Shop now Shop now Shop now  Up to 70% Off Fashion  Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now
Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

Brian Cox and the Wonders of Life....in other words more scientific propaganda.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 101-125 of 338 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 30 Jan 2013 20:40:09 GMT
Bellatori says:
Hi Peter...

I have to say I agree with you entirely.

The real difference between theists and atheists is the reaction to scientific progress. Theism cannot bear to be wrong. It offends 'God'. Science really does not care. Oh, individual scientists may get a bit of a huff and have a bit of a TT but as a whole we shrug and move on.

Stephen Hawking got really upset about information loss at a black hole (apparently it is not lost and he was wrong. It took him 10 years to finally admit it and with some bad grace so I understand!! Cold fusion - need I say more). But the global community simply smiled politely and moved on.

Religion, by its very nature (particularly omniscient Gods) are ossified. They cannot move on. To admit they are wrong is to admit that their God was wrong which is tantamount to saying the religion is bunkum.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Jan 2013 21:27:08 GMT
Last edited by the author on 30 Jan 2013 21:28:02 GMT
kraka says:
Bellatori Hi

Greetings, as you are far better informed than i am in all things scientific i was hoping that you might be able to enlighten me as to if any science has examined the claim that *duality* (or should that read dualism?) is a part of our physical reality. That opposites exist and inter-react with each other and produce changes to occur.

Many thanks.............................in anticipation, kraka

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Jan 2013 22:16:15 GMT
Spin,

"The only fault I found with the first program of "Wonders of life" was its failure to specifically identify and account for the origin of life. Cox could only put forward htpotheses based on current scientific observations and speculations"

Oh come on Spin. Nobody will ever know how life began. Nobody was there when it happened. Hence, the origin of life will only ever be a speculation. But if it is based on current scientific observations it probably will be closer to the fact. What is true is that once life began it evolved. That is not in doubt.

In reply to an earlier post on 30 Jan 2013 22:22:32 GMT
Because you couldn't bear to be told the truth as it conflicts with your delusion.

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 04:47:17 GMT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 05:06:12 GMT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 12:01:25 GMT
Bellatori says:
Are you talking about wave/particle duality? I need a little more to understand the question.

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 13:34:30 GMT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 14:38:12 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 14:57:02 GMT
Ian says:
Diane, I would say that every scientific theory has the potential to be overturned by a new one with evidence to support it. In reality most modern theories are more likely to be modified in the light of new evidence (Darwin's original work contained some minor errors, which is not surprising given how little he knew of the mechanism of inheritance. What is surprising is how much he seems to have got right).

The problem that evolution by natural selection faces is that it is constantly questioned by those who don't fully understand it and/or can't supply the evidence to back up their alternative hypotheses. No other scientific theory has had to face this constant barrage of criticism in the same way and it's a testament to Darwin's theory that it continues to stand despite this.

Posted on 31 Jan 2013 15:36:19 GMT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 31 Jan 2013 15:42:31 GMT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 19:59:20 GMT
Bellatori says:
DB says: " ...is wrong as an 'established truth' and is therefore questionable?"

That is the difference between science based atheism and theism. We can question everything in the light of new knowledge and circumstance. Theism has a whole list of blind spots where questioning is ruled out because of religious dogma.

Don't get me wrong. I 'believe' 1+1=2 and I accept Betrand Russell's proof because I am not clever enough to contradict it. But if someone cleverer than I says... 'Hmm there is a flaw in this' I am prepared to listen and see if I can understand the reasoning.

Theists get stuck at that point if there is a dogma at issue. How can I question miracles? It is a staple of religion. Miracles occur. Examining them closely is discouraged because an alternative 'truth' may arise.

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 21:24:33 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 31 Jan 2013 21:26:13 GMT
Theists cling to superstitions in the face of fact and reason.

They need to grow up.

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 21:34:31 GMT
Ian says:
"how open are you to the possibility of miracles? Atheists fear what science can't explain and need to deny it's existence."

I'm not afraid of miracles, I just haven't seen or heard a reliable report of one.

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 21:44:56 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 21:49:44 GMT
Ian says:
Is it possible that there's an invisible unicorn? everything's possible, just most things aren't very likely. So we choose to live our lives believing the likely things (if I look both ways before crossing the road I won't get run over) and disbelieving the unlikely things (if I sit in my house eating chocolate a rich and attractive millionaire will ring my doorbell and offer to marry me).

So where's the evidence an invisible unicorn exists? There's none, so it probably doesn't.

Where's the evidence the Higgs-Boson exists? Physicists seem to think there was enough to justify building the Large Hadron Collider to look for it.

In reply to an earlier post on 31 Jan 2013 21:58:10 GMT
DB says:
I N
Agreed

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2013 13:07:16 GMT
Last edited by the author on 1 Feb 2013 13:08:32 GMT
Bellatori says:
DB says: "But what if an 'alternative truth' doesn't arise, how open are you to the possibility of miracles? Atheists fear what science can't explain and need to deny it's existence."

The boot is really on the other foot. Just one verifiable miracle is all it would take. We get lots of historical ones when people were credulous and ignorant but not in the modern day. Somewhere else on another thread Paul came up with the 'Miracle at Fatima' Pope Pius XII had a similar vision caused by the same effect in the Vatican garden in 1951 which is why the RC Church has been very distant from the whole publicity and fairground that now surrounds it. Is the spontaneous remission rate for cancer due to drinking the water at Lourdes better than 1:30k->60k? My understanding is it is not.
I would love a true miracle the same way that I would love a confirmed UFO sighting. Sadly there has never been a credible one of either.

Fear it? Never. It would be something new and exciting. Science moves forward by being tested with things it cannot explain.

Only religion fears the new...

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2013 13:36:21 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2013 13:41:02 GMT
C. A. Small says:
DB- naff poetry, for which you have no evidence whatsoever.

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2013 13:43:57 GMT
G. Heron says:
DB

"Is your assertion that 'everything' that is 'true' must be explainable by science? "

Science gives you a method of testing certain things about the physical universe (which is why there is only one theory of General relativity)

Religion is good at claiming truth but poor at providing a method to verify the claim ( which is why there are so many religions)

I accept that the scientific method only applies to the physical universe and should not be applied to other areas, however I note that these other areas lack anything equivalent to the scientific method.

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2013 15:51:34 GMT
Bellatori says:
DB says:"Is your assertion that 'everything' that is 'true' must be explainable by science?"

The problem with 'true' is that it is a very elastic concept. It is quite possible to have directly contradictory statements and have them both be true. Science provides (as G. Heron points out) a methodology for testing assertions. However this is limited to things in the physical world. Once you start to speculate on extra-physical beings then any evidential method becomes invalid.

You cannot prove objectively the statement 'God exists' or 'God does not exist' because there is no physical evidence. It is all a matter of faith. Once you add the word 'because' you start to make evidential assertions and rapidly come unstuck.

Can you think of something that is 'real' that is not explainable? Please note my comment about miracles above.

That was some really terrible poetry/hymn. I particularly liked...

"When you dwell in the exile of a stranger,
remember you are precious in my eyes."

which is cloyingly nauseating...!?

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Feb 2013 20:47:01 GMT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the religion discussion forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Important Announcement from Amazon
158 1 day ago
Is President Trump right. Should we ban all Muslims and start deporting them in large amounts until they can prove they can accept civillisation and modern practices. I'm sure we all like history but the dark ages were the dark ages. 810 6 minutes ago
if you don't like and don't believe in religion nobody says you are religiousphobic. So where did the liberal myth of Islamaphobia come from. 3 18 minutes ago
Gay habits and God. Smokers and the devil. 267 46 minutes ago
Book (Snapping of the American Mind) shows Harvard tests showing parental neglect causes homosexuality 902 2 hours ago
How do Christians decide which rules in the bible should be obeyed? 75 5 hours ago
The Power of Prayer. 2055 5 hours ago
Why are atheists without theism, which is to say why are atheists, atheists? 36 9 hours ago
A Syrian refugee with a criminal past and a history of assaults in Germany has today killed a woman with a machete. Come here, come to us said Merkel. She MUST STAND DOWN NOW. 23 13 hours ago
Why did it take precisely 7 days, not more or less, for Jahwah,God or Allah to create the universe? 70 14 hours ago
Does Christianity make any sense? 494 15 hours ago
The thread for all religion bashing homosexuals to come OUT on. You know you want to, George Michael never looked behind him when he came out. 10 18 hours ago

More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  36
Total posts:  338
Initial post:  20 Jan 2013
Latest post:  1 Mar 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions