So ... do you subscribe to the theory of relativity, sub atomic, particle and quark theories? I am curious ... since there is a decent amount of science supporting those theories. As I understand it ... everything is made up ~ 98% space and the rest are fields and particulate matter. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2001/friedman-0404.html If you read the article above and agree with the studies and science ... which would be pretty level headed to do so ... Then you believe what you read more or less ... yes? Do you know the scientists personally? Have you been with them in their discovery? Are you as well researched as those scientists on the subject? Are you in their league of expertise to prove their theories as real? Do you own your own lab equipment that can prove those theories? You would be pretty blind with pride, and also stubborn to "NOT" believe those theories or possibilities ... as it is pretty good science with solid proofs with decades of growth in human understanding. Yet ... you cannot prove any of it ... not really. (Not that you would need to.) While I detest religion as silly and dangerous ... I also believe in God. [The proofs and critical evidences for me personally are in the thousands.] I think people mess up when they begin telling others to simply take things on faith. [Belief needs be founded on validated discovery to take the leap of faith.] We are brought up to learn and discover ... as we do, we believe and grow in understanding, we learn and discover more and so on. Belief is a natural learning and discovery process. It is required in theoretical leaps and advanced discovery in all scientific fields. I am curious ... you claim to be a free thinker ... and yet in this arena ... you are a super restricted thinker ... or anti-thinker ... in as much as your "belief and discovery" switch is turned off. I can't blame people for reacting to religion and superstition ... but I find it interesting ... the hypocrisy. The animosity and mockery are certainly not indicative of someone who is a free thinker at all. So ... while you are typing a response ... just remember that 98% of "you" is space and fields of energy ... Hmmm ... how is that all organized and held together?
Not true. Belief is not required in any of that. Belief is not the prerequisite to scientific discovery. You're misusing the word. You think or you understand something goes this or that way in science, is not the same, nor is it required that in science , you must believe something goes this or that way. The true joy in science is in finding out whether it does or it doesn't. God belief is validated on things like discovery meaning anything you want it to. A leap to faith needs no founding, that's why it's called faith. God belief is certainty without fact. Science is fact without certainty.
"God belief is certainty without fact." I don't know if you are terribly confused, ignorant, or just angry at your own failed theism... Belief in God is not a practice of certainty, it is a practice of faith. Were someone to be truly certain of God, not even .000001% doubt in their heart of mind, they would be one with God. For a theist to say they are practicing faith in God means just that...they have not perfected faith to a level of 100% certainty which would Divinize their mind to be on with Divine God.
Believing to me is being convinced of a truth by either statement, experience or phenomenon based on the examination of evidence. [or perceptions thereof] I make a clear distinction between belief and faith. [That is another discussion entirely] For example ... to paint a painting. I must believe to even be able to see or visualize. I must have a history of those experiences and understandings of colors and a multitude of shapes and information. Then I must have a history of proven experiences to draw from in order to visualize and frame a reference for that painting in the first place. EXPLE: A baby crawls across the floor in a discovery mode ... convinced of interest about ... what lies ... over there. Belief has been enacted. Experiences will follow. Those experiences will provide evidences to learn by.
If 98% of us is Space and Fields and 2% is particle matter ... Then what compromises us? The particles? The invisible fields? All of it? What about personality ... how do those fields and particles work together to form personality? How am I supposed to believe any of this? Fields and particles ... HA! ... sounds like superstitious mumbo jumbo religion to me. It just seems so unrealistic and naive![Just Kidding]
Absolutely amazing Photos. My problems seem so small now. Personally I wonder if smaller particles than quarks exist and if they would appear like these images?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K4_7h1lajE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY-ZrwFwLQg&feature=player_embedded