Believing in Aliens is ok

[Strong Bad]

Oh goodie goodie, now I can put my mind at ease and sleep peacefully once again. :rolleyes:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/ap_on_re_eu/vatican_aliens

[janmike]

Right!

[Airplay355]

I don't get it...the big bang created God which created everything else? lol

[bobman1235]

Ohhh there's so many things I want to say here but won't .... :)

[wingnut4772]

C'mon guys. It all makes sense. Where else do you think he got that hat?

[WilliamM2]

It's amazing that people still pay any attention to old mythology at all.

[Gaara]

I have opinions to, but don't state them as it is against forum policy. These convos never go anywhere good.

"2) The discussion of politics and religion is not allowed on this forum. " - Justin

[Strong Bad]

I meant this thread to be humorous and nothing more, so don't go getting preachy. Keep it stupid and fun!

Darla, LOL...he raided E.T.'s wardrobe.

"E.T. phone hooooome...oh ****, where's my hat?"

[Face]

I found that article hysterical!

[Lorthos]

I'm sticking to my time travelers theory.......

[obieone]

PFFFT! I waved goodbye to listening to them a long time ago. Right after I found out my hand was a sin. That and my favorite food:p

[Ron-P]

Ahhhh, the Big Bang. If that were a reasonable truth then I should be able to take a pile of junk metal, blow it up and have a Lamborghini as the end result.

[bobman1235]

Yes, I prefer to believe that an invisible magical giant in the sky shot the universe from his fingertips

;)

(it's a joke, religious people, please don't be mad / offended)

[jcaut]

You're all going to hell, you know...

[F1nut]

You're all going to hell, you know...

See ya there. :D

[SKsolutions]

You're all going to hell, you know...

It's a bus tour, I'll save you a seat. The alien is driving.

[schwarcw]

"No stop signs . . . speed limits . . . . .nobody goin' to slow you down"

[Ron-P]

You're all going to hell, you know...

I'll hit every level on the way down and make a big splash in the lake.

[shadowofnight]

Hey its fine to believe in aliens....they dont scare anybody...If it bleeds we can kill it :D

I'll tell you whats scary....that damn commercial they keep playing on tv that says 1 in 4 adults has the herpes virus....now that **** will keep you up at night :eek: Whats it up to now....Herpes simplex 15...16 ??? ;)

[mrbigbluelight]

You're all going to hell, you know...

You mean THIS isn't hell ?

That means it's going to get worse ...... awwwwww, crap !

[ben62670]

Ahhhh, the Big Bang. If that were a reasonable truth then I should be able to take a pile of junk metal, blow it up and have a Lamborghini as the end result.

I can't believe they are still trying to teach the BB theory in schools:confused:

[Keiko]

I was in a Big Bang once. I had a real good time. :p

[Airplay355]

Teaching it as a theory would be fine I suppose...nothing wrong with knowning some of the possible explanations, but teaching it as fact would seem a little irresponsible.

[bobman1235]

I didn't realize we had so many astro-physicists on this board! I'd love to hear your theories :)

The Big Bang Theory is called the Big Bang Theory for a reason - it's an educated guess by many smart people about what could have happened at the start of the universe. Even the people who thought it up never said it was fact.

Considering the state of our educational system, I have a feeling kids aren't getting that deeply into physics and astrology.

[Early B.]

It has always puzzled me why people separate science from religion. Religion is the ultimate science. The word "science" means "to know." What can be more scientific than knowing how the world was created or knowing the purpose of life or knowing what happens after you die?

[bobman1235]

The "ends" may be the same, it's the means that are polar opposites. Religion - all religion- is based on faith. Believing something you cannot otherwise know to be true. Science is the search for proof of things so you can know they're true. So while in the end you're just looking for answers, the ways you find them are not compatible.

[reeltrouble1]

Considering the state of our educational system, I have a feeling kids aren't getting that deeply into physics and astrology.

I am sure you meant astronomy.

[Early B.]

The "ends" may be the same, it's the means that are polar opposites. Religion - all religion- is based on faith. Believing something you cannot otherwise know to be true. Science is the search for proof of things so you can know they're true. So while in the end you're just looking for answers, the ways you find them are not compatible.

No, not all religions are based on faith.

Religion and science are both a search for answers to the same questions. Religion includes God in its answers (which is often perceived as unscientific) whereas science mainly excludes God (which is often perceived as aetheistic). Whether God is part of the answer or not isn't the issue I'm addressing. I'm simply saying that the process to arrive at these answers must be scientific (i.e., a logical one). It's obvious that there is intelligent design in the universe, so to understand it requires an intelligent (read: scientific) approach. In other words, the world is not designed by faith, so we need a scientific appraoch to make sense of it all.

[Gaara]

Religion and science are both a search for answers to the same questions.

Where in religion do they cover questions subjects like chemical reactions, or better yet gravity?

[Early B.]

Where in religion do they cover questions subjects like chemical reactions, or better yet gravity?

I'm speaking in broad terms. I meant the vitally important questions most people actually give a **** about.

[Strong Bad]

See ya there. :D


First round is on me boys! See ya there! :D

[Airplay355]

Yea, who cares about gravity! I've always wanted to fly anyway :)

[bobman1235]

No, not all religions are based on faith.

Religion and science are both a search for answers to the same questions. Religion includes God in its answers (which is often perceived as unscientific) whereas science mainly excludes God (which is often perceived as aetheistic). Whether God is part of the answer or not isn't the issue I'm addressing. I'm simply saying that the process to arrive at these answers must be scientific (i.e., a logical one). It's obvious that there is intelligent design in the universe, so to understand it requires an intelligent (read: scientific) approach. In other words, the world is not designed by faith, so we need a scientific appraoch to make sense of it all.

I really have no idea what you're talking about - you either don't understand what belief in God means or you don't understand what the scientific process is - but since this whole topic is forbidden anyway I'll just say "OK, fine."

[MGPK]

Einstein was quoted "science without religion is blind, religion without science is lame", or was it the other way around.:confused:

[Early B.]

Einstein was quoted "science without religion is blind, religion without science is lame", or was it the other way around.:confused:

You were very close. Here's the exact quote:

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Albert Einstein, "Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium", 1941



I really have no idea what you're talking about - you either don't understand what belief in God means or you don't understand what the scientific process is - but since this whole topic is forbidden anyway I'll just say "OK, fine."

Hey bobman, maybe you should read some Einstein so you can understand what I'm talking about. Here's a good link: http://einsteinandreligion.com/

[bobman1235]

From the little I have time to read (http://einsteinandreligion.com/scienceandreligion.html), Einstein seems more to be talking about the function of religion from a societal standpoint; how it shapes the collective psyche and the betterment of a group of people. He speaks of "religion" as simply spirituality; an accepting that the world is more than just that which you can see and that within yourself.


It seems to me that what is important is the force of this superpersonal content and the depth of the conviction concerning its overpowering meaningfulness, regardless of whether any attempt is made to unite this content with a divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities. Accordingly, a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation.

Maybe that's what you're talking about, Brad, and if so then I can't disagree with you - there is no conflict between being SPIRITUAL and being scientific. They're not even really related.

But the actual mythology of religion and God ARE at odds with science. I guess the difference is like this : believing in the important lessons of most religions - be kind to your neighbor; do unto others as you would have done unto you; most of the ten commandments - is not at odds with science as it just tells you how to live and exist with other people.

Believing in an actual higher power that will come out of the sky and punish you, on the other hand, is a much different animal. It's blind faith in a thing - not an idea or lifestyle, but something supposedly tangible - that I just cannot see being associated with logic and reason.

(EDIT : not to say it's WRONG to believe it, just that it's incompatible with science)

Great website though, some interesting stuff in there, I hope I have some more time to go over it later.

[WilliamM2]

It's obvious that there is intelligent design in the universe, so to understand it requires an intelligent (read: scientific) approach.

What evidence is there that the universe has intelligent design?

[Early B.]

What evidence is there that the universe has intelligent design?

Watch a few Discovery Channel shows tonight and you'll answer your own question.:rolleyes:

[WilliamM2]

Watch a few Discovery Channel shows tonight and you'll answer your own question.:rolleyes:

If you don't know the answer, you could have just said so.

[PhantomOG]

5... 4... 3...

[amulford]

Considering the state of our educational system, I have a feeling kids aren't getting that deeply into physics and astrology.


I am sure you meant astronomy.

That's gonna leave a mark...

[obieone]

Riddle me this atheists, WHAT caused the big bang? BTW, I'm agnostic.

[NotaSuv]

Riddle me this atheists, WHAT caused the big bang? BTW, I'm agnostic.

What causes a theory????? Where does it say the the Big Bang even happened? I was under the impression this was just a theory........

i am not a atheist or agnostic just a visitor from another world.........

[NotaSuv]

Riddle me this atheists, WHAT caused the big bang? BTW, I'm agnostic.

Heres a quickie from Wink not too to use search on the net ya know......



The Big Bang is a cosmological model of the universe that has become well supported by several independent observations. After Edwin Hubble discovered that galactic distances were generally proportional to their redshifts in 1929, this observation was taken to indicate that the universe is expanding.[1] If the universe is seen to be expanding today, then it must have been smaller, denser, and hotter in the past. This idea has been considered in detail all the way back to extreme densities and temperatures, and the resulting conclusions have been found to conform very closely to what is observed.

Ironically, the term 'Big Bang' was first coined by Fred Hoyle in a derisory statement seeking to belittle the credibility of the theory that he did not believe to be true.[2] However, the discovery of the cosmic microwave background in 1964 was taken as almost undeniable support for the Big Bang.

Analysis of the spectrum of light from distant galaxies reveals a shift towards longer wavelengths proportional to each galaxy's distance in a relationship described by Hubble's law, which is taken to indicate that the universe is undergoing a continuous expansion. Furthermore, the cosmic microwave background radiation discovered in 1964 provides strong evidence that due to the expansion, the universe has naturally cooled from an extremely hot, dense initial state. The discovery of the cosmic microwave background led to almost universal acceptance among physicists, astronomers, and astrophysicists that the Big Bang describes the evolution of the universe quite well, at least in its broad outline.

Further evidence supporting the Big Bang model comes from the relative proportion of light elements in the universe. The observed abundances of hydrogen and helium throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

However, there are mysteries of the universe that are not explained by the Big Bang model alone. For example, a region of the universe 12 billion lightyears distant in one direction appears little different than a region 12 billion lightyears distant in the opposite direction. But since the universe is 'only' around 13.7 billion years old, it would appear these regions could never have been causally connected. How, then, can they be so similar? Alan Guth's 1981 theory of cosmic inflation, a short, sudden burst of extreme exponential expansion in the very early universe, provided an explanation for this horizon problem and several of the features unaccounted for by the original Big Bang model. The successor to Guth's original theory has found some circumstantial support, but it is not yet nearly as well supported as the Big Bang model.

[fossy]

after reading this thread -- thank GOD for rock & roll -- amen

[Airplay355]

Cool :)

[mrbigbluelight]

The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate.

That shouldn't oughta be.


.....and I get extra credit for excellent grammar use.