The Next Pope

[ManuelsMum]

"But human reason is limited, science can't explain everything."

[boldie]

"But human reason is limited, science can't explain everything."

People saying that sort of thing just massively tilts me.

We don't have to know everything, scientists should just just strive to get as many answers as possible.
Saying "Well, we don't know everything so I'll believe in homeopathy, faith healings, voodoo or god until the opposite is proven" is just lazy and, potentially, harmful.

In fact, I think everyone believing in any of the above should have all their privileges to the opposite things removed...Anyone who believes in homeopathy, faith healings and magic water etc. should be denied access to any service on the NHS.

See what they believe in then.

[ManuelsMum]

"But human reason is limited, science can't explain everything."

People saying that sort of thing just massively tilts me.

We don't have to know everything, scientists should just just strive to get as many answers as possible.
Saying "Well, we don't know everything so I'll believe in homeopathy, faith healings, voodoo or god until the opposite is proven" is just lazy and, potentially, harmful.

In fact, I think everyone believing in any of the above should have all their privileges to the opposite things removed...Anyone who believes in homeopathy, faith healings and magic water etc. should be denied access to any service on the NHS.

See what they believe in then.

I would generally agree with you, but there are certain things, like chinese medicine, which have been around for thousands of years.

There are certain things that science has investigated however, which really point to things that are beyond reason, like the Turin Shroud, which really fascinates me.

[boldie]

1; Chinese medicine has been around for thousands of years. "Modern" Western medicine does not pooh-pooh the idea behind most Chinese medicine. (You know, the stuff that works) That doesn't mean that taking ground panda penis will make your own penis 4 inches longer etc.

Like the Turin Shroud what? Obviously scientists not actually being able to study the thing other than by looking at pictures doesn't help but I don't see what the big mystery is. If the Turin Shroud makes people believe in, a Christian, God that is obviously fine..but I would argue that there might be a more logical reason for the picture of a crucified figure in the shroud other than "God made it appear".

[kinboshi]

There has been lots of remedies that have been around for thousands of years. Those that work have become 'medicine', those that don't are peddled as 'alternative medicine' without having to undergo any clinical trials or studies.  Read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre for more on that subject, would be a bit of a digression for this thread.

Turin Shroud has been carbon dated to the 13-14th Century AD.  What about it points to "things beyond reason"?

[boldie]

There has been lots of remedies that have been around for thousands of years. Those that work have become 'medicine', those that don't are peddled as 'alternative medicine' without having to undergo any clinical trials or studies.  Read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre for more on that subject, would be a bit of a digression for this thread.

Turin Shroud has been carbon dated to the 13-14th Century AD.  What about it points to "things beyond reason"?

Pffft @ carbon dating;

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-c14-disprove-the-bible

http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_assumptions.php

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html


It's clearly just nonsense.


BTW, the above links are also the reason why there is no reason to believe that people will stop believing in god when it's "proven" how the universe came to be.

[ManuelsMum]

There has been lots of remedies that have been around for thousands of years. Those that work have become 'medicine', those that don't are peddled as 'alternative medicine' without having to undergo any clinical trials or studies.  Read 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre for more on that subject, would be a bit of a digression for this thread.

Turin Shroud has been carbon dated to the 13-14th Century AD.  What about it points to "things beyond reason"?

Pffft @ carbon dating;

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/does-c14-disprove-the-bible

http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_assumptions.php

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/carbon14.html


It's clearly just nonsense.


BTW, the above links are also the reason why there is no reason to believe that people will stop believing in god when it's "proven" how the universe came to be.

+1

Radiocarbondating of the Shroud vair vair dodgy

"  It is said that the carbon dating is inaccurate. One Dr. Maria Grazia Siliato, Who has studied the shroud for 16 years     says the reason that the carbon dating is wrong, is that the fragment tested was a corner of the cloth that had been repaired five times since 1400. Another Dr, Dr. Leoncio Garza-Valdez, after months of examining microscopic samples, concluded in January that the shroud is centuries older than it's carbon date. Dr. Garza said the shrouds fibers are coated with bacteria and fungi that have grown for centuries. He said that the carbon dating had sampled the contaminants as well as the fibers' cellulose.

      In May 1993, Dr. Garza traveled to Turin, and examined a shroud sample with the approval of Catholic authorities. "As soon as I looked at a segment in the microscope, I knew that it was heavily contaminated, and I knew what had been radiocarbon dated was a mixture of linen, and bacteria, fungi, and bioplastic (A plastic-like coating that is a byproduct of bacteria and fungi.) " Dr. Garza enlisted Dr.Mattengly. Together they are working with an enzyme process to cleanse the contaminated samples."

http://theshadowlands.net/shroud.htm

wiki

"Corona discharge
During restoration in 2002, the back of the cloth was photographed and scanned for the first time. An article on this subject by Giulio Fanti and others envisages the electrostatic corona discharge as the probable mechanism to produce the images of the body in the Shroud.[138] Congruent with that mechanism, they also describe an image on the reverse side of the fabric, much fainter than that on the front view of the body, consisting primarily of the face and perhaps hands. As with the front picture, it is entirely superficial, with coloration limited to the carbohydrate layer. The images correspond to, and are in registration with, those on the other side of the cloth. No image is detectable in the reverse side of the dorsal view of the body.
Results of some new experiments propose that a Corona discharge mechanism could have been involved in the Turin Shroud body image formation, but it is impossible to reproduce all the characteristics of the image in a laboratory because the energy source required is too high.[131][139] This theory and the experiment have not addressed a method by which the high level of energy could have been controlled and directed, without damaging the Shroud"

So we have probably got Jesus' burial cloth, an imprint of him left because of the High Energy Flash that happened when God the Father revived him (like the Defibrillation paddles you see in hospitals, only stronger. And divine). Jesus is not in the cloth. Why? Because He has risen. Only God can make people rise. Therefore God exists.

[doubleup]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051693/Rapture-Will-world-end-today-Harold-Camping-goes-hiding.html

Thus we can be sure that the whole world, with the exception of those who are presently saved (the elect), are under the judgement of God, and will be annihilated together with the whole physical world on October 21


So looks only the devout will be left to argue later today - what a lo

[boldie]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051693/Rapture-Will-world-end-today-Harold-Camping-goes-hiding.html

Thus we can be sure that the whole world, with the exception of those who are presently saved (the elect), are under the judgement of God, and will be annihilated together with the whole physical world on October 21


So looks only the devout will be left to argue later today - what a lo

lol WP.

Missed the "world going into a frenzy" over his latest predictions though. Ah well, GL to him..this time I hope he's right and all the devout are being taken up to heaven. Means the rest of us can get on with life in peace and quiet.

[nirvana]

Atheists, militant or otherwise, occasionally a bit hasty to draw conclusions and report as scientific fact some things that would be inconvenient to many religious people, but that there isn't really enough evidence yet to make such a statement.

eg, Life can be generated spontaneously in the lab coz we made some amino acids in the lab. Or then there's the whole thing about extra-terrestrial life. It's out there coz it must be as space is so big.

Religious people may very well say, I'll show you God if you either make me a beastie or show me a beastie from elsewhere in the cosmos.


On nirvana's point about no scientist challenging evolution. I'm sure many put their minds to it as there is considerable profit incentive for them to do so. If they found a way of crafting a narrative within rigid and recognized scientific paramaters that called the evidence for the Theory of Evolution into serious question then, if they published at breakfast, they'd sell 100,000 copies before lunch.

Take yr ticket for the most part but I dont think they challenge in the way I understand the word. They challenge themselves to come up with another sub theory that explains another gap in our collective understanding of what evolution theory actually means. The fossil record has been quoted in these pages and yet the fossil record tends to disprove more than it proves. Some good points here though that you gotta have faith even if you don't have religion.

With my faith button switched on, I am looking forward to the punctuated equilibria events that lead to humans speciating or something - I would like to have wings, humans would really be awesome with wings.

[ManuelsMum]

Atheists, militant or otherwise, occasionally a bit hasty to draw conclusions and report as scientific fact some things that would be inconvenient to many religious people, but that there isn't really enough evidence yet to make such a statement.

eg, Life can be generated spontaneously in the lab coz we made some amino acids in the lab. Or then there's the whole thing about extra-terrestrial life. It's out there coz it must be as space is so big.

Religious people may very well say, I'll show you God if you either make me a beastie or show me a beastie from elsewhere in the cosmos.


On nirvana's point about no scientist challenging evolution. I'm sure many put their minds to it as there is considerable profit incentive for them to do so. If they found a way of crafting a narrative within rigid and recognized scientific paramaters that called the evidence for the Theory of Evolution into serious question then, if they published at breakfast, they'd sell 100,000 copies before lunch.

Take yr ticket for the most part but I dont think they challenge in the way I understand the word. They challenge themselves to come up with another sub theory that explains another gap in our collective understanding of what evolution theory actually means. The fossil record has been quoted in these pages and yet the fossil record tends to disprove more than it proves. Some good points here though that you gotta have faith even if you don't have religion.

With my faith button switched on, I am looking forward to the punctuated equilibria events that lead to humans speciating or something - I would like to have wings, humans would really be awesome with wings.

Please expand.

Ultimately, there's only one way to settle this whole Faith v Reason debate, and that is a FaithReason RSQ.

[outragous76]

I have just finished reading Dave Gorman vs the world where he challenges people to games.

Someone invites him to play IDVE, which only upon arrival does he find out is a board game called intelligent design vs evolution! I won't spoil the book, but let's say some of the games questions are a little one sided!

I have no problem with people having a faith, but on the understanding that they are choosing to believe in something which is fairly mythical. If it gives them personal strength that's great, but keep it to yourself please!

At least with science they are continually challenging themselves on their hypothesis and reasoning, religious people just believe because they are told to believe, and in any other part of life this attitude would usually be questioned

[Rod]

This thread could run and run but it is the best debate I have seen on this subject for a very long time (although I still think a few fundamentalists would be fun).

I agree with Boldie that proof of the origin of the universe would not bring an end to Theism there and then but it would probably die out over a few generations as the new theory gets taught to kids in school.

I disagree that there could be any serious challenges made to evolution. The evidence is so strong it is considered fact by any serious scientist (so I am lead to strongly believe). the transitional forms are all there as well and there are no "missing links". This does not matter, all evolution explains is the origin of life. The universe was already here and the it was already raining, where did all of this come from. There are two schools of thought to the best of my knowledge.

1) We don't know yet but science will eventually work it out (I think this is by far most likely)

2) God did it (as good an explanation as the one above at the end of the day, although less likely in my opinion)

Also the discussion shows why gods existence is more likely than fairies. God is a theory, which is in some ways scientific, fairies are just in the realm of fantasy. Kinboshi said that there is as much evidence for god as the orcs from Mordor. He is quite correct but god is still more likely (as we know the orcs to be fictional this is no great claim, I guess the fairies are also more likely).

Couple of points about the religion thing (which I was trying to stay out of). I understand the following to be true

Are The christian god (Yahweh/Jehovah) and the muslin god (Allah) the same thing? Yes they are, they are both the god of Abraham who both agree was a prophet of god. They both received the 10 commandments . The disagreement is about Jesus (is he the Christ and god incarnate?) and Mohammed (was he a prophet?).

Most protestants do not believe Catholics will go to hell. They are saved (mis-informed but saved).

Eternal Life? I think only Christianity offers this (Islam offers it to some people). If Christianity is true (I know it isn't btw) I will pass please god :-)

As for the good things religion has done which has been mentioned in the thread? Religion did not do it, Humans did. It may get attributed to god but the reality is the chances are 99% of it would have happened anyway, some of the atheist communities in the USA do massive amounts of good works. There have though been plenty of wars that would not have happened if not for religion. The crusades being the obvious example.

Anyway my position remains the same:-

Theism - Requires far to much faith in the unknown
Atheism - Way to many questions that cannot yet be answered.

My conclusion - I don't know which is true. If I have to guess I would say atheism but I still say theism is a possibility. Although if god does exist I don't think any existing religion has it right.

[Delboy]

Interesting information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaism%27s_view_of_Jesus

[ManuelsMum]

I disagree that there could be any serious challenges made to evolution. The evidence is so strong it is considered fact by any serious scientist (so I am lead to strongly believe). the transitional forms are all there as well and there are no "missing links". This does not matter, all evolution explains is the origin of life. The universe was already here and the it was already raining, where did all of this come from. There are two schools of thought to the best of my knowledge.

1) We don't know yet but science will eventually work it out (I think this is by far most likely)

2) God did it (as good an explanation as the one above at the end of the day, although less likely in my opinion)

Well there are plenty of missing links (fossilization is pretty rare, never mind the difficulty in finding them), but there are some major transitional fossils kicking around, and a pretty decent number of different fossils that bridge the link between ourselves and our ancestors with chimps. There's also a lot of DNA evidence.
Evolution explains the complexity of life in all its forms, doesn't spend so much time on the origin of life. How life originated on earth is still open to debate. Before life occurred, a lot of the groundwork had already been done by the universe in creating complex non-life chemistry without which life could not happen.
It's entirely possible, maybe probable, that we will never be able to understand the origin of the universe. We are creatures of spacetime, our understanding evolved to allow us to cope with spacetime events. Spacetime came about at the start of the universe, good luck wrestling with a non-spacetime 'cause' of it, if there is one.
It's pretty random to posit 'God' (as we know him) as the alternative really. By 'God' we're talking about a personal, intelligent maker, a concept totally suffused with anthropomorphisms, only because it was humans that dreamt him up, humans who thought that mankind was the King of the Universe. If there was some BigForce, it could come in loads of other forms. We only evolved intelligence, personhood and creativity as answers to a dangerous, complex environment; remarkable coincidence then that God has similar attributes despite having never been threatened by giant tigers or lived in complex social groups.

If you put a decent detective on the case, he'd probably arrive at atheism anyway without these considerations. It just doesn't looklike there's a benign, all-powerful creator of it all, who designed the universe as a suitable place for man. The world is really crap for man, very dangerous, and we've only recently begun to live life in any sort of 'comfort'. Doesn't look like a place made with us in mind.