McCain Picks Buchanan! Yes in an effort to appease the "republican conservative bible religious party" and keep God happy........... McCain picks Sarah Buchanan Palin as the bible thumping party's nomination for VP! Weeeeeee.... it looks like we may still have a Buchanan in the White House! Geee I wonder if he/she will want the 700 Club shown in all classrooms from 2nd grade to H.S????!!!!!!! Hallelujah my brothers and sisters.... we might have Sister Love's Travelling Salvation Show right in our Capital!
Scientific discovery is just that - a process of discovery. Until relatively recently (in the big picture time-scheme of things) - discovery was limited to what we could comprehend through our senses. Now we can enhance our senses (or bring the detection of phenomena within the realm of our senses) to learn more. If I knew what God is, the search would be over, no? The point would be moot. What I find most interesting is that the ones who pound the table saying God cannot exist using their limited senses as proof are using the same logic as those who think they can describe God with their limited senses (which is why he often shows up in a robe and a beard). The Large Hadron Collider is looking for, among a host of other things, proof of alternate dimensions. The process of discovery continues. If they do indeed find that dimensions exist outside of - and perhaps even immediately beside our own (after all, what's 3D space really mean in a multi-verse) then what other wonders are there yet to be discovered? "There are more things in Heaven and earth Horatio, then are dreamt of in your philosophy". "The Kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the earth, and men do not see it."
That inevitably IS "first cause". DNA mutation is evidence for the cause of evolution. So your next question is a "first cause" one ... right?...what caused DNA. You are telling me I have no evidence against a supernatural being? I do have evidence which I think quite compelling. Are you even interested in hearing it? There is nothing equal about science and religion. They are two diametrically opposite things. So they cannot have a common response to the same question. Science is evidentiary and knowledge based information and fact. Religion necessarily unsupportable, unquestionable personal belief. Standing in awe at the question, knowing that you don't know is fine. I am exactly the same. With fairies and leprechauns.
No, not at all. Scientists know what they are looking for or more precisely what they are not looking for with the Hadron collider and are going about the process of finding proof of it. It sounds as if you don't want to know what God is because if you did , there would be no God? Is that correct . Just what would be the attraction in searching for something you cannot possibly know what It is or isn't , and still wouldn't know even if you found It? Teaching the same in school as if it were equal to science is plain wrong and is at best a disservice and at worst an abuse of children. They are entitled to meaningful and useful scientifically based knowledge in science class. Wild imagination , makebelieve, folklore, story telling and creationism belong in religious studies.
You have evidence AGAINST a supernatural undefineable being? Yes i am VERY interested in hearing it. I am especially interested in hearing how you go about finding evidence against something that we know nothing about? (e.g. a supernatural being). There is nothing equal in science and religion? They have their differences for sure, but they are the same in that they both seek the truth. They both try to find order in what used to be considered a world of chaos. Anyways please proceed with your evidence against a supernatural un-definable being. Im aching to hear it. If you want me to go around in circles with you I will. Just to prove that in circles we will go.
Scientist are looking for specific things - but did you know that surprises happen when looking for things? If not, science wouldn't march on, would it? You'd find what you were looking for and stop. Your comment about not wanting to know what God is makes no sense. Yes, science should be in school. Religion should be in religious institutions. If there are 11 dimensions - with some of those dimensions not following the laws of our universe at all - there is a lot more to learn. There are some who long argued that alternate dimensions did not exist. You can continue to argue your religious conviction that there is no God (yes - it IS a religious conviction because it is a BELIEF, which you adhere to...religiously.) Feel free to pound your hand on a table and condemn others. You will look completely familiar as some on the opposite side of your same table .
I would no more believe there is no God than I would believe there is no Odin or spaghetti monster or fairies. They are all equally superfluous or irrelevant things , not serious enough to justify holding any belief for or against. For you to suggest lack of belief is belief , is frankly just contradictory and a bit silly.
That's odd. You infer there is evidence for "something that we know nothing about". Then you imply there can't be any evidence against "something that we know nothing about". Is that what you meant about how you intend to go around in circles.