(June 6, 2014 at 1:31 am)Chuck Wrote:

(June 6, 2014 at 12:48 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: I think there's a slight language barrier that's making some of Mikiel's posts read like someone JAQ-ing, but I don't think that's the intent.

Anyway, welcome to the board, look forward to the contributions

Has the word contribution taken on a meaning not found in dictionaries?

---

(June 6, 2014 at 12:48 am)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: I think there's a slight language barrier that's making some of Mikiel's posts read like someone JAQ-ing, but I don't think that's the intent.

Anyway, welcome to the board, look forward to the contributions

Has the word contribution taken on a meaning not found in dictionaries?

Besides using the word "the" instead of "your", he was correct. And there was no need to repeat yourself.

(June 5, 2014 at 9:45 pm)mickiel Wrote: And the church was its mother. A fact many Atheist seem to be unaware of. Or would soon forget. You would be surprised to see how many scientist were believers in God that actually founded some serious science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chr...in_science

I am not a religious man or a Christian, but I am often amused at how some Atheist seem to use science as a type of weapon against religion, not knowing that science was once a bedfellow with religion.

...tell that to Galileo.

(June 6, 2014 at 1:16 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(June 6, 2014 at 12:28 am)mickiel Wrote: Man, that's like asking me to write a book. I have found thousands of them, and the list is still growing. But this thread is about science prior relationship to the church.

Believe me, a new thread on that topic would be well attended: we haven't had new theist arguments for a while.

As to your initial argument, the split between science and the church can be pinned down to one thing: the intellectual honesty of those who respected the scientific method. To be clear, science isn't against god, it's against untrue things, and things without evidence- like gods- are really very close to being untrue things. Certainly, they aren't things we should accept as true.

The fact that science split from the church has nothing to do with jealousy, or a lust for power or any of that nonsense; it was simply because the church was unable to back up its claims with evidence befitting the scientific method, which is actually a trivially easy thing to do. That the church stumbled at the very first hurdle doesn't reflect poorly on science, but rather on the church itself.

Thank you I think I will start one.

(June 5, 2014 at 10:21 pm)mickiel Wrote: Your use of cursing proves nothing either, except a distain for the human language.

Using distain instead of disdain while admonishing someone's use of language is FUCKING hilarious.

I'm late to the thread so some of this might have already been covered.

Providing a list of Christian scientists is not evidence that the church was responsible for or had a harmonious relationship with scientific inquiry. In fact, even a cursory knowledge of the historical angst between the church and science demonstrates that science has been dragging the church kicking and screaming into modernity. Creationists, intelligent design supporters, stem cell research opponents and some global warming skeptics are proof that this is still the case to a great degree.

Scientific inquiry is antithetical to religious dogma. Considering scientists that were/are also Christian; their religion had/has fuck all to do with their science.

The fact that you didn't realize your argument was fucked on arrival betrays a tender age, gullible naivete, and/or a severely underdeveloped reasoning capability.

(June 6, 2014 at 10:00 am)Cato Wrote:

(June 5, 2014 at 10:21 pm)mickiel Wrote: Your use of cursing proves nothing either, except a distain for the human language.

Using distain instead of disdain while admonishing someone's use of language is FUCKING hilarious.

I'm late to the thread so some of this might have already been covered.

Providing a list of Christian scientists is not evidence that the church was responsible for or had a harmonious relationship with scientific inquiry. In fact, even a cursory knowledge of the historical angst between the church and science demonstrates that science has been dragging the church kicking and screaming into modernity. Creationists, intelligent design supporters, stem cell research opponents and some global warming skeptics are proof that this is still the case to a great degree.

Scientific inquiry is antithetical to religious dogma. Considering scientists that were/are also Christian; their religion had/has fuck all to do with their science.

The fact that you didn't realize your argument was fucked on arrival betrays a tender age, gullible naivete, and/or a severely underdeveloped reasoning capability.

I fail to see the need to curse at my guest on thread, so you must excuse me if I do not respond using such disrespectful language. There is no need for it. I think it ruins debate and the human language. I don't understand the constant use of it here; maybe its an atheist thing?

Well no, it could not be that, because many Christians I debate use the same tactics. I don't like it when they do it either. It spoils a conversation in my view; its rude.

Maybe I am old fashion, and this is a new wave thingy.

What has theism ever brought to the table? Nothing but inanities, platitudes, silly rituals, and loads of intangible nonsense. No experiments, no data, no verifiable results, nothing of substance whatsoever. No matter which religion. All worthless.

Meanwhile, our standard of living, food sources, travel , medicine, dentistry, communication; is the result of science. The next time you have need a root canal, see how much Jeebus does for you. And none of this "he works through the dentist's hands!" bullshit. Weak.

If all religious thought were to be wiped from humanity's experience, who would even notice?

The vast majority of scientists today are non-believers - what does that tell you? The fact scientists in the past might have been believers, (when not believing would get you thrown in jail, property confiscated or worse) means nothing. Does Christianity help the pro-billiard player sink that tricky shot? Does Islam help a DBA tune a database query? Does the Mormon angel Moroni help with that electrical wiring? Nope, nope and nope.

Nor does any religion assist the scientist in their work. Science informs religion how things are, not the other way around. Religions must lie, cheat and steal to avoid being made the fool and it isn't working for them. Poor babies!

(June 6, 2014 at 10:33 am)mickiel Wrote: I don't understand the constant use of it here; maybe its an atheist thing?

Or maybe it's just what grown ups in the real world talk like. Sorry, but this forum doesn't have a PG rating.

OP you do realize there's a difference between swearing and swearing at someone. Right?

(June 6, 2014 at 10:33 am)mickiel Wrote:

(June 6, 2014 at 10:00 am)Cato Wrote: Using distain instead of disdain while admonishing someone's use of language is FUCKING hilarious.

I'm late to the thread so some of this might have already been covered.

Providing a list of Christian scientists is not evidence that the church was responsible for or had a harmonious relationship with scientific inquiry. In fact, even a cursory knowledge of the historical angst between the church and science demonstrates that science has been dragging the church kicking and screaming into modernity. Creationists, intelligent design supporters, stem cell research opponents and some global warming skeptics are proof that this is still the case to a great degree.

Scientific inquiry is antithetical to religious dogma. Considering scientists that were/are also Christian; their religion had/has fuck all to do with their science.

The fact that you didn't realize your argument was fucked on arrival betrays a tender age, gullible naivete, and/or a severely underdeveloped reasoning capability.

I fail to see the need to curse at my guest on thread, so you must excuse me if I do not respond using such disrespectful language. There is no need for it. I think it ruins debate and the human language. I don't understand the constant use of it here; maybe its an atheist thing?

Well no, it could not be that, because many Christians I debate use the same tactics. I don't like it when they do it either. It spoils a conversation in my view; its rude.

Maybe I am old fashion, and this is a new wave thingy.

Swearing is fucking brilliant.

Stop using your "offence" at the language used to deflect from the points being made. I almost looks like you're deliberately avoiding answering some very good points.

All of the above is meant with no offence my friend, I'd suggest maybe not being such a timid little flower.

(June 6, 2014 at 10:41 am)JesusHChrist Wrote: What has theism ever brought to the table? Nothing but inanities, platitudes, silly rituals, and loads of intangible nonsense. No experiments, no data, no verifiable results, nothing of substance whatsoever. No matter which religion. All worthless.

Meanwhile, our standard of living, food sources, travel , medicine, dentistry, communication; is the result of science. The next time you have need a root canal, see how much Jeebus does for you. And none of this "he works through the dentist's hands!" bullshit. Weak.

If all religious thought were to be wiped from humanity's experience, who would even notice?

The vast majority of scientists today are non-believers - what does that tell you? The fact scientists in the past might have been believers, (when not believing would get you thrown in jail, property confiscated or worse) means nothing. Does Christianity help the pro-billiard player sink that tricky shot? Does Islam help a DBA tune a database query? Does the Mormon angel Moroni help with that electrical wiring? Nope, nope and nope.

Nor does any religion assist the scientist in their work. Science informs religion how things are, not the other way around. Religions must lie, cheat and steal to avoid being made the fool and it isn't working for them. Poor babies!

I don't like religion either, but I don't see those things disappearing if the entire world were atheist.

---

(June 6, 2014 at 10:57 am)Hoopington Wrote:

(June 6, 2014 at 10:33 am)mickiel Wrote: I fail to see the need to curse at my guest on thread, so you must excuse me if I do not respond using such disrespectful language. There is no need for it. I think it ruins debate and the human language. I don't understand the constant use of it here; maybe its an atheist thing?

Well no, it could not be that, because many Christians I debate use the same tactics. I don't like it when they do it either. It spoils a conversation in my view; its rude.

Maybe I am old fashion, and this is a new wave thingy.

Swearing is fucking brilliant.

Stop using your "offence" at the language used to deflect from the points being made. I almost looks like you're deliberately avoiding answering some very good points.

All of the above is meant with no offence my friend, I'd suggest maybe not being such a timid little flower.

I don't like it. I don't like being sweared at either. If that is a requirement here for membership, then withdraw mine.

---

(June 6, 2014 at 10:53 am)Losty Wrote: OP you do realize there's a difference between swearing and swearing at someone. Right?

I don't do either when I have speaks with people; I consider it rude.