is religion a language virus?

Their may be a "gawd". It's unproven and no more evidence to support it. Maybe we are in a train locker like men in black. Just as viable. I don't care what people believe. Just don't make laws to support beliefs. Just facts. Like the 20 plus trillion dollars deficit.
 
dandyrandy said:
Faith in science doesn't fit. Sorry.
Click to expand...

There's so many scientifically valid peer reviewed scientific theories that contradict and can't both be true, so you therefore need faith one is correct while another isn't.
Take for instance Sam Harris and his nonsense that believes in the theosophical idea called predestination, but he dresses it up in scientific mumbo jumbo calling it how science proves free will doesn't exist.
That's why I don't believe a god of any kind exists. I have faith in the idea we do have free will, and if an all powerful god exists, we'd automatically have the same condition Mr. God Hater Harris has faith in, yet calls himself a man of science who's too smart to believe in something so silly as god.
If you believe Quantum Bayesnianism, which is the same belief that children believe where the world revolves around them, and their observations creates reality, how's that not the same as religious faith?
If you believe in the multiverse, how's that not any different than a Hindu who has faith in reincarnation?
If you believe in the Big Bang, how's that not different from a Christian who believes that the word of Dog created nothing to something?
If you believe in any of those theories, you have faith in a scientific theory which is no better than what a religious nutter does, except you can hide your stupidity and claim how smart of a scientific atheist who doesn't believe in supernatural nonsense.
 
Communist Dreamer said:
There's so many scientifically valid peer reviewed scientific theories that contradict and can't both be true, so you therefore need faith one is correct while another isn't.
Take for instance Sam Harris and his nonsense that believes in the theosophical idea called predestination, but he dresses it up in scientific mumbo jumbo calling it how science proves free will doesn't exist.
That's why I don't believe a god of any kind exists. I have faith in the idea we do have free will, and if an all powerful god exists, we'd automatically have the same condition Mr. God Hater Harris has faith in, yet calls himself a man of science who's too smart to believe in something so silly as god.
If you believe Quantum Bayesnianism, which is the same belief that children believe where the world revolves around them, and their observations creates reality, how's that not the same as religious faith?
If you believe in the multiverse, how's that not any different than a Hindu who has faith in reincarnation?
If you believe in the Big Bang, how's that not different from a Christian who believes that the word of Dog created nothing to something?
If you believe in any of those theories, you have faith in a scientific theory which is no better than what a religious nutter does, except you can hide your stupidity and claim how smart of a scientific atheist who doesn't believe in supernatural nonsense.
Click to expand...
Bullshit you have no understanding of doing research if you believe people have to have faith in one study over another thinking that a theory is contradicting another.

Maybe what you wrote might sound good in google translate.
 
hanimmal said:
Bullshit you have no understanding of doing research if you believe people have to have faith in one study over another thinking that a theory is contradicting another.

Maybe what you wrote might sound good in google translate.
Click to expand...

I have faith in science over faith in organized religion. But I'm not completely sure science is right, and neither are you, unless you're lying.
Science isn't a 100% fact, just a very good guess, and a better one than "god did it." God could very well be true, but I don't have faith in that, and believe its likelihood is close to zero, but that's still not the same as zero.
I also don't believe in the Big Bang and consider the theory the same as what the Bible says. Instead I have faith in the Big Crunch/Big Bounce, which brings back in vogue a modification of a previously discredited theory known as steady state theory using advances in quantum physics.
Science has many similarities to religious faith, but unlike religion usually changes and updates itself when new knowledge comes along. Unless an entity stops progress like the church did in the dark ages, or what's happening now with an oppressive government bent on turning us all atheist, and refuses to investigate the unlikely so they can push their secular faith of their particular brand of science that's approved by the Ministry of Truth.
Marx warned what would happen if we exterminate religion and replace it with secular science. The result of such will become a disaster, and not lead to the Utopia they predict.
Stop being a jerk when someone disagrees with you, it just makes you look bad, not edgy and cool.
 
Communist Dreamer said:
I have faith in science over faith in organized religion. But I'm not completely sure science is right, and neither are you, unless you're lying.
Science isn't a 100% fact, just a very good guess, and a better one than "god did it." God could very well be true, but I don't have faith in that, and believe its likelihood is close to zero, but that's still not the same as zero.
I also don't believe in the Big Bang and consider the theory the same as what the Bible says. Instead I have faith in the Big Crunch/Big Bounce, which brings back in vogue a modification of a previously discredited theory known as steady state theory using advances in quantum physics.
Science has many similarities to religious faith, but unlike religion usually changes and updates itself when new knowledge comes along. Unless an entity stops progress like the church did in the dark ages, or what's happening now with an oppressive government bent on turning us all atheist, and refuses to investigate the unlikely so they can push their secular faith of their particular brand of science that's approved by the Ministry of Truth.
Marx warned what would happen if we exterminate religion and replace it with secular science. The result of such will become a disaster, and not lead to the Utopia they predict.
Stop being a jerk when someone disagrees with you, it just makes you look bad, not edgy and cool.
Click to expand...
I call bullshit on you knowing enough about the actual science and mathematical foundation to have any clue of what the big bang is outside of hearing about it for years of people saying what it is (like they had time to explain it in anyway that would help you to understand it).

It is easy to sell against anything if you can just say whatever the hell you want and make believe it means something.
 
hanimmal said:
I call bullshit on you knowing enough about the actual science and mathematical foundation to have any clue of what the big bang is outside of hearing about it for years of people saying what it is (like they had time to explain it in anyway that would help you to understand it).

It is easy to sell against anything if you can just say whatever the hell you want and make believe it means something.
Click to expand...

The Big Bang is a stupid theory. It makes no sense. The theory was invented by a Catholic monk who wanted to make the Genesis story actually believable.
Steady state theory doesn't seem too probable at first either (and why it was previously rejected), but our new understandings of quantum theory make such a theory possible.
The Big Bang just isn't very probable, which also requires quantum physics in the form of virtual particles.
Something from nothing is just as probable as something always existed and just changes into different forms.
I also have faith the Big Bounce has to be true, because the odds of that nothing ceasing to exist at that exact moment is just too coincidental. The Big Bang negates everything else about quantum physics how the universe is just a huge probability engine and introduces too many paradoxes. A paradox is impossible and I also believe in Occam's Razor. So why make things more complicated when they don't have to be?
If the Big Bounce and quantum gravity is true, it also puts pressure on the theory of thermodynamics which states that the final result of all matter is heat death from entropy.
The beginning of the universe was way too ordered to have started by chance, and a more likely scenario is the "beginning" was just another transition from an unknown state that can never be known.
I actually have a pretty solid mathematical foundation beyond calculus into number theory/set theory. Understanding the basics of the Big Bang doesn't require any sort of math at that level and why it's most likely an untrue primitive theory.
 
Communist Dreamer said:
I have faith in science over faith in organized religion. But I'm not completely sure science is right, and neither are you, unless you're lying.
Science isn't a 100% fact, just a very good guess, and a better one than "god did it." God could very well be true, but I don't have faith in that, and believe its likelihood is close to zero, but that's still not the same as zero.
I also don't believe in the Big Bang and consider the theory the same as what the Bible says. Instead I have faith in the Big Crunch/Big Bounce, which brings back in vogue a modification of a previously discredited theory known as steady state theory using advances in quantum physics.
Science has many similarities to religious faith, but unlike religion usually changes and updates itself when new knowledge comes along. Unless an entity stops progress like the church did in the dark ages, or what's happening now with an oppressive government bent on turning us all atheist, and refuses to investigate the unlikely so they can push their secular faith of their particular brand of science that's approved by the Ministry of Truth.
Marx warned what would happen if we exterminate religion and replace it with secular science. The result of such will become a disaster, and not lead to the Utopia they predict.
Stop being a jerk when someone disagrees with you, it just makes you look bad, not edgy and cool.
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as faith in science you fraud
 
Communist Dreamer said:
The Big Bang is a stupid theory. It makes no sense. The theory was invented by a Catholic monk who wanted to make the Genesis story actually believable.
Click to expand...
I have a hard time seeing any similarities between Genesis and the Big Bang...

the Big Bang theory is simply the most simple theory to explain the red-shifted movement of all observed stellar objects if reversed in time.

However, we do not know how energy behaves beyond the Planck scale so it's only a theory. get over it. We still lack some crucial information on the nature of gravity & dark energy to set these topics in stone, really.
 
UncleBuck said:
There is no such thing as faith in science you fraud
Click to expand...

Richard Dawkins is smarter and has more money than you. He also has sold many magnitude more books than you have likes on this site.
He says you're wrong.
"Put your faith in the scientific method. There's nothing wrong with having faith."
You're not a Bright, are you?

 
Communist Dreamer said:
Richard Dawkins is smarter and has more money than you. He also has sold many magnitude more books than you have likes on this site.
He says you're wrong.
"Put your faith in the scientific method. There's nothing wrong with having faith."
You're not a Bright, are you?

Click to expand...
There is no such thing as faith in science

You can verify and replicate results. No faith required whatsoever

Your attempts at injecting doubt into trusted institutions is failing as miserably as your shitty sock puppet account , neo nazi
 
Kassiopeija said:
I have a hard time seeing any similarities between Genesis and the Big Bang...

the Big Bang theory is simply the most simple theory to explain the red-shifted movement of all observed stellar objects if reversed in time.

However, we do not know how energy behaves beyond the Planck scale so it's only a theory. get over it. We still lack some crucial information on the nature of gravity & dark energy to set these topics in stone, really.
Click to expand...

All you need to do is replace "the word" with "virtual particle" and god with scientist.
Most scientists now believe in Quantum Loop Gravity as the beginning of the universe and reject the Big Bang because the math behind explaining an infinite singularity is just too hard, when instead the universe collapsing from a previous state to something only very dense existed, rather than infinitely dense.
The singularity part of the Big Bang theory is what makes the theory just not very probable, to pretty much an impossibility.
Sometimes in an effort to make something simple, it only ends up becoming absurd.
Dark energy is another concept which is losing traction, and is pretty much the god argument to explain what we still don't completely understand in physics.
 
UncleBuck said:
There is no such thing as faith in science

You can verify and replicate results. No faith required whatsoever

Your attempts at injecting doubt into trusted institutions is failing as miserably as your shitty sock puppet account , neo nazi
Click to expand...

So now you have a PHD in biology and have written many best sellers which are translated into several languages world wide? Good to know.
I personally don't have faith in you having two functional brain cells, so it confounds me how you can even post to this site.
My bet is something bad happened to you from a religious figure you still can't get over, which prevents you from grasping simple philosophical ideas.
Whatever he did to you, there's options these days, and it wasn't your fault.
 
Communist Dreamer said:
The singularity part of the Big Bang theory is what makes the theory just not very probable, to pretty much an impossibility.
Click to expand...
that singularity part is just an artefact that arises out of a graph which puts energy-density into correlation to an ever increasing gravity. to be more precise, the graph will only point towards infinity. We do not know if there may be a stop to that collapse or not.
 
Communist Dreamer said:
So now you have a PHD in biology and have written many best sellers which are translated into several languages world wide? Good to know.
I personally don't have faith in you having two functional brain cells, so it confounds me how you can even post to this site.
My bet is something bad happened to you from a religious figure you still can't get over, which prevents you from grasping simple philosophical ideas.
Whatever he did to you, there's options these days, and it wasn't your fault.
Click to expand...
Eat my poop, racist rabbit
 
Communist Dreamer said:
The Big Bang is a stupid theory. It makes no sense. The theory was invented by a Catholic monk who wanted to make the Genesis story actually believable.
Steady state theory doesn't seem too probable at first either (and why it was previously rejected), but our new understandings of quantum theory make such a theory possible.
The Big Bang just isn't very probable, which also requires quantum physics in the form of virtual particles.
Something from nothing is just as probable as something always existed and just changes into different forms.
I also have faith the Big Bounce has to be true, because the odds of that nothing ceasing to exist at that exact moment is just too coincidental. The Big Bang negates everything else about quantum physics how the universe is just a huge probability engine and introduces too many paradoxes. A paradox is impossible and I also believe in Occam's Razor. So why make things more complicated when they don't have to be?
If the Big Bounce and quantum gravity is true, it also puts pressure on the theory of thermodynamics which states that the final result of all matter is heat death from entropy.
The beginning of the universe was way too ordered to have started by chance, and a more likely scenario is the "beginning" was just another transition from an unknown state that can never be known.
I actually have a pretty solid mathematical foundation beyond calculus into number theory/set theory. Understanding the basics of the Big Bang doesn't require any sort of math at that level and why it's most likely an untrue primitive theory.
Click to expand...
What do you think the cosmic background radiation was caused by?
 
zeddd said:
What do you think the cosmic background radiation was caused by?
Click to expand...

Not by the Big Bang. But CMB can be used to disprove the Big Bounce. If swirls in the CMB are found it proves the Big Bang, but if they aren't found it makes the theory unlikely. CMB alone doesn't disprove the Big Bounce.

www.quantamagazine.org

Big Bounce Models Reignite Big Bang Debate | Quanta Magazine

Cosmologists have shown that it’s theoretically possible for a contracting universe to bounce and expand. The new work resuscitates an old idea that directly
www.quantamagazine.org www.quantamagazine.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top