I liked science and spend a lot of time on it when I was young, I even got a degree and a minor in two of them.  What turned me off is hypocritical sciences that we have today.  We have science that are very biased and seem to have some kind of agenda (social, political etc..).  If religion indoctrinate people so does so called science.  They present theory that they can't prove as facts.  When you look closely there are a lot of assumptions and maybe even errors.  But they don't want to be questioned.  Its like a herd mentality.  The sad part is that many scientist see that as well, but they are afraid to speak up.  I thought science was suppose to encourage questions?  Science has become science fiction or even a religion.

I think the main difference between String Theory and religion is that String Theory, like all science, was formulated as a tool to try to understand the actual universe, and attempts are being made every day to find evidence supporting it.  (Like you said, the Large Hadron Collider and similar works.)  Religion is formulated not as a tool to understand the physical universe, but as an attempt to imagine things outside of the universe.  For some it is an attempt to understand the universe, with gods being responsible for anything from thunder and lightning to the creation of human beings out of clay, but those ideas aren't what most people are talking about when they say their god is above science and provability.)  And there is no search for supporting evidence; in fact, after making up a religion and gaining a few followers, most preachers are happy to say that looking for proof is actually a bad thing, and that you should just have "faith" that they're right and everyone else is wrong.

I mean that every version of the gods that had them actually doing anything useful in the physical world has been disproven.  Originally, for example, Christian God lived up in the sky dome on a cloud and the world was flat with hell underneath.  God would poke holes in the sky dome where the stars were and rain would come through the dome from some water source above the flat earth.  Eventually people started studying the skies and the earth, figuring out that these things weren't true, and eventually, despite the Church murdering as many scientists as they could, people eventually had to accept that this version of God couldn't be real.  So those qualities were retconned to be "metaphors", but God still kept certain qualities: he had created man out of clay and a woman out of a rib and they hung around until a talking snake gave them an apple that made them smart and then they inbred and gave birth to the human race.  Eventually, people started to find holes in this story as well, and despite the Church murdering and silencing as many scientists as they could, the majority of people had to accept that this story wasn't true.  God was retconned so that those qualities were actually just "metaphors".  More and more, every physical quality that God was supposed to have, and every physical act that he was supposed to be responsible for, was proven to be false.  More and more of the Bible had to be interpreted as "metaphors".  We are now at a point where, at least in philosophical circles, even the religious people tend to admit that God doesn't actually affect the physical world in any noticable way, and has no actual physical qualities.  This new version of God is nothing like the original version: the old one was an actual physical guy who did things; the new one is more of a linguistics riddle and a vague happy feeling.

There are lots of non-religious moral philosophies.  The closest one to a religion would probably be "humanism", which actually has a sort of church of atheists.  But other than that there are moral systems like moral relativism, noncognitivism, emotivism, and utilitarianism.  These all accept, more or less, that there isn't One True Morality (this is objective morality, which is what major religions profess), but that there are various ways to interpret the moral impulse in people.  Personally, I'm sort of a noncognitivist: I don't think there really is such a thing as right and wrong; I only know that certain things make me feel sad or guilty or angry while others make me feel giving and supportive.  I study a situation and try to determine what I think is the most moral way to deal with it.  I realize that there is nothing objectively right or wrong, and that my morals are only my opinions, but I still act as ethically as I can under my own standards, and work to refine my ethical system as I learn more about the world and the people in it.

There are good things about it, but like I said, it seems like more of a shortcut.  People don't want to be bothered putting too much thought into the consequences of their actions, so they just follow a leader with a rulebook on life and assume that he's always right about everything.  I don't think our religions are quite as bad as the Advent yet.   But in my opnion, the best way to avoid Advent is to encourage a constant open-minded search for answers, rather than a close-minded faith that your chosen leader is right and the others are wrong.

He's speaking the truth. Like I said in a post one page back, science has taken on the job of giving people the certainty to know things. Even when we don't know something, scientists will not easily hesitate and just give some random answer that is based on sloppy science. I've seen that before and I come from that world. In physics, things aren't so bad yet, but social/medical sciences (the ones that have the most impact on our everyday life, I may add) have the tendency to do this. Especially statistical results often get misinterpreted. How often does it happen that some researcher looks for correlations between a certain disease and a certain lifestyle and then exclaims that you get cancer from this or that? More often than you want to believe, there is no causal relation at all (correlation =/= causality http://www.xkcd.com/552/). Especially if such evidence supports a certain political or economical agenda, scientic scrutiny can go right down the drain.

......

Does God Exists or Not?

This topic had been reposted and reposted all over again. In the concept and in Science knowledge, there is no such thing as God. But, Science already stated that, there MAY be soul. Christians, Muslims, Buddhistism, Shinto, Taoism, Hindu. All religions have one common, which is... they are all related to death.

Religion, is that it is created to influence people not to afraid of death? King creates it to make sure his soldiers fight for him. Or... religion is real? Do you trust Jesus Christ? I never insult of others' religion. By the way, I will not say if Jesus exists or not. And so, please, don't insult my "God" too. By the way, why don't you all try to check out of other religion and choose one that you believe in? Have faith in your heart. I was thinking about this a long time ago, not even I can remember when. I was borned Buddhist, but, nowadays everyone are fusing Buddhist, Taoism and Polomenisme together. I don't care, I also read bible everyday. By the way, I check out of Islamic and Hindu too. I had been in love with Japanese's anime for a long time. I also have a good knowledge of Shinto too.

Remember, please don't insult others' religion, okay? Before I introduce you in the view of Science and the common thing of Science and God.

Christian and Muslims believe there are a Creator. By the way, I am not talking nonsense, Christian and Muslims ARE PRAYING TO THE SAME GOD! Just, with a different view of it, and so seperated to Christianity and Islamic. Just like Christian also have different branch, right? (It is just different point of view)

Buddhist and Hindu trust in Karma. Which is a recycle of your deeds. (I am not going to explain here, because it is long and...) There trust that you can be one of the Gods or Goddesses if you do good things. Even Gods can die and will be reborned.

Taoism and Polomenism. They trust that there are alot of Gods out there. When you die, you will either become Ghosts or Gods. And will be reincarnated too.

Ok, now, in view of Science. I read alot of Einsteins' book about he trusts God or not. He says one thing, the possiblity of an existance of a God is very low. Not more than 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%. (Around that), but, he says one word--- "Faith"

In the Science, it has proved that, there are energy in our body. Don't you ever think of it? How we can move, our brain? What our brain do? Send Signals? How the signals do? Impulse? Then... then...? Try to think our body is a computer, kay? Your brain works as Hard Drive. Your IQ works as RAM. How a computer run? You will eat breakfast,lunch,dinner and even supper. Computer consumes Electricity. Ok, if you want to eat, you need energy to move your hand? Then the energy is from your previous meal. Then... Then... you will need to go back to your mother's stomach. Ok, your mother gave you the first "power". Who gave your mother the first power? Then you will need to recall back to your ancestors, gorrila, mammals, complex organisms, single organisms. Ok, how single works? It is because of the heat and other energy, made the non-licing things transform into a living things. WTF? Dead become alive? Then where the energy starts?...............................

Stop this, because I don't want to talk crap anymore. You ever heard that some cats will go under a patient's bed and sleep? Then the patient will die a few hours later. WTF? But real, it seems that Cats have softer hearing, they can even hear the vibration of a molecules, the patient's organs started to shutdown and seems quiet enough to attract the cats to sleep under the bed. But, how death works? We still eat everyday, right? We have alot of energy, why it will stop? Ok, on this moment, you will need to check "How Ageing Works" in www.howstuffworks.com and see the explaination of a cell becoming old.

Ever heard OBE? Out-of-Body-Experience. You can find these kinds of books everywhere or on the net. There is also an article about OBE in howstuffworks.com.

I just wanted to say, if Soul really exists? Before you go and investigate if God exists, why not research if there are souls? It is easier to find it out with your body rather than you go for the God you seek.

Science had proved that, when a person dies, there are a strange energy will came out from our body. Ok, lets think that as "Soul", now temporarily believe there are souls, okay? Ok, your souls will rise from your body if you are dead. Where does it goes? Some Chinese scientists which believed that reincarnations exist, so they tracked down this strange energy, or you can say, soul. If you read the Karma Book- Law of Universe. OKOK, BY THIS MOMENT, I KNOW EVERYONE HERE IS TRYING TO SAY I AM ADVERTISING FOR BUDDHIST AND TAOISM? NONONO! LATER I WILL WRITE ABOUT ADVANTAGE FOR BECOMING A CHRISTIANS TOO. Ok, it stated that "Hell" is located a few -dunno how far, but written in the book- from Earth. And the scientists founded out that there are a strange Cube. The book also stated that Hell is in cube form. Ok, the soul gone into the cube, dunno do what, but it seems like, after a few thousands of years, the soul will come back from the "hell" and gone back to Earth, and this is called--- Reincarnation.

Ok, stop the Buddhist and Hindu here. Now goes to "Does ghosts exist?"

Let me tell you all one thing, I trust only Buddhist-Hindu-Taoism-Polomenisme-Shinto after I acually seen ghosts since 3 years ago. Ok, I am not saying that Christianity is fake, but, this knowledge is not passed to Western countries and no one in Western countries seems like wanted to know too. I hope today, I can pass this knowledge to Westerns.

SEE GHOSTS, this is only the proof. Don't you believe? You don't believe ghosts exist? Ok, maybe you read an article about buddhist are fake, I don't care, just, try this. If you don't dare to try it, DON'T SAY BUDDHIST ARE FAKE! After you tried it, if it does not works, THEN YOU CAN INSULT MY RELIGION.

There are alot of ways to see a ghosts. There are 5 types of eyes. And we possessed Eye of Human. How to let go of this power and change it into Eye of Heaven?

Get a pure black-fur dog, in the full moon's night, keep beating it until the dog's eyes are in red colour. Kill it, get the eyes out, and eat it.

Get tears from any dog, sweep it with your eyes.

Sweep your eyes with a cow's tail.

Anything above will do, but I don't acually use methods above.

You may go find a bomoh or a Taorist, they use dead crows, putting them into a bottle fo water, let it sucks up all... then blah blah blah. This also can, but mostly cheating.

The best way is to born naturally. If everything above cannot works, then you can continue believe Christians and continue insult Buddhists or any religion related to ghosts.

IF YOU DON'T DARE TO SEE A GHOST, then shut your mouth up.

After you see ghosts, you will never believe of any science related on God.

NOTE: The process can rarely reversed. By the way, in the temple, around 0.25% of monks died because of fearing to see ghosts. The only way to transform back is find a Taorists, but with sacrifices like your lifespend.

OK, maybe you are thinking of I am talking nonsense, please reconsiderate after you try things above, if you don't dare to, SHUT UP! By the way, one last thing.

I am not buddhist. I have no religion, because....

I trust Ghosts and Karma, but not Gods. (Similiar to Taoism, but not)

Give me some Karma if you really see ghosts. By the way, alot of people scolded me not because I had nearly insulted Christians but, they saw ghosts, and afraid and scolded me. For those who saw ghosts, give yourself a time, you will feel use to it... Because, now there is a red-coloured-dress female ghost standing besides me when I am writing this. Sometimes you will see the face, sometimes you will see only white figure, depends your power of your mind. It could be scary.

Last Advice: Don't Die because of Fear.

I haven't read the other 5 pages but Albert Einstein once said "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"

Exactly. I also can't figure why, but it simply is the way of the three major world religions or at least of the leaders of their institutions to try killing or converting anyone who is not of their belief and/or doesn't abide by their religon's laws.

As opposed to the eastern religions like Buddhism, Hinduism etc. btw.

But Titania was just a Queen. Granted a faery Queen but nonetheless no god.

Sooooo true...!

And getting back to the topic a bit more: There are those who believe that the universe has something similar to a memory. The Akashic Field. I read a bit into that theory, and though I doubt it's existence, the idea or concept sounds somewhat interesting...

Makeshiftwings,

I agree with your post entirely. Everyone should be open-minded and question everything, including their own religion. Otherwise, you are just a peon following everyone.

Yeah, I've heard humanism, determinism, stuff like that before. The only thing that bothers me is that I believe there are some things that you MUST put a "right/wrong" on. Ie...cold blooded murder, genocide, etc.. Those should be totally objectively evil, even in a mostly subjective, nonreligious moral system. And I don't like the idea of justifying not murdering someone only because of "self interest", ie "you would go to jail, so that is why you don't murder". Since you seem to know about these nonreligious moral stances more than me, I would appreciate an elightening on to how those moral actions are based when everything is supposed to be subjective.

But I get very annoyed by super-religious, blinded people. I also get really annoyed with athiests who mock religion. Both types are people who judge others based on religion way before they know who they are.

I am "Catholic", but only in a very, very, VERY loose sense (raised that way). The pope would disown me.

I believe in Jesus and God, but at the same time, I think that if you were raised in another religion or without a religion, then as long as you are a good person and lived a good life that you should be saved. How do I judge that? Meh, I don't know, it's not up to me, its up to God. And that's why I get sick of religious figures aggresively judging people because ultimately, if there is a God, its not up to them but up to him. And if there is no God, then they are just being pricks, and no one should ever be so judging.

If anything, I think religion is not an answer to morals or lifestyles, but an answer to death. An answer about what happens after death, or what type of meaning you bring to your life before death. I admit, I'm scared of an empty death. But in a weird, masochistic way. I love looking at the stars and knowing that I am a speck on a speck on a speck in an infinite sea of other specks, and that I am nothing other than what I am to myself and my close friends.

But dying with nothing afterwards is...it's something that can't be put into words. An end with nothing is empty, yet fufilling at the same time. And I feel the same way about an eternal afterlife, it is empty yet fufilling. It's harder to explain that in words, but maybe someone here might also understand that feeling.

i find it quite interesting that religions seem to be the groups most intolerant on this planet.
i mean, you have: one bunch of communists, one bunch of nazis, one mafia per town, but you go to some tiny-arsed western farmer town in the US and you get like 5+  christian churches there.

 Do you have some evidence to back up these accusations?

 

...Wait, are you talking about the Republican party's global warming conspiracy theories?  I'd rather not go into that; it's a thread derailment waiting to happen.   Is there something else that you're alluding to above?
[/quote]

Yes global warming is one of them.  And I rather not get into it.  If you don't know about it you probably not a science major.  I don't think Global Warming is Republican conspiracy theory; its a joke.  People who scream the loudest about it owns private jets.  Its a good example where politics disguise itself as science.

Lol.  So in other words, your evidence is limited to angry rants by conservative talk radio.

Every national and international scientific body on the planet agrees that global warming is man-made.  Originally, there was one dissenting group: The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, but they retracted their denial a year or two ago.  You can read about the consensus here: link

Anyway, I have to go fly around in my private jet.

/derail

I read somewhere that data collected over last 23 years show no sign of global warming trend.

Lol.  So in other words, your evidence is limited to wikipedia????

I am sure wikipedia is credible.  Hahaha.

You are wise in staying out of that argument.  I am not suppose to argue about that either.  Its hard to guarantee the accuracy of information unless you do the research yourself.  No, I am not going to look up 23 years of data.  I had to laugh, I was surprised and couldn't help it.

Not true. Freeman Dyson doesn't.

http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge219.html#dysonf

Please read this article. It's also about other things, like the need for heretics in science. He brings up many good points, like Sahara being a fertile plain several thousand years ago (which clearly proves that major climate changes happened even before humans were capable of releasing large quantities of CO2)