised religion will doubtless
continue unabated. I would imagine this will only increased
the divide.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 06:59 [#02362081]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



i believe that the sciences, if utilized rationally and
environemntally instead of for the status of power of
nations and destruction. earthly harmony could be achieved,
and the only threat humans would face in having dominion
over this planet would be outside forces like asteroids and
other advanced lifeforms. in our lifetimes, we will never as
a race, experience a functional global utopian society.
which is why spirituality has its place. people arent
willingly being being falsely led, if they knew truth,
almost all would search for a greater more fulfilling truth
in other areas. like an ex-religious individual who
discovers science.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2010-01-26 08:33 [#02362093]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker | Followup to pulseclock: #02362081



There's no such thing as truth, it has no fixed point -
there is only ideas, yet these constant comparisons create
the very dichotomy that prevents the freedom and harmony you
speak of whether religious or otherwise.

I might not know what truth is, but I know what truth is not
- it's not organised religion that's for sure.

Humans first have to accept the limitations of thought, as
it's entirely useless within the psychological/intellectual
realm. As long as though is misused it will continue to
create complete havoc.

It's a race against time as to whether human thinking can
mature into a beneficial tool or simply destroy everything
around it. My betting is the latter.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 13:21 [#02362131]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02362093



well truth by definition is 'a fact that has been
verified'.

You can go on and on about, which words don't really mean
anything
, but they do matter when not speaking
meta-philosophically. I am just expressing the thoughts i am
assembling from electrical reactions in my brain, who knows
if that is even 'true'. But I do agree that humanity has
already thrown in the towel where the earth's concerned.
Humans prefer to rely on their basic animalistic instincts
in compliance with their prideful ignorance over their
capacity to understand what they really are as a progressive
organism.


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-01-26 13:36 [#02362135]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



Barcode debunked :D


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2010-01-26 13:51 [#02362140]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker | Followup to pulseclock: #02362131



Of course words matter when not speaking philosophically - I
already said that, accept the limitations of thought.

You need do use language for the basic necessities in life;
anything above that, within the so-called "spiritual"
sphere, is meaningless.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 14:02 [#02362144]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02362140



But i am not trying to involve spirituality with 'meaning'
as you choose to see it here, the point i'm making is that
spirituality has value because of the current state of human
life on this planet. Not the state that you see as what
humans are in denial of. Spirituality, to me, does not mean
religion, whatsoever. They are two different things that are
connected only by historical postulations. Spirituality, to
me, is the ability to understand the life force, the overall
process of life, death, birth, recycling energies,
individual entities. If a human, like yourself, does not
choose to see itself as spiritual, well then it sees itself
as animal. This is obvious, but not the DEFINITIVE quality
of a human being. We are not greater or better or smaller
than any other organism, but we do have the ability to
communicate as a society, this matters.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2010-01-26 15:10 [#02362160]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



The definitive quality of a human being is an animal. Eat.
Fuck. Die. Anything else your brain dreams up and
superimposes on top of that is shit. Why do you believe
thought has any significance? It doesn't. You may give it
significance but that doesn't mean it has significance. Does
a cow have spirituality? Does it care about "life force" -
whatever the fuck that is? If so-called intelligent life did
not exist would there be a "life force"? There would be
nobody there to dream it up. Your body doesn't need it to
function, and it doesn't need the idea of it either. It
chucks out all that shit that thoughts invent. You exhibit
that through stress just like your rectum chucks out the
food it doesn't need.

Your life is an hallucination. Everything you experience is
second hand, every thought put there by others. Thought has
enabled you to play games with it, overcome the hideous
boredom. But you have to take it to the next level, dream up
shit about spirituality. Stick to your Xbox. That's about as
spiritual as life gets.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 15:20 [#02362163]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02362160



You're a condesending drone like the rest of the fuckin POOR
ME people who can't envision anything beyond your immediate
surroundings.

A cow can't express its thoughts through words you idiot, it
has nowhere near the brain faculty. Read up on your
'science' before you attack people with misplaced anger.
Saying shit about Xbox, when you're the one on a dumbass
mission attempting to berate people over an electronic music
messageboard. It's better to be a dumb fish in a bowl full
of smart ones than a smart one in bowl full of dumb fish.
You choose the latter because your crying for acceptance.

Stick to your U.G. that's as animal as you can seem to
understand.

'Your life is a hallucination'

Go back to the fucking matrix.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 15:37 [#02362169]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



Why does no one else feel inclined to back me up here? Or
atleast back Barcode up if he's more in line with what i'm
trying to prove here.

I hate these arguments with Barcode, thank god i have
hobbies.


 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 15:44 [#02362172]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Followup to pulseclock: #02362169 | Show recordbag



i don't really want to read this

why do you start fighting right after i warned? did you want
to prove me wrong?


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 15:50 [#02362173]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to big: #02362172



I get it that Barcode is just trying to 'keep it real', but
he's on XLT with an avatar of a dog with a dildo in its
mouth. How can anyone else not see that for what it is? I am
just happy that i'm not as dried-up, maybe it's age, maybe
i'm just more comfortable with my hallucinated life.
Whatever this is, it's eating at me, because it's like
talking to a mirror, the words just get self-analyzed while
talking to Barcode because he sees no meaning in reacting to
the points i mention, only that they continue to be an after
effect of a meaningless dream state.


 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 15:56 [#02362174]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Followup to pulseclock: #02362173 | Show recordbag



know that guys smarter than you have already powned people
like him in the past (other way around too), and forget
about this argument


 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 15:59 [#02362175]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



i mean what's there to argue about.

it's false dichotomy false dilemma, like glasse pointed out

sure religion caused a lot of suffering, but we'll never
know what would have happened without it. people couldn't
even do without is

sure science is great. but it created the h-bomb too. but
we'll never know how much happier we would have been
withtout it.

etc.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 16:02 [#02362177]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



right, i'm not as 'in tune' as i thought i was anyway. It
was just some wierd power struggle that Barcode was showing
me through his observations on what i've said, i accept
that. EMO


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-26 16:08 [#02362181]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to big: #02362073



Monoid is a purebred European Trollhound. We use him to
flush the quarry out of the bush so we can pick them off at
our leisure.



 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-01-26 16:14 [#02362184]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #02362181



what did you get out of that?


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-26 16:18 [#02362185]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to pulseclock: #02362184



You're taking all this shit entirely too seriously. No
trollo.


 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 17:11 [#02362194]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



i choose not to be a nihilist


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-01-26 17:24 [#02362196]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to big: #02362194



What a meaningless gesture.


 

offline big from lsg on 2010-01-26 17:28 [#02362197]
Points: 23624 Status: Regular | Followup to fleetmouse: #02362196 | Show recordbag



hadn't thought about it that way yet :/


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2010-01-26 18:16 [#02362216]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker | Followup to pulseclock: #02362177



Sorry if I was too aggressive - was not intentional to wind
you up. Don't ask people to back you up though, stand on
your own two feet. Who says what I say has to be right?
Question me, question everything.


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2010-01-26 18:17 [#02362218]
Points: 39977 Status: Lurker



jebus.


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-01-27 09:14 [#02362367]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



Science vs religion. It difficult to find something common,
exept that our culture is build on those two "things". Its
like day and night.


 

offline yann_g from now on 2010-01-27 18:10 [#02362591]
Points: 3772 Status: Lurker



religion is always irrelevant


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2010-01-27 18:14 [#02362597]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



so are opinions


 

offline yann_g from now on 2010-01-27 18:20 [#02362602]
Points: 3772 Status: Lurker



opinions can be relevant, but as you just proved it, not
always.


 

offline glasse from Harrisburg (United States) on 2010-01-27 18:31 [#02362605]
Points: 4211 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



of course they are relevant, which was the actual point, and
so is religion. whether or not the claims of a particular
religion are true, it is still relevant because it affects
culture and society, as has been pointed out numerous times
by our atheist friends.

do you believe islam is irrelevant?

pissing matches, however, are in fact irrelevant.


 


Messageboard index