Religion Vs. Science

[The_Spirit_Of_Melodies]

This is a Discussion Forum and this topic is probably the most controversial topic of all so i say let passion burn in this thread and let hours/lifetime of thought be expressed here. I will post after a few other posts. (This is also found in the "Religion" Section of this Forum)

[justoleme]

http://www.godstruth.org/

[justoleme]

Science,Technology and Exploration
Robert Boyle*
George Washington Carver*
Christohper Columbus*
Kenneth H. Cooper - "Father of aerobics"
Michael Faraday*
Jim Irwin* - astronaut, Ark Hunter
Samuel Morse*
Isaac Newton* - inventor, scientist
Louis Pasteur*
Hugh Ross - physicist
Francis Schaeffer - theologian and thinker
Carol Swain - political scientist, author of Black Faces, Black Interests and The New White Nationalism in America: Its Challenge to Integration (a convert to Evangelical Christianity)
Wright Brothers*

[Spunky]

I base my beliefs on faith, and PURE common sense. No, there wasnt a big fart in the universe that magically created us..... Darwins theory can also be thrown out, because if amebas and plankton magically changed up to higher animals(plants), then they all would have, and we would no longer have them on earth. If monkeys and apes magically changed into humans, then there would be NO monkeys or apes left. If grasshoppers evolved into other animals, there would be no grasshoppers.
THere is a HUGE difference in "adaptation" to your environment, and "evolution". People seem to confuse the 2.

[Glupak]

This is a fascinating subject. Religion in the traditional sense is all but gone in Europe, and in America the trend is beginning. I'm unfamiliar with the current religious trends in Russia but have read that many are interested in their Orthodox roots and are exploring.

Personally I am studying a very science oriented field, mechanical engineering in particular, and in the course of my studies thus far have not encountered anything that has contradicted the Biblical account of creation. Everything that was mentioned that does oppose the creation story is still theory. Darwin's idea to this day is called the Theory of evolution and for good reason. It has countless upon countless holes and many many scientists wholeheartedly disagree with it. Not to say the studies that resulted from Darwin were useless, they are valuable but are put often in context that is nonsense. On the other hand I do not believe that religion should be used as an answer for all scientific questions. Quite the contrary I'd love to see science used to discover how many of the stories of creation actually happened.

[rikbe]

Originally posted by Glupak
This is a fascinating subject. Religion in the traditional sense is all but gone in Europe, and in America the trend is beginning. I'm unfamiliar with the current religious trends in Russia but have read that many are interested in their Orthodox roots and are exploring.

Personally I am studying a very science oriented field, mechanical engineering in particular, and in the course of my studies thus far have not encountered anything that has contradicted the Biblical account of creation. Everything that was mentioned that does oppose the creation story is still theory. Darwin's idea to this day is called the Theory of evolution and for good reason. It has countless upon countless holes and many many scientists wholeheartedly disagree with it. Not to say the studies that resulted from Darwin were useless, they are valuable but are put often in context that is nonsense. On the other hand I do not believe that religion should be used as an answer for all scientific questions. Quite the contrary I'd love to see science used to discover how many of the stories of creation actually happened.

Try biology.
Evolution theory has holes but also facts that confirm it, relligion has nothing but one big hole.

[Deni]

Yes the theory of evolution has holes. But an opposite theory just doens't exist or is nor a theory.
May be some facts prove that the evolution was guided. But even if it was it doesn't mean 'guided by a God'. There can exist laws of the nature we don't know. For example on Gordon's TV scientific show (Russian NTV chanell) one scientist offered a hypothesis that 'calculating abilities of the vacuum' can be involved in guiding the evolution and it can explain the emergence of the first organisms, jumps in evolution etc. I don't know if this theory is right but anyway ratioinal explanations like this can exist.
The main fault of creatioism is is throws out zillion facts from different fields of biology and paleontology which prove the fact of evolution itself.
What amuses me mostly in many religionists is some kind of 'mental incontinence'. From the fact of problems with the Darwinism they conclude that ANY evolution doesn't exist. From it they conclude that it was guided by a loving God. Finally they conclude that it proves their chimeras of the hell and paradise, of the Armageddon and etc. However there can be zillion explanations that don't involve anything of it.
I wouldn't say that I am 100% atheist. Really I have some Platonic slant and believe that a space of "pre-forms" having a complex structure can exist and influence the material world. It can explain many misterous fenomena of evolution, animals' behaviour, human consciousness etc. But I don't want to pile up phantasm on belief and invent 'a God' and ascribe properties to him like 'loving'. 'having emotions' like some religionist do.
We must learn much more about the world to make any conclusions about this subject.