A path to faith with science

[natureisawesome]

Also, you kinda dodged the point. Bumblebees are an amazing example of going against your requirements. There is no way to prove that they are flying. No scientific equation to explain it. It is literally, by all science known to man, impossible. And since you have said before that you can assume possibilities and what might be, only whats right infront of you, that you can observe... bumblebees are a problem.

Are you serious? Did you read the big words above that portion of the article that said : Bumblebee myths ? Some people made some calculations that did not take into factor certain evidence. But the article points out that the effects of dynamic stall is the known mechanism to keep the bumblebee aloft.

And even if we didn't know the scientific reason why it can keep itself aloft, the fact that it can do it is proof in itself. It's there for everyone to see. It doesn't contradict any laws.

for certain, if anything is shown to be possible, the impossibility of that thing happening is ruled out.

I really liked that article though. did you know the bee stores it's tongue in a sheath? Reminds me of the woodpecker. Now that's a good piece of evidence for creation.

[mfqr]

mfqr:



A person has to be open for something to be proven to them. There can be proof, but we value in our minds and hearts what's reasonable as proof. SOme people see things with their own eyes and it's not proof enough. For some people with some things their never enough proof. It's just a lack of faith, it's not reasonable or logical.

There's a difference between being open enough to be able to evaluate both sides of the argument and come up with your own conclusion, or remaining neutral, and being open minded to the extent that you believe everything you read/hear/see. It's a lack of faith, sure. But it doesn't make sense to have that faith without a believable story. To me, the story is fairly unbelievable. I am open-minded. Open-minded enough to say that it's a possibility, and hinted with enough narrow-mindedness to say there's not enough evidence, and thus is more improbable than probable. I think that's reasonable, don't you? I think it's pretty logical thinking, too.

can you show me some examples?

Google can. It's documented that people back in the days of Christ, and even before, have made drawings and paintings of strange objects in the sky, which look quite like the ones we imagine and see today. I am not saying it is 100% true that people back then believed they were gods. I am assuming that they would, because it's far beyond them in any sort of explanation. Remember, back then, anything out of the ordinary was supernatural.

Excuse me, but about those aliens in the bible.. can you show me some evidence please?

Like I said, google can. Again, it could have just been people's imaginations running wild. I guess there was a lot of science fiction novels being written back then (:wtf.

And are you referring to the catholic church ? I already pointed out that the catholic church isn't Christian earlier in this thread. They're not Christian and Jesus did not teach us to have any kind of physcial warfare, the opposite actually. If you want me to explain a few things about the catholic babylon mystery religion another thread can be started about that later. ( Like when thsi thread is done at least), but otherwise let's leave the rcc out of this.

Catholicism was only used as an example. Jesus did not teach anybody to have physical war, sure, that's true. However, people obviously took it into their own hands and used religion as a form of control, whether or not your Christian God exists.

The evangicals and everyone else who votes in a Democracy all judge easch other through the ballot so everyone is guilty. But again, evangicals are obviously not Christians either. And I know their false doctrine.

Well, you believe their doctrine to be false - millions of others don't. Another example of conflicts between different faiths.

I will reiterate a previous declaration in my post. There is no morality without God. And yes, I'm a sheep and I'd rather be a sheep than a wolf.

[/quote]

There is no morality without God? That's quite the statement there. I would say I am a moral human being, and yet I do not endorse the belief of any God but myself. You'd rather be a sheep than a wolf? Are you using the "wolf" as a metaphor to describe someone who is mentally free, and at the same time using that as a comparison to a sheep, like a wolf eats sheep, and is therefore a vicious animal?

Let me get down to explaining something that might peak your interests.

There are many, many, many religions and faiths. Most religions will tell you that if you do not believe in that particular religion, that you will ultimately go to hell in the afterlife. Am I right? Well, then let's dig a bit deeper.

Everyone who believes in a particular religion believes their religion is correct, right? Obviously, because then they would not believe it. A bit deeper now...

If every religion claims you will go to hell if you do not believe in it, and you can only choose one religion, then you are ultimately doomed to go to hell. Your only way of not going to hell, in the eyes of religion, is to believe and have faith in every single religion. Of course, that is not possible either, because every religion tells you that you can only believe in that particular religion. But then again, your religion/belief is correct, right? Correct just like catholicism is correct, and Islam is correct, and Judaism is correct, and so on. Sigh. So which religion should you believe in? Any of them. Mostly all of them have the same general beliefs as to how a human being should act, and they all believe theirs is the correct one.

This is the reason why I do not choose religion to guide my life. They're all in competition, my friend. They all want to tell you how you should live your life. I say live your own life the way you want to live it... and yes, if you want to live your life being controlled by someone else's belief, then go for it. I won't, though.

Have fun :thumbsup:

[Hardcore Newbie]

This is the reason why I do not choose religion to guide my life. They're all in competition, my friend. They all want to tell you how you should live your life. I say live your own life the way you want to live it... and yes, if you want to live your life being controlled by someone else's belief, then go for it. I won't, though.

Have fun :thumbsup:

We only believe in one less god than he does.

[imitator]

Bumblebee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One for God? or at least against the dreamer's theory?

Simply part of the design of the Dreamer of course.

[imitator]

I really liked that article though. did you know the bee stores it's tongue in a sheath? Reminds me of the woodpecker. Now that's a good piece of evidence for creation.

Sounds more like evidence of Dreamer design to me. I mean, its just hairball screwy enough to be a part of a dream, but realistic enough that it wouldnt stand out alot to the dreamer to make them realize it was a dream.

[mfqr]

Sounds more like evidence of Dreamer design to me. I mean, its just hairball screwy enough to be a part of a dream, but realistic enough that it wouldnt stand out alot to the dreamer to make them realize it was a dream.

Or it's a product of adaptation. There's a reason that it's like that, other than it being "neat."

And to natureisawesome, it's not evidence of creationism. Not at all. Not a good piece - not even a bad piece. It's a piece of evidence for evolution, if anything. Now I am not sure what the reason for it is, but there is. Or it could be vestigial, and had a reason to be there a long, long time ago. Point is, it either has a reason to be there, or it had a reason to be there at some point.

[jamstigator]

I read recently that the human population boom is having an unforeseen negative side effect: in the last few decades, there have been 39 "new* species popping up. If God created all life, this means that God's still out there creating new life. In this case, new diseases to kill us off, or otherwise increase the level of suffering in the land.

I believe it's just evolution taking its normal course, creating a few new species, even as existing ones die off and become extinct. But perhaps it is, in fact, a supreme being just tossing us some new sources of misery. That seems to me to imply a rather hostile god. Maybe he's not quite omnipotent, and he's trying really hard to kill us all off, and just hasn't succeeded yet. That certainly makes him a bio-terrorist, and way worse than bin Laden.

[imitator]

I read recently that the human population boom is having an unforeseen negative side effect: in the last few decades, there have been 39 "new* species popping up. If God created all life, this means that God's still out there creating new life. In this case, new diseases to kill us off, or otherwise increase the level of suffering in the land.

I believe it's just evolution taking its normal course, creating a few new species, even as existing ones die off and become extinct. But perhaps it is, in fact, a supreme being just tossing us some new sources of misery. That seems to me to imply a rather hostile god. Maybe he's not quite omnipotent, and he's trying really hard to kill us all off, and just hasn't succeeded yet. That certainly makes him a bio-terrorist, and way worse than bin Laden.

So what you are saying is, we should bomb heaven?

[jamstigator]

Once we get our troops out of Iraq, then yes, we need to send them to take out God and his disease factories!

[mfqr]

I read recently that the human population boom is having an unforeseen negative side effect: in the last few decades, there have been 39 "new* species popping up. If God created all life, this means that God's still out there creating new life. In this case, new diseases to kill us off, or otherwise increase the level of suffering in the land.

I believe it's just evolution taking its normal course, creating a few new species, even as existing ones die off and become extinct. But perhaps it is, in fact, a supreme being just tossing us some new sources of misery. That seems to me to imply a rather hostile god. Maybe he's not quite omnipotent, and he's trying really hard to kill us all off, and just hasn't succeeded yet. That certainly makes him a bio-terrorist, and way worse than bin Laden.

Although there is no proof that Bin Laden is a terrorist, and there has been no solid link in saying that he actually aided in 9/11. But of course, this is all beyond the topic.

I would agree with you on the god issue, though. If there is a god, he obviously is either just fucking with us and causing chaos... or he isn't completely omnipotent and can't actually do much. I would suggest that he/she/it is a hostile god/goddess as well.