qustioning Science and Relgion

[Kreacher Real(Kevin Berry)]

So I've noticed alot of intelligent conversation on the subjects of science and relgion here. Now I've only been here a few days but I'd like to challenge the feilds of both

To science: Is it not possible that creationism could be a new revolutionary (if unlikely) science. If everything has been created then it must have a design, which means it could be more easily understood if we only have to figure out the creators design of things. Could you be like those who denouced the theory of heliocentrism, Pasteures germ theorys, or anyone who has denouced revolutionary science.

To relgion: Is it not possible that evolution is a work of God instead of a challenge to him/her. That God made evolution to help invoke the wonderous creation of change. That the bible may have been orginally perfect, but through the 1000s of years has had the flaws of mans opinions hammered into it, or that if man is flawed and was made in Gods image, is it not possible for God to be flawed also?

Now as I said I'm pretty new here so if theres a forum like this one I apologize.

[sabelmouse]

only a few hundred, but i am sure there is space and energy for one more.

[Alan]

To Kreacher Real,

No.

From,
Science

[QuantumTuba]

To science: Is it not possible that creationism could be a new revolutionary (if unlikely) science. If everything has been created then it must have a design, which means it could be more easily understood if we only have to figure out the creators design of things. Could you be like those who denouced the theory of heliocentrism, Pasteures germ theorys, or anyone who has denouced revolutionary science.

To Kreacher Real,

We denounce them because they happen to have no evidence to support their ideas, and when they attempt to present evidence they epically fail. In the improbable instance that one of them manages to properly present evidence in favor of their theories, we'll concede. But considering the massive myriad of evidence gathered in favor of evolution and the big bang, this is highly improbable.

Further, in the case of heliocentrism, germ theory, and other revolutionary science, the revolutionary conclusions were drawn after evidence had been gathered that led the proponents of said revolutionary theories to their conclusion. In the case of creationists, however, it works in the opposite direction. They reach a conclusion dogmatically based upon a literal interpretation of an ancient text, and then attempt to distort evidence in order to justify it, revealing abject ignorance of basic scientific principles in the process.

Sincerely,

QuantumTuba, Devotee of Science and Reason

[Kirsten]

In the improbable instance that one of them manages to properly present evidence in favor of their theories, we'll concede.

No problemo! We Pastafarians have a nifty chart:

Viola! SCIENCE!

[Kreacher Real(Kevin Berry)]

hahaha very funny chart, but isn't their a natural theology book that shows evidence for creationism?

[Kirsten]

We have a Gospel as well: The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as revealed to Bobby Henderson.

Chart- check
Gospel- check

What more could you want?

[Alan]

no.

[QuantumTuba]

There are plenty that claim to do so. Those that do of which I'm aware are really easy for anyone anywhere with any knowledge of anything remotely scientific to debunk.

[Brianna]

I'm not really sure what the science versus religion debate is. They can obviously both coexist. I mean if you're going to translate the Old Testament literally you'll have problems with the serious contradictions in it. So one must realize that the majority of the Bible is written in symbolic language which made more sense to the people that wrote it than it does to us. And I don't mean this to be offensive to either side of the argument. I just feel that the Christian side generally doesn't even really understand the Bible that well. As for the science side, who cares if you right? So maybe there isn't a god, and when we died nothing happens, but at that point science won't really matter anyway.

[Kenny]

I'm not really sure what the science versus religion debate is. They can obviously both coexist.

yes we can, and when the right winged creationists stop using their religion to try and influence then law, and they stop trying to teach creationism in schools, then we'll gladly shut up with our logic and reason.

[Ben Alexander]

Please don't do that. Logic and reason are way too useful! Religion is too, but I definitely don't plan to shut up about it, and I doubt many people do...

[XOX]

Just want to add someething funny as I found someone who are brave enough to go to the Creationist Museum.

See blog and have fun. http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/evolution-creation/creation-museum-p...

Or this one. http://thedevilanddanvojir.blogspot.com/2009/02/darwin-day-what-wil...