Matthew’s answer to “Does this book align itself with any particular theory or religious belief about how the universe b…” > Likes and Comments
9 likes · Like
...which don't touch at all on the question of existence.
I'm not exactly sure what questions of existence you are looking for in a book that explains very basic astrophysics. The book was well written in basic terms by an expert in the field. If you were looking for something more philosophical or religious about some greater meaning this isn't the selection to make, nor is most any science book dealing with the universe.
Exactly. I wasn't, which is why it was jarring when NDT inserted his unwelcome views on religion, implying that knowing the science somehow qualified him to do this.
Science is based on evidence and religion is based on faith. The two are mutually exclusive since if you have evidence you don't need faith. As a scientist there has been NO evidence for any gods, hence as far as science is concerned, just like ghosts, there is no evidence to believe the thing. If you are looking for a faith based approach to creation try reading convicted criminal Kent Hovind.
Actually, intelligent people's religious faith is based on evidence, too. Not all evidence is physical. Do yu require physical proof of mathematical concepts? You exhibit the typical materialist's (rather smug) lack of understanding that the physical world cannot prove the cause of its existence. It just assumes it. No matter how far back before the big bang you go. All I ask is that scientists respect the limits on their own knowledge, which they do in some ways, but with this huge blind spot.
God is not a master craftsman, operating within they physical universe and subject to its laws, and therefore susceptible of the kind of "evidence" you think is the only evidence. Not all believers subscribe to intelligent design. You really should know more about what you purport to be disproving.
I would be happy to engage with you on a one on one level if you are serious about this conversation, feel free to send me a private message.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Renee
(new)
Mar 01, 2018 02:49PM
...which don't touch at all on the question of existence.
reply
|
flag
I'm not exactly sure what questions of existence you are looking for in a book that explains very basic astrophysics. The book was well written in basic terms by an expert in the field. If you were looking for something more philosophical or religious about some greater meaning this isn't the selection to make, nor is most any science book dealing with the universe.
Exactly. I wasn't, which is why it was jarring when NDT inserted his unwelcome views on religion, implying that knowing the science somehow qualified him to do this.
Science is based on evidence and religion is based on faith. The two are mutually exclusive since if you have evidence you don't need faith. As a scientist there has been NO evidence for any gods, hence as far as science is concerned, just like ghosts, there is no evidence to believe the thing. If you are looking for a faith based approach to creation try reading convicted criminal Kent Hovind.
Actually, intelligent people's religious faith is based on evidence, too. Not all evidence is physical. Do yu require physical proof of mathematical concepts? You exhibit the typical materialist's (rather smug) lack of understanding that the physical world cannot prove the cause of its existence. It just assumes it. No matter how far back before the big bang you go. All I ask is that scientists respect the limits on their own knowledge, which they do in some ways, but with this huge blind spot.
God is not a master craftsman, operating within they physical universe and subject to its laws, and therefore susceptible of the kind of "evidence" you think is the only evidence. Not all believers subscribe to intelligent design. You really should know more about what you purport to be disproving.
I would be happy to engage with you on a one on one level if you are serious about this conversation, feel free to send me a private message.
