Defense Against the Dark Arts. .. The reason why this post is stupid is because it misrepresents what science is. Science isn't hiding from something you think is false, it's analyzing it and fi
x
Click to expand

Comments(188):

[ 188 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #7 - xyxoz (01/18/2013) [-]
The reason why this post is stupid is because it misrepresents what science is. Science isn't hiding from something you think is false, it's analyzing it and finding out the truth if possible, then making connections to other knowledge if unable. You portray the man hiding under science, which is the exact OPPOSITE of what he should be doing. He should be facing it head on, with his head open and three other flows going into it.
User avatar #15 to #7 - saddestofbreads (01/18/2013) [-]
I think what the picture is saying is that religion has been passed down through the generations but science is blocking these beliefs in favor of more logical conclusions.
-2
#16 to #7 - thecollaboration **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
+3
#20 to #16 - missing has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #24 to #20 - zaxzwim (01/18/2013) [-]
"probable the most stupidest thing"
want to re-word that?
0
#22 to #20 - thecollaboration **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#129 to #16 - anon (01/18/2013) [-]
DIAF you dirty christian
#8 to #7 - allamericandude (01/18/2013) [-]
Now there's an intelligent comment if I've ever heard one.
Now there's an intelligent comment if I've ever heard one.
#12 - Achmedisfunneh (01/18/2013) [-]
comment section when this get to front page <
comment section when this get to front page <
#4 - zukowashere (01/18/2013) [-]
You need not worry about religion my friend. There are assholes with religion and assholes without religion. They both know their choices.
User avatar #1 - goobyman (01/17/2013) [-]
inb4 religious ********* .
User avatar #6 to #1 - theonlytinman (01/18/2013) [-]
ERMAGERD HERP DERP JEZUS! U GOIN 2 HELLLLL BOI!
+112
#2 to #1 - thecollaboration **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #3 to #2 - patrickmiller (01/17/2013) [-]
Science umbrella would just single you out for attack, just smile and wave boys smile and wave....
#83 - englman (01/18/2013) [-]
This is something I typed on here before so I'm going to be lazy this time and just paste it again because it's relevant.   
   
&quot;Science doesn't try to disprove God or Religion. People futilely attempt to do this and use Science as the tool. Then Science ends up getting blamed, when the true culprit is the person. The relationships between War and Religion tend to share a similar problem. &quot;All Wars are started by some Religion! They should all be abolished!&quot;. This may appear correct at first glance, but it's deeper than that. Ignorance (intolerance, nonacceptance, and many other words fall under this type of &quot;Ignorance&quot;) is what actually causes most, if not all, War. To put it simply, &quot;You don't hold my opinion on _______, so I'm going to kill you.&quot;    
   
Back to the main point though. Science and Religion are both tools with distinct 'properties' that can be used differently. Science is more concrete, while Religion is more interpretive. This allows for some flexibility, because you can use them together in many different ways. Without making this a 7 page paper, though, I'll just give one example that I believe clears up what I mean.    
   
Love is essentially just a series of Biochemical interactions between two people, with a dash of Psychology/Sociology.    
Does knowing that make love any less 'magical' or 'special' though?    
   
One Scientist might say &quot;Yes, this is how it works and it shows our interactions to be nothing more than complex Chemistry.&quot;    
   
The second Scientist might say &quot;No, understanding how it works doesn't make it any less valid. Our concept of love still exists, but now we know how it works.&quot;    
   
Now, which one is correct?    
Big finish.. It's ultimately just a matter of opinion.&quot;
This is something I typed on here before so I'm going to be lazy this time and just paste it again because it's relevant.

"Science doesn't try to disprove God or Religion. People futilely attempt to do this and use Science as the tool. Then Science ends up getting blamed, when the true culprit is the person. The relationships between War and Religion tend to share a similar problem. "All Wars are started by some Religion! They should all be abolished!". This may appear correct at first glance, but it's deeper than that. Ignorance (intolerance, nonacceptance, and many other words fall under this type of "Ignorance") is what actually causes most, if not all, War. To put it simply, "You don't hold my opinion on _______, so I'm going to kill you."

Back to the main point though. Science and Religion are both tools with distinct 'properties' that can be used differently. Science is more concrete, while Religion is more interpretive. This allows for some flexibility, because you can use them together in many different ways. Without making this a 7 page paper, though, I'll just give one example that I believe clears up what I mean.

Love is essentially just a series of Biochemical interactions between two people, with a dash of Psychology/Sociology.
Does knowing that make love any less 'magical' or 'special' though?

One Scientist might say "Yes, this is how it works and it shows our interactions to be nothing more than complex Chemistry."

The second Scientist might say "No, understanding how it works doesn't make it any less valid. Our concept of love still exists, but now we know how it works."

Now, which one is correct?
Big finish.. It's ultimately just a matter of opinion."
User avatar #90 to #83 - xXMAQXx ONLINE (01/18/2013) [-]
thats nice
User avatar #91 to #90 - englman (01/18/2013) [-]
If you're not being sarcastic, then thank you lol
User avatar #100 to #91 - xXMAQXx ONLINE (01/18/2013) [-]
i wasnt it actually is a nice comment

thumbs for you
#102 to #100 - englman (01/18/2013) [-]
Then thank you very much! May your days be blessed with billions of thumbs
Then thank you very much! May your days be blessed with billions of thumbs
User avatar #138 to #83 - theshadowed (01/18/2013) [-]
You're a pretty cool guy
User avatar #139 to #138 - englman (01/18/2013) [-]
Thanks lol
#55 - envinite (01/18/2013) [-]
OOOOOH SO THERE ARE 2 CHOICE, SCIENCE OR RELIGION AND YOU CAN ONLY CHOOSE ONE!!!!!!!! OMGGODNOTREALSTUPIDFAIRYTALE##ULTIMATE trollE 9000!!!!!
#78 - longboarding (01/18/2013) [-]
Religion, isn't a ******* tutorial on science. For instance, the creation story didn't actually happen like that. The bible isn't a science textbook, it's divine-inspired words to describe an actual happening. If you ******* think the earth was made in 7 days, you're a ******* . If you think the Earth was made by God, and that the 7 days and list of everything is to show and emphasize his power, then congratulations, you understand how religion works!
User avatar #95 to #78 - Kattemans (01/18/2013) [-]
Well technically, the King James Bible is mistranslated, in Hebrew in Genesis one it states that the earth was made in 6 ages, and Genesis 2 was added on later. I do agree with you, I believe the bible is merely symbolic, a way of saying that God created everything.
User avatar #62 - gottdammit (01/18/2013) [-]
Dude, I'm an atheist and I find this **** annoying. You are making this site worse by posting things like these.
User avatar #66 to #62 - breadbasket (01/18/2013) [-]
The point of this post isn't that religion is bad, it's that the older generation tries to stop the progression of science, by keeping their children's minds narrow. Teaching that it's okay to never question anything.
User avatar #69 to #66 - gottdammit (01/18/2013) [-]
That's a wise life lesson.
Does this look like a place where we want deep thoughtful **** ?
We want funny, and this is serious and only starts ********** .
User avatar #73 to #69 - Marker (01/18/2013) [-]
Well, the image in itself is funny in its own way.
#46 - cabbagemayhem (01/18/2013) [-]
Since when did science become synonymous with anti-religious? It's about bad ideas or habits being passed down through generations, but that the current generation has something the previous generations didn't to shield itself (which is actually the Internet).
#68 to #46 - techketzer (01/18/2013) [-]
> Scientific method
> Faith

Choose one.
User avatar #74 to #68 - Marker (01/18/2013) [-]
Faith isn't always about taking everything blindly and not questioning out of fear of consequence.
User avatar #81 to #79 - Marker (01/18/2013) [-]
Dictionary definitions notwithstanding, allow me to use my own religion as an example.

Judaism (inb4 byposted) holds the exact opposite view that you should just follow everything blindly. Judaism encourages people to question the things they're told and to form their own beliefs. If those beliefs end in "I don't believe in God," then so be it. You won't find any Rabbis beating people over the head with a Torah. Amongst us, the Rabbis teach, the people listen, and then everyone comes up with their own ideas.
User avatar #84 to #81 - techketzer (01/18/2013) [-]
There is a difference between the religion and its followers.
User avatar #85 to #84 - Marker (01/18/2013) [-]
When I said "Judaism encourages..." I meant the Rabbis are the ones encouraging this idea. Clergymen aren't exactly "followers."
User avatar #86 to #85 - techketzer (01/18/2013) [-]
Clergymen are not followers of their religion?
What?
User avatar #87 to #86 - Marker (01/18/2013) [-]
They're more leaders than followers.
User avatar #88 to #87 - techketzer (01/18/2013) [-]
Leaders of people, followers of the religion, I'd say.
User avatar #89 to #88 - Marker (01/18/2013) [-]
Eh, it's all semantics.
User avatar #198 to #68 - cabbagemayhem (01/18/2013) [-]
Fortunately, you don't have to choose, as that would leave you mentally disabled. To think one can choose to only believe what is proven by rigorous scientific processes is naive. You would have remarkably little knowledge, below that of a retard. Fortunately, whether you are aware of it or not, most of your important beliefs are based on faith as it would be next to impossible to prove them scientifically. Such as the strange belief that there is no god.
0
#48 to #46 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#13 - bloodseel (01/18/2013) [-]
This has been posted too many times in the past few days. Is it that hard to shut up about someones religion/beliefs? Is it that hard to understand that everyone wants to better themselves but dickheads like you force people to get into meaningless arguments over the internet, and that betters no one
-3
#47 to #13 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #117 to #47 - meganinja (01/18/2013) [-]
the old men all have a bible with a cross beneath it in their hands. It's supposed to symbolize religion being spewed to each successive generation. Read the comments sometimes if you don't know what the post is about.
+1
#118 to #117 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #45 to #13 - cabbagemayhem (01/18/2013) [-]
This content has no religion in it whatsoever. Since when did "Science" become synonymous with "Anti-Religious"?
0
#17 to #13 - thecollaboration **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #23 to #17 - bloodseel (01/18/2013) [-]
good. And no, I was merely saying that these posts cause unnecessary arguments which benefit nobody
#28 to #17 - blackandwhitegod (01/18/2013) [-]
Are you a troll or handicapped?

>> You are trying to start an argument, I want take a part in it.

>> What you are actually doing is starting an argument

>> You have no idea how life works

>> Tldr; hang yourself
#21 to #17 - anon (01/18/2013) [-]
This^
#171 to #144 - anon (01/18/2013) [-]
try **** that has never been proven yet people insist on calling Science and teaching as such VS. The Bible which is RELIGION which in the past was called and taught as fact, but at least we now acknowledge our mistakes and call it what it is."
User avatar #130 - jussurviving (01/18/2013) [-]
Excuse me, do you have a moment to learn about chr-blughasdalhesdfhkajha!
#77 - mustachebro (01/18/2013) [-]
Oh snap son, this is gonna be a good 			*********		!
Oh snap son, this is gonna be a good ********* !
#125 - IamSofaKingdom (01/18/2013) [-]
Yay, more front page content because it is about atheist.
Yay, more front page content because it is about atheist.
User avatar #98 - shashashadow (01/18/2013) [-]
there seems to be this concept going around that religion and science can't co-exist, and it's just not true. I grew up in a religious household, yet my mother is an environmental engineer, and my father is an advanced physics professor.

Yes you do have to take everything you hear from the bible with a pinch of salt, but the exact same can be said about anything you hear on any news network.
User avatar #135 to #98 - theshadowed (01/18/2013) [-]
This guy and his repeating username have something here
User avatar #59 - buttseckss (01/18/2013) [-]
Do you know how to tell of some ones an atheist? Don't worry they'll tell you. Over and over again. Then shove your retardation down your own throat. Hell I'm even an agnostic but atheists can't ******* control their ******* mouths.
User avatar #140 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
But science doesn't even counter religion they are about two separate things
User avatar #147 to #140 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
religion claims there is a god. this is a factual claim, which science processes.
User avatar #149 to #147 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
The thing is we do not have the instruments or technology yet to ever detect "God" that is the issue. And people have faith he does exist based on what they believe is factual evidence, and other believe he doesn't exist based on lack of evidence. But you cannot prove or disprove something you cannot detect.
User avatar #152 to #149 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
this is why take the nul hypothesis, atheism.
User avatar #157 to #152 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Or unless you have had spiritual experiences, or think it is a good way to live your life based on personal experiences take up faith in whatever denomination you like.
User avatar #160 to #157 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
spiritual experiences can be explained, but people can become religious for personal reasons like love or comfort, just not logical reasons
User avatar #161 to #160 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
You can become religious for logical reasons.
User avatar #162 to #161 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
religion is illogical, personal reasons only.
User avatar #163 to #162 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
But reasons to become religious can be logical reasons.
User avatar #166 to #163 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
care to name a few? that wouldnt count as personal
User avatar #169 to #166 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Well it is philosophical, but this is a bit of a paradox but for anything to exist something had to come from nothing. And you can think God had this role.

Point 2: If you believe that by being religious it will help society because of the ethical teachings and service you do. Now obviously you can be ethical and do community service and help a lot of people without religion but some people think religion is a good guide to live there life.

Point 3: Say you are very stressed due to some major conflict in your life. And you attend church because it relieves stress and prayer helps you be more relaxed about the issues, so that you can face them better and not be so exhausted. It would be logical because it helps you deal with your problems, and not ignore them and leave them up to God. Obviously he won't take your final exams for you XD. But prayer has helped a lot of people relax and face problems head on which is a good healthy logical choice if it helps you


Point 4: In many faiths it gives you extra "family" or people you can turn to to help. But there are a lot of benifits to being apart of such a large community.

But as always religion isn't for everyone, as atheism isn't for everyone
User avatar #173 to #169 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
point 1: illogical, everything in the viewable universe came from the big bang
point 2: personal
point 3: personal
point 4: personal

religion is highly unnecessary, for everything it provides, there are secular institutions.
User avatar #175 to #173 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Point 1: What caused the big bang then, what allowed all of matter to exist in that density in the first place?

Point 2-4: They are logical decisions one can make in there life. I prefer religious institutions over secular ones. Its a logical choice for me to go to them. Because religion is apart of my culture. And I am comfortable with my religion compared to a secular institution.

And on this last point through my years of helping out many charities I always fine more religious groups helping then secular ones. Though I am always glad when I do see secular ones because it is really showing how society is improving :) But logical reasons can be within personal. We must make logical choices for our own life. Just because it is a personal decision doesn't mean it is nothing but a personal choice. Because we must use logic when making decisions.

So I don't really see your point on how personal decisions are not logical. But maybe we are looking at this from different perspectives.
User avatar #176 to #175 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
the logical decisions you mention are personally biased. allow me to borrow your logic.

im going to blow up a building and kill people, this is logical because my personal god tells me that not only will i get a special place in paradise but the people i kill will also get this benefit.

if it were logical everyone would do it.
your logical choice to choose religious institutions is personal not logical.
and going back to your first point, we dont know. if you would like to input the new and revealing evidence that has passed science by for the past hundred years or so, get your evidence peer reviewed and become famous for winning the Nobel prize, go right ahead =]
User avatar #178 to #176 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Okay now we are getting the hairy area of what "God" wants and what the corruption of man has done. I don't think we can get much further on that point. But you are right that religion can become corrupt and unethical things can happen. But just like everything else nothing is ideal. But your right that personally decisions can be bad one.

The point I was trying to make though, is religion has helped organize a lot of people into doing a lot of good. And has become a major part in many cultures, for better and for worse. But at this moment I believe my faith helps a lot more then it hurts.

I understand now what you mean by personal and logical but I believe my personal choices are logical though not all personal choices are logical.

Now for the last point which was also the first point XD It will be hard for us to detect and discover what happened before the big bang because we can only analyze as of yet what has happened after. But hopefully one day we can go further :)

But I don't think it is illogical to assume there was something before the Big Bang. We just don't know what.


User avatar #179 to #178 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
yes it is illogical to assume anything beyond our capacity, so why make assumptions about a god?

actually, in my opinion religion has become more ethical, like the 10 commandments. they show how unethical the bible was, sacrifices and such, but look how far its come, not killing homosexuals, not demanding the first fruit of the harvest, not calling for the cleansing of wombs by sacrificing the first of every womb unless its a human boy...
yes it may seem logical for personal reasons, but the personal reasons are illogical.
User avatar #180 to #179 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Well personal reasons can be logical or illogical, but maybe because of those teachings from the old testament Jesus came and brought us the New Testament (well written later but a compilation of what he taught). To correct us of human error. But of course you would have to assume a lot.

But I don't think it hinders anyone to believe in God unless you make it hinder you and if you are such a jackass to impose it on others. But it should be okay to talk about like we are here but not to say this is the "only way!". Which sadly ppl do :(
User avatar #181 to #180 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
that awkward moment when jesus came to for-fill the old testament and was extremely rude to his host when he didnt observe their table manners tradition (or something) and then rudely shouted at them for not killing their disobedient children like the OT commands...

a belief in god is a biased myth which science cannot afford to indulge in. this is why 99% of the smartest people on the planet are atheist.
User avatar #185 to #181 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
But I am curious where you got that statistic that 99% of the worlds smartest ppl are atheist and how are they qualified as smart? IQ or other reasons?
User avatar #186 to #185 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
im basing it on scientific institutions
User avatar #190 to #186 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
I just did a little research myself and I didn't find anything close to these numbers while looking up famous scientific institutes. So I hope it is a credible source you are looking into :/
User avatar #188 to #186 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
where* yourself* sorry about the grammar
User avatar #187 to #186 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
But were did you find this information? From an article or did you collect it your self?
User avatar #184 to #181 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
That was completely wrong my bad!
User avatar #189 to #184 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
my apologies, its actually 93%, found in this video but the survey was from "The Nation" june 2007
www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSxgnu3Hww8
User avatar #193 to #189 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
This is a very good article :)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/national/23believers.html?pagewanted=print&_r= 0
User avatar #192 to #189 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
I found the article and this professor is very much like me!

"Kenneth R. Miller, a biology professor at Brown, said his students were often surprised to find that he was religious, especially when they realized that his faith was not some sort of vague theism but observant Roman Catholicism.

Dr. Miller, whose book, "Finding Darwin's God," explains his reconciliation of the theory of evolution with his religious faith, said he was usually challenged in his biology classes by one or two students whose religions did not accept evolution, who asked how important the theory would be in the course.

"What they are really asking me is "do I have to believe in this stuff to get an A?,' " he said. He says he tells them that "belief is never an issue in science."

"I don't care if you believe in the Krebs cycle," he said, referring to the process by which energy is utilized in the cell. "I just want you to know what it is and how it works. My feeling about evolution is the same thing."

For Dr. Miller and other scientists, research is not about belief. "Faith is one thing, what you believe from the heart," said Joseph E. Murray, who won the Nobel Prize in medicine in 1990 for his work in organ transplantation. But in scientific research, he said, "it's the results that count."

Dr. Murray, who describes himself as "a cradle Catholic" who has rarely missed weekly Mass and who prays every morning, said that when he was preparing for the first ever human organ transplant, a kidney that a young man had donated to his identical twin, he and his colleagues consulted a number of religious leaders about whether they were doing the right thing. "It seemed natural," he said."
User avatar #191 to #189 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
So you only qualify scientists as the smartest people in the world? Because I am a biochemist so I understand how one can be atheist because as a scientist we look at the natural world for answers and we do not like superstition. But do you really only qualify scientists as the smartest?
User avatar #183 to #181 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Wait might be the wrong link
User avatar #209 to #183 - cheesymondo (01/19/2013) [-]
yeah this is true, e.g. "religion is a better source of knowledge than science because it always changes its mind"

i mean an bad argument could be made for religion being intelligent, but ancient books don't progress.
User avatar #207 to #183 - cheesymondo (01/19/2013) [-]
im afraid this differs from my experience of philosophy, but then maybe i had the worst teacher in the world, half his class switched after 1 lesson.

maybe it was cos i totally schooled him about bumble bee's and analogies that apparently "you can't explain that"
User avatar #208 to #207 - stcronin (01/19/2013) [-]
"The tide rolls in the tide roles out, you cant explain that" XD that what that reminded me of haha. But you probably did though most general philosophy classes teach about ancient philosophers and the history behind them.
User avatar #205 to #183 - cheesymondo (01/19/2013) [-]
i did, i just think the philosophy subject is rediculus. it may have started as philosophy but science has become more than asking questions with no answers.
User avatar #206 to #205 - stcronin (01/19/2013) [-]
That's not what philosophy is, here is the definition for you

"The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, esp. when considered as an academic discipline."

* face-palm*
User avatar #203 to #183 - cheesymondo (01/19/2013) [-]
personally, philosophy is ******** . in my opinion.
User avatar #204 to #203 - stcronin (01/19/2013) [-]
I don't think you understand Science is Philosophy like Ph.D stands for Philosophy Doctorate.

I can't believe you didn't know that :/
User avatar #196 to #183 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
okay then what supernatural method would you decide intelligence is based on?
User avatar #197 to #196 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
Well intelligence is found in people in all fields of Philosophy not just science, you cannot tell me that out of all thirteen branches of Philosophy that only smart people are within Philosophy of Science. That is just biased. And so you know what all 13 branches are here they are.

http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutphilosoph1/a/branches.htm
User avatar #194 to #183 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
because they study the universe, and further our knowledge and understanding.
User avatar #195 to #194 - stcronin (01/18/2013) [-]
You are right science does expand our knowledge and understanding of the world very much. However I do not think that is the only thing which we should qualify intelligence on.
0
#182 to #181 - stcronin has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #148 to #140 - cheesymondo (01/18/2013) [-]
errr i mean, they sure are, as science translates as knowledge.
User avatar #143 to #140 - phunkyzilla (01/18/2013) [-]
You win the best comment I've seen in a while award!
[ 188 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)