man, i wish i could see that badger. and, since i can't, YOU ARE HERETICS! :]

I think religion and science are pretty much intertwined. I mean, let's say in the beginning there's animal ism: kill, eat, ugh, poop. and, through a primitive mathematics someone finds out that this makes this happen until they reach their intellectual limit and say "we gotta be nice to that force that's pushing all this." then somebody comes along with another theory beyond the existing paradigm and everybody says "ugh, unknown. scary; angry; refute; stomp." and so, if this new idea doesn't die, the remaining followers of this new idea become defiant and create a backlash to push their idea. in the process they usually become rigid and ignorant to any new ideas. their idea becomes something sacred and, the person behind this idea, god-like (this happens in science and religion all the time). So the followers backlash through the discrimination and keep rollin' with tunnel vision(this also seems to happen in race, sex, sexual orientation etc.).

and this process repeats until innovative alchemists are called witches; the inquisitions and all that go down. you get innovative thinkers creating secret societies. then science takes hold and each paradigm rejects new theories because they seem like religion. scientists ignorantly reject hypnotherapy because it's not tangible enough. Quantum Mechanics is rejected and then, starts to blend with philosophy. Then you got string theory creating this beautiful idea out of numbers. and blah, blah, blah. tangible and abstract things need each other. i would say we're more on a kick now where science refuses to test more "religious" type things, although it's getting better.

_________________
"...he must bring forth values which are an equivalent substitute for his absence in the collective personal sphere. Without this production of values individuation is immoral and, more than that, suicidal..." Jung

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_and_the_Roman_Catholic_Church#Early_reaction

stirring the pot

(Admin note: karuna, your post is fine and normally wouldn't need approval from the mods/admin, but I had made an incorrect setting while setting up the forum.. it's fixed now, so please continue posting!)

The truth does exist, whether we know it or not...or does it?

_________________
"It's a big industry
And they can beat my brain
With houses, cars and shame
They are insane"
~ Iggy Pop

I don't think the issue is so much the merits of either religion or science but rather conveying things in a respectful matter on both sides of the fence.

Basically the problems between science and religion come down to people themselves. It's the guy yelling at christians that "there is no God!" or the lady yelling at atheists "They will burn in hell" that exasperate the problem not either entity in and of itself.

Very much agreed.

Or more like:
Disrespectful atheists: "Christians are loony!"
Disrespectful "christians": "Go to hell, atheists!"

We need more true skeptics like Dr. Newberg to deepen the discussion in a respectful and rational manner.

Also, for the respectful and rational Christians, try and evaluate these arguments against reigning scientific beliefs.

_________________

Truth be told, while I understand science, I have never been a fan of it. One sure mark of a fool is to dismiss anything past their experence as impossbile and most scientists share that mark. The idea that a purple unicorn does not exist because I did not see it does not fly too well with me as it existed whether you observed it or not.

I also find the idea of defining reality by "consistant repeatible observation" to be flawed there is no repeatible consistancy in reality. No moment is the same as another and all things have more differences than similarities. If one has a no consistancy or pattern, how can one observe things consistantLY?

Organs, bones, cars, gravity, or whatever else you can think of, well, they are all on a very small level different. They may appear to be the same but in truth are in fact two completely different objects. This is why I believe that medicine does not work on people the same way as the medicine will never have the exact same effects. To be sure they may have similar affects but never the exact same effects.

One can never have consistancy in a world that is based off of change. Ergo repeating patterns are impossible.