[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…[/quote]
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science. 
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
[/quote]
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
Another ridiculous McCain accusation.
You care to explain why my tax dollars should fund a projector in ill? Why is this an appropriate use of federal tax dollars? Let the state deciced what they want to spend on it. If that’s not enough hand out fucking flyers and ask for money, don’t take it by force.
Another brilliant post. Congrats.
You still here dickbag?[/quote]
you’ve outdone yourself on this one too. very informative.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.[/quote]
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins. [/quote]
Yes, there is a smart and educated cousin that is occasionally wrong and a slightly retarded cousin that means well, most of the time.
[quote]orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins.
Yes, there is a smart and educated cousin that is occasionally wrong and a slightly retarded cousin that means well, most of the time.[/quote]
One is a very bitter and lonely spinster who has only her education to comfort her and the other is a happy outgoing family man.
[quote]orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins.
Yes, there is a smart and educated cousin that is occasionally wrong and a slightly retarded cousin that means well, most of the time.[/quote]
tell that to people who think we have evidence for macro evolution(we have none, by the way).
science has told us very little about the big picture. All it’s done this far is show us how to make trivial little things that make life easier.
I’m much more interested in how we got here.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
One is a very bitter and lonely spinster who has only her education to comfort her and the other is a happy outgoing family man.
[/quote]
I lol’d at that.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins. [/quote]
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon. It’s not a religion. Period.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins.
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon. It’s not a religion. Period.[/quote]
Science is much closer to a religion than you want to admit. That’s fine, but is doesn’t change the truth.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon.[/quote]
That sounds a lot like a religion to me.
I think most people who bash religion in favor of “science” simply think that they will sound cooler or smarter by doing so. They fail.
[quote]RebornTN wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon.
That sounds a lot like a religion to me.
I think most people who bash religion in favor of “science” simply think that they will sound cooler or smarter by doing so. They fail.[/quote]
Religion has some virtues, but understanding and explaining the physical world is not one of them.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LOL. That could be the saying nowadays… kabillions for war, not a cent for science…
What if you’re a liberal, and science has become your religion? I don’t think we should be funding the preffered religion of liberals; science.
Science is not and can not be a religion. It’s merely the best way we have of understanding the physical world around us.
Weak. Very weak. Science and religion are first cousins.
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon. It’s not a religion. Period.
Science is much closer to a religion than you want to admit. That’s fine, but is doesn’t change the truth.
[/quote]
I get the feeling that you are trying to discredit science by somehow lumping it in with religion, which doesn’t help your case at all if you think about it.
If I’m wrong about that, please explain to me your original point.
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon.
That sounds a lot like a religion to me.
I think most people who bash religion in favor of “science” simply think that they will sound cooler or smarter by doing so. They fail.
Religion has some virtues, but understanding and explaining the physical world is not one of them. [/quote]
You seem to think that religion and science are mutually exclusive. They are not.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
RebornTN wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
Science is nothing more than a system of understanding natural physical phenomenon.
That sounds a lot like a religion to me.
I think most people who bash religion in favor of “science” simply think that they will sound cooler or smarter by doing so. They fail.
Religion has some virtues, but understanding and explaining the physical world is not one of them.
You seem to think that religion and science are mutually exclusive. They are not. [/quote]
Science is, ideally, completely irreligious. A scientist that won’t change his beliefs is doing it wrong. A religious person whose faith can’t be swayed is doing it right.
I’m not trying to bash religion. Just saying they aren’t similar. The strong atheists & darwinists who zealously BELIEVE the way you see religious people believe are exhibiting characteristics of humans, not characteristics of the scientific process.
Anyway, you keep making these statements without explaining yourself. Why aren’t they mutually exclusive in your opinion?
[quote]beebuddy wrote:
Science is, ideally, completely irreligious. A scientist that won’t change his beliefs is doing it wrong. A religious person whose faith can’t be swayed is doing it right.
I’m not trying to bash religion. Just saying they aren’t similar. The strong atheists & darwinists who zealously BELIEVE the way you see religious people believe are exhibiting characteristics of humans, not characteristics of the scientific process.
Anyway, you keep making these statements without explaining yourself. Why aren’t they mutually exclusive in your opinion?[/quote]
Science and religion are cousins. They both require faith. One more than the other, but both still require a level of belief.
I can be a scientist and be a christian at the same time. You seem to be saying that you can only be one or the other, but not both.
Science coexists with religion. It is the zealots on both sides who want you to think otherwise.
I think my statements are quite self-explanatory.
I disagree that science requires any faith other than the faith in the truth of an observation, but I won’t argue that you can’t be religious and a scientist. That’s a personal thing, and I’m sure there are plenty of influential and successful scientists that are religious.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
One is a very bitter and lonely spinster who has only her education to comfort her and the other is a happy outgoing family man.
[/quote]
LOL! Very well said.