Quote:
Originally Posted by wildsage  Black holes were postulated, and their effects were observed, and though they themselves have not been seen, everyone who reviews the facts about them agrees that they exist. There are numerous theories about various aspects of them but to dispute the existence of black holes in the face of the gathered factual data is ludicrous. |
Their effects have been observed from billions of light years away. Call me a pessimist but how do you prove “observed” effects from billions of light years away? Either way, I’m not disputing their existence anymore than I am disputing the existence of God. I’m simply saying, shy of concrete physical proof, both require a certain level of faith to believe they exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildsage Science is a rigid process where a hypothesis (belief) is tested and supporting evidence establishes it as a theory; a theory must be predictive and logical and consistent and stand up to the scrutiny of unbiased individuals. Religion is none of those things. Every major theism disputes the validity of the others (and sects dispute teachings of other believers within their own theology) and none of them can provide evidence to the contrary. By definition, Christian theism requires acceptance of claims that are inconsistent with natural, observable laws. |
You mean the kind of rigidity that science just knew the earth was flat, or the earth was the center of the universe or what Hawking held about his theory that matter breaks down when entering a black hole? He was so sure he was right that it nearly tore that scientific community in half. When you are talking about applying man-made math, created based on rules limited to earth, to events in deep space it all breaks down when you can actually prove, through absolute physical evidence, these events are real adn suddenly they turn out quite different.
And I agree that a belief in God is inconsistent with natural, observable laws. Until the scientific community can open its mind to the possibility of the existence of a spiritual plane, the concept of a God will always stand outside what is believed to be our laws of nature.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildsage The established church fervently embraced geocentrism once (thank the FSM that it is no longer accepted as "fact"). Though science "proved" heliocentrism, it was centuries before it was directly observed but that does not make it any less true today than it was in Galileo's time or even King Tut's.
Modern theists chuckle that primitive people believed that their god(s) caused X, because science has since proved that Y causes X and everyone knows that God created Y. So when scientific advancement proves that Y is caused by Z, the believers claim that God created Z.
Stated another way, “we don’t know, so I choose to accept on faith the myths of my religious doctrine.” And that’s fine if you need faith in the supernatural; some of us choose more tangible evidence on which to base our beliefs. |
The one event that science has yet to disprove is that life was created. They have not even come close to determing how life came to be. It’s like the big bang, you may say it happened but that doesn’t answer the question as to how it got there. Science says “we don’t know” to how life came to be, so they cling to myths like Darwinism. Our lives are full of myths that we cling to to give us reason and satiate that desire to answer “how”. Science doesn’t prove to me that there was a big bang just because some really smart physicist can string together a bunch of numbers. Those same numbers (that man created) wont convince me that life just sprang up out of spontaneous chemical reactions. There are no numbers that you can crunch together that will explain how we feel emotions and have the ability to think and reason. So your whole lecture about my faith being a myth doesn’t change a thing for me. What is a myth to you is reality to me and billions of others; and just the same on the other hand.