Science evolving into Religion?

[jms.chapman]

Evolution doesn't explain the origins of life, just how it advanced. Personally I cant agree with it, mutations generally destroy genetic material not enhance it. and then looking at current theories of how the world was created from a scientific viewpoint makes me laugh to quote one bio teacher, "and then another meteor that was made up of ice crashed into earth.

Overall this topic proves you dont need drugs to do your head in

[truthguild]

Evolution doesn't explain the origins of life, just how it advanced. Personally I cant agree with it, mutations generally destroy genetic material not enhance it.

not a problem when you consider that an ameoba has a genome roughly 100 times the size of ours, with gradually decreasing sizes between.

and then looking at current theories of how the world was created

couple corrections - there aren't theories, just a theory. in science, competing theories can't exist, since a theory is, by definition, the best explanation we have. if there is more than 1, then none is truly considered the best and none are theories. secondly, there is no evidence to say the earth was created - just formed.

from a scientific viewpoint makes me laugh to quote one bio teacher, "and then another meteor that was made up of ice crashed into earth.

you shouldn't be asking a biology teacher for explantions of cosmological events - try a cosmology professor - you'll get a much better answer.

Overall this topic proves you dont need drugs to do your head in

hunh?

[Sohail]

I don't think it's becoming a religion, but maybe it can prove one of the religions already in existence, I've heard that there were many statements in the Qur'an regarding prophecies which have only been discovered in recent days and proven by science.

[truthguild]

I don't think it's becoming a religion, but maybe it can prove one of the religions already in existence, I've heard that there were many statements in the Qur'an regarding prophecies which have only been discovered in recent days and proven by science.

religions are of the supernatural (gods, souls, etc) and are by definition outside of science.
islam and christianity have lately been trying to sport things in their holy texts as being proven by science, but this is inherently wrong. everything that thy claim has been proven is either things people already knew, or are bizarre stretches of interpretation of the lines involved. also, proof doesn't exist in science - only evidence and degrees of confidence, so anytime you hear someone claim anything proven by science, your BS detection should immediately alert.

[mattura]

Back to a point at the beginning, the creation of the universe is ALL ABOUT particle physics, which has been essentially made up to fit what we can observe as scientists. The more basic level, the more we must guess! How can the smallest particle be measured when the measuring equipment is made of larger particles? We can only observe the effect of things and make a guess!

[truthguild]

Back to a point at the beginning, the creation of the universe is ALL ABOUT particle physics, which has been essentially made up to fit what we can observe as scientists. The more basic level, the more we must guess! How can the smallest particle be measured when the measuring equipment is made of larger particles? We can only observe the effect of things and make a guess!

there's a lot more to it than just making guesses. a theory allows scientists to make testable predictions - if it was just a guess, the preditions would be wrong. however, they are repeatedly correct.

[Twinkie]

This is a very far fetched idea, but we as scientist have failed to prove that we, or any other creatures is "alive" by anything more than a collection of chemical reactions. Who is to say that the reason we cannot create life is that we are not smart enough to create our own stable creatures. Who is to say that is some super genius assembled all the right materials for life, and gave it that spark of energy that we could not make life out of non-living things. If that were possible, it would be a major possibility that life just spawned under the right circumstances after billions of endless years. We can already make copies of existing creatures by cloning. On a side note, it has been proven that when you die, you immediately lose 2 pounds, could that be the soul?

[mattura]

a theory allows scientists to make testable predictions

Yes, these are the guesses I'm referring to

they are repeatedly correct.

how do we know this for sure? Correct according to our test equipment only. And on the level of particle physics, it is very difficult to get reasonable test equipment!

it has been proven that when you die, you immediately lose 2 pounds, could that be the soul?

I think that might have been phrased incorrectly... there are chemical changes after you die, new reactions etc, and these can release gases (sometimes making the body bloated), so it's not surprising that the weight changes. But 'immediately' is not a word that should be here!

[Twinkie]

I think that might have been phrased incorrectly... there are chemical changes after you die, new reactions etc, and these can release gases (sometimes making the body bloated), so it's not surprising that the weight changes. But 'immediately' is not a word that should be here!

"Immediately" is what I heard of. Aside from correcting people, what is your opinion of my post?

PS: I could not tell where half the quotes you posted were from.

[mattura]

Well, your post presents a standard argument, not really much to say about that.
As for the soul, I believe if it had weight, we would be able to find it as matter, therefore it does not have a weight.

PS sorry, they were the post above yours, ie 2 above mine