If science started 2000 years ago, do you think religion would be as big as it is?
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Plato argued for the philosopher king well before the Christians got hold of all the scientists and killed them off. I think we can prove science is well over 2000 years old. The Antikythera mechanism would be a prime example of science in action well before Christianity's utter and complete simplistic ignorance.
They would have been burnt at the stake.
The difference between science and religion....
Science: "We have many questions, and we want to work very hard to find the true answers no matter where the research leads."
Religion: "We already have all the answers to everything, and we want to work very hard to ignore and deny anything that contradicts our answers no matter where the scientific research leads."
I think that pretty much sums it up.
If I was to define the major difference between science and religion, is that science is the best explanation based on the evidence, while religion is just made-up shit. No doubt that there are very wise people who can offer valid explanations, but there has always been some joker making up shit.
How can science have a beginning?
How big is religion?
Doesn't everything have a beginning? Surely that is the backbone of theistic causal thinking.
In theory yes, in practice no one can know when that was. No one can even guess without making certain assumptions others might not agree with. In other words it's futile.
Science is a methodology. The first instant early man struck something with a stick and understood the result, science was born.
Religion is so big I could stick you inside and you could not touch the walls. Even if you had a stick.
Science is a method created by humans, so that's a particularly silly question. Science exists, there was a time when it did not exist, ipso facto it had a beginning. QED
TheBlindWatchmaker: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ......
@ xenoview
Sorry for my overdue response.
I think your question is flawed.
Why should there be a "v" between religion and science?
Are they really in conflict or in competition?
They are two very different things, so why ask the question as if they are the same?
@Jo
Let me simplify this for you:
religion = fiction (zero facts, zero evidence.) And continually weakens in the test of time.
Science = finding fact (nonfiction) that is supported by repeatable testable evidence with enormous amounts of supporting evidence/facts that only grows more relevant and precise with the test of time.
So yes they are diametrically opposed. Science actually should not even have to trouble it self with debunking ridiculous fictional crap from the religions. It is a burden and waste of time that gets in the way of human progress.
Bible/religion belongs in the fiction section, science and its findings obviously belong in the non fiction section.
Some people like fiction, that is fine, it can make em feel good etc. But religions try to force and brainwash this fiction onto people like it is nonfiction, typically for the organizer/leadership of the religion benefit. That is WRONG. (There is countless examples of this very process in action by the way!) Only in recent human history have we been able to start to minimize actual use of deadly force (wars) to push this fiction on others.
Xenoview's question is not flawed it is an extremely simple and valid point. And to me they should not even be in competition. One is fictional story time, the other is a powerful tool in the pursuit of expanding actual fact and knowledge. We all should of learned how to separate fact from fiction by 3rd grade.
It is a trick of religious leaders to try and get around the basic issue I listed above to try and make it sound like religion and science are not opposed. They are. It is about nonfiction vs fiction.
Any scientist should be pissed at the thought that they and perhaps a whole team of team of people could spend thousands of hours advancing a small idea in science through careful study, fact finding etc. where religion just writes a confusing, contradictory, heavily translated, highly edited book that supposedly has all the answers 1000+ years ago without one iota of actual fact finding work in them.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
@ LogicFTW
I think those who prosecuted the Galileo's of the world would agree with you that science and religion are diametrical opposed.
Can science answer all religious questions?
@Jo
No, of course not.
Can science answer all the questions that could come up in the Harry Potter book series? Why does saying "leviosa" and swishing a wand a certain way make something, (even something as large a 1000+ pound troll,) start floating upwards?
@ LogicFTW
"Can science answer all religious questions? No, of course not."
Than why are you saying there is a conflict?
Because science does not pretend to have all the answers, while religion does. The first is intellectual honesty, the second just pure dishonest bullshit.
I would like to add that religion does not fill the gaps that science cannot. There is no mutual coverage. It is fantasy to beleive that religion takes over where science stops.
@ David Killens
Where does science stop?
If religion doesn't take over what does?
Although I think religion is the wrong word.
Probably philosophy is a better word.
@Jo
"Where does science stop?
If religion doesn't take over what does?"
Science is a continual process, where new discoveries replace old, and our knowledge base continually increases. Science presently has it's limits, but they will be expanded tomorrow, and so on. What fills in for present gaps in knowledge and science is "we do not know ... yet".
Religion is the complete opposite. It does not base it's teachings on observation or results, it invented stuff just to make it's leaders and holy men appear knowledgeable. That worked when Babylonian or Egyptian priests could predict the coming floods and seasons. But not after that. Religion has always positioned itself as the biggest liar, claiming it had all the answers to all of the major questions.
Philosophy is more of a discipline that spends a lot of effort asking questions.
For example, dark matter has been discovered. Yet there is zero mention of this dark matter in any religious text. Although research on this is going ahead in many institutes, we do not know what it is and it's qualities. That is why it is called "dark matter", the "dark" indicating our lack of knowledge and understanding.
Eventually we will peel back dark matter and in the future will know it's nature. And religion will have nothing to do with any learning or understanding.
@Jo
Because religion says it has all the answers even when those answers go against the findings of science.
Science: A far superior method of ascertaining the truth then people making shit up that sounds good. (Religion.)
@ LogicFTW
Does science have all the answers?
What answers does it not have and what would have them?
What religion says it has all the answers?
I know mine does not.
I know the Bible does not.
@Jo
I thought we already gone over this? I don't think anyone here said science has all the answers.
Science does not have the answer to 99.99(repeating) of all possible questions (with the vast majority of those being questions we do not even know to ask!)
I thought all of them did, stating they had some sort of all powerful all knowing god that has all the answers (but this fictional charachter being the ahole that it is, chooses not so share them.)
Are you sure about that? Doesn't your religion go on and on about an all knowing all powerful god that has all the answers?
Agree there, the bible does not have answers, only more questions. It fails miserably at answering anything other than: what a lie that persists for 1000's of years to billions of people looks like.
@ LogicFTW
Did you answer this one?
Can science answer whether or not God exists?
@ Jo
'Science' isn't interested.
The sciences have already pushed the (your) biblical god into a small corner and is, as a by product of scientific research, filling in all the knowledge holes where the dishonest can claim their deity resides.
The last refuge of the scoundrel seems to be apologetics, and they are fast vanishing as the sciences uncover the truth.
@Jo
Have not seen that question yet in this thread, so have not answered it.
Anyways...
Probably not, but maybe if god was very stringently defined instead of this sort of vague "unknown" concept.
For instance, the god concepts that rely solely upon the "god of the gaps" (I would argue that is not even really a "god" concept anymore, but I digress...as that does not really address the question.)
In this god definition no, science cannot, the god idea/concept was placed out of reach of any tools that science can use to answer it.. (I think it can be justified to ponder why that happened!) Just like science cannot answer if the god idea I made up called the magical rainbow farting unicorn that exists outside of space/time exists or not. By definition this type of god concept is placed outside the reach of science tools of fact/truth/reality discovery.
In that type of god all we are left with is: that it is worthless/useless to us except as a lie to make us feel good. Because it has zero bearing on reality and does not influence us in any other way. (By the way how is it we are "aware" of a god that exists outside space and time?)
However a more carefully defined/precise god concept, say the god and it's actions described in say: the King James bible, then yeah, science does begin to answer that question. And has been for some time. Take Noah and the ark story, science has shown that to be impossible without breaking just about every fact and discovery science has made so far.
Saying god is all powerful and works in mysterious ways is the ultimate shortcut to any actual work of discovery of reality. I can use that "answer" for anything no matter how small or big, no matter how ridiculous or common any idea I come up with.
Using the same standard of "evidence" for your god idea, I can say: "I am your god, I demand half of all your wages. And you would eithir have to admit you have different standard of evidences for different situations as they suit you, or give me half of all your wages.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
@ LogicFTW
Jo - Can science answer whether or not God exists?
"Probably not, but maybe if god was very stringently defined instead of this sort of vague "unknown" concept."
Isn't it a yes or no answer? Yours seems very vague.
If someone claims that no god or God exists, can science confirm or deny that claim?
"Take Noah and the ark story, science has shown that to be impossible without breaking just about every fact and discovery science has made so far."
Please explain to me how science has shown it to be impossible
Please do not create a straw man argument.
@Jo
Wow, you apparently do not read past your first point of contention. I explained this, hmm let me try to explain it like I would to a child... You asking if science can answer whether god exists? That is like asking could science answer whether a superhero exist? The term god is so VAGUE that it is impossible to answer that with any accuracy, so I can only answer vaguely to your question. If you got specific and said this god as described by this book, then I could more accurately answer yes or no. Just like I could if you told me could a superhero like batman (as portrayed in the latest big budget batman movies) possibly exist?
Tell you what, I will explain how you can answer that question for yourself: Does the god description include terms similar to:
"outside space and time" ?
If it does, science can not answer whether god exist.
If it does not, science might be able to test/answer it. Or could one day in the future.
--- A little sidenote: most religions I ever heard of, hypocritically try to say their god is outside space time yet not, (The god idea interacts with this space time, therefore putting itself IN THIS SPACE TIME and no longer outside of space and time!)
See what I wrote above. Once the god is specified, science may be able confirm/deny, or not.
Again "god" is so incredibly vague (probably on purpose) that it is almost meaningless as a word. Worse still many theist apologist intentionally use this very vague notion to try and run back to the "god of gaps" when ever they are losing an argument.
There is somewhere well over 5 million land species.
People like to imagine noah's ark as the world's largest zoo. The world's largest zoo (by species count is the San Diego zoo, it has 800 species. San Diego Zoo covers 100 acres. Is well connect to a large/sophisticated supply chain. With 2850 trained adult employees. Even ignoring somehow the san diego zoo being entirely self sufficient for 80 days within those 100 acres, and it could all be done by Noah and his family, that is 100 acres for 800 species. Now San Diego zoo is a permanent home to many of the much larger species, so let's be generous and say if san diego zoo just wanted to save as many different species as efficiently as possible, for 80 days, instead of just 800 species, they could save 100 times that number. 80,000. Super super generous right?
Well unfortunately that boat would still have to fit 62,500 acres in its decks to save all the land species (of which there is at least 5 million but likely millions more than that.) And this is with SUPER GENEROUS numbers in favor of the noah myth.
How big is 62,500 acres you may ask?
Well the largest boat in the world ever built by man is 1500 feet long, and I can promise you does not have more than 25 acres of space on it even with multiple decks. So how long would noah's ark have to be? Assuming a 60 foot wide (average) deck (like the largest boat in the world today?) Taking again a very generous to the noah myth number of 25 acres for 1500 feet, you get, 3.75 million feet long. That is 710 miles long. Ever so slightly less generous numbers make it 1800 miles long. That boat could straddle the Atlantic ocean between Brazil and Sierra Leone.
The world's longest boat in calm waters takes 2 miles to turn around. Turning radius for a boat gets exponentially larger the longer the ship is. The base material strength needed to hold this boat together in rough seas is not just: a lot more than any molecular structure known to man so far, its exponentially greater then that. The pacific ocean would be to small for this boat to even turn around! And this is with fantastically generous numbers to the noah myth. The noah story is an absurd story that is worse than a story a 5 year old would tell after the child drank an entire pot of coffee and sugar that was spiked with large amounts of cocaine.
And if you want to say well god is all powerful and he can make whatever he wants happen. Why would such a powerful all knowing god not just pull a Thanos and snap out all the "sinners" out of being instead of going through all this time/trouble of this absurd story?
And this is just one of the many major MAJOR problems this child like silly story that noah's ark is.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
▮I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
▮Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
▮Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
@ LogicFTW
"If someone claims that no god or God exists, can science confirm or deny that claim?
See what I wrote above. Once the god is specified, science may be able confirm/deny, or not.
Again "god" is so incredibly vague (probably on purpose) that it is almost meaningless as a word."
The claim is not vague at all, it includes all gods.
Can it not be answered with a yes or no?
You keep appealing to science, but when I ask if science can answer the question, you are vague and non committal.
I am very clear and concise, the answer is no.
Your answer is maybe, with a continuous requirement for more definitions.
You say god is vague as the reason you cannot answer the question.
But it is you that are saying god is vague, not me.
I asked you not to give a straw man argument and you gave a great example of one.
"People like to imagine noah's ark as the world's largest zoo."
@Jo
"Can science answer whether or not God exists?"
Nice try at reversing the burden of proof. But before we delve into this question any further, as a theist you need to prove this god exists. And if your reply is that you are unable, that is your problem, and not mine.
@ David Killens
You only addressed half of the question.
Does someone who believes God does not exist need to prove he does not?
If they are unable to, what does that indicate?
@Jo
"Does someone who believes God does not exist need to prove he does not?
If they are unable to, what does that indicate?"
It means that anyone who makes a claim they can not back up is blowing air out their ass.
Pages