Science was once a child of the church.

[Cyberman]

^ Why are we even entertaining this wilfully ignorant moron?

I wonder why myself?

Why are you so interested, if you are not interested?

*shrugs* Everybody loves a trainwreck?

[Esquilax]

No, no, no; how are you going to separate a mans philosophy from his work? Come come now, the church birthed Charles Bell - the first to map the brain
Robert Boyle- founded modern chemistry
John Dalton - Atomic Theory
John Fleming - Electronics
Issac Newton-- Laws of Grtavity

All Christian, many ministers, some theologians. You cannot change these birth certificates and remove their religion or the churches influence over them.

And you could plug in any other religion, or no religion, and they still would have been equipped with the brains that led them to their discoveries, and they still would have been correct about them. God did not hand down these things to them, they used their brains. Religion is completely irrelevant in the operation of their scientific minds.

This is what's so sick about religion, the way it simply has to lay claim to absolutely everything, to demand ownership over things they have no rights to. Or are you actually saying that, had Newton not been a christian, he wouldn't have discovered gravity?

[Cyberman]

Religion can also be an impediment to scientific discovery if unchecked. In the famous story of the modern discovery of penicillin, had Alexander Fleming decided that his Staphylococcus samples were killed off by God and was satisfied with that as an answer, there would have been no need to investigate the true cause. The modern world would have been very different.

That's why even scientists with religious backgrounds have to leave all that baggage at the door and follow the evidence where it leads.

[Mister Agenda]

There is no advantage in science, it will not escape the same results as any group of humans in history has shown.

Um, scientists aren't a political party or religious movement, they just study nature.

---

So you think children precede their parents? Because, if not, your claim that science was once a child of the church is completely devoid of meaning. And if so, you're an idiot.

If you can admit it was a stupid claim to make, you can get on with your life a wiser man. We've all said things we didn't really think through, there's no shame in it. Around here, being able to admit when you're wrong does wonders for one's credibility.

---

The Church can't have birthed something that existed before it did. Why on earth would you scream something so profoundly stupid?

It birthed 17 different new sciences and their founding fathers, whose names I have listed, being able to see that may do wonders for you're fault finding needs.

So you've moved from 'it' to 'some' without admitting any mistake. If you start saying things that are true, or at least well thought out, that would do wonders for me not finding fault.

[mickiel]

Because they did not let their beliefs get in the way of science.

It's called Compartmentalization, and it's the same reason you can

Quote scripture, and still claim you're not religious.

The oft-cited example of Francis Collins, founder of the human genome project and devout Christian, would not have been able to follow the evidence where it led, and scientifically prove the Adam and Eve story is impossible if he kept to strict religious doctrine.

The same goes for every other scientist.

Other religions existed during those ages, but they were persecuted.

http://www.thefinertimes.com/Middle-Ages...-ages.html

We have to use common sense, I am sure some of those religious scientist may have been crossdressers, only dressing in religion, but I seriously doubt the majority of them.

No, no, no; how are you going to separate a mans philosophy from his work? Come come now, the church birthed Charles Bell - the first to map the brain
Robert Boyle- founded modern chemistry
John Dalton - Atomic Theory
John Fleming - Electronics
Issac Newton-- Laws of Grtavity

All Christian, many ministers, some theologians. You cannot change these birth certificates and remove their religion or the churches influence over them.

And you could plug in any other religion, or no religion, and they still would have been equipped with the brains that led them to their discoveries, and they still would have been correct about them. God did not hand down these things to them, they used their brains. Religion is completely irrelevant in the operation of their scientific minds.

This is what's so sick about religion, the way it simply has to lay claim to absolutely everything, to demand ownership over things they have no rights to. Or are you actually saying that, had Newton not been a christian, he wouldn't have discovered gravity?

Religion is not sick, man is. And Newton was predestined to be Christian and discover gravity; you cannot separate the two.

[Crossless2.0]

Religion is not sick, man is. And Newton was predestined to be Christian and discover gravity; you cannot separate the two.

Newton was predestined to be a Christian and discover gravity? So much for that precious free will you Christers keep jabbering about.

And yes, I agree that humans (many anyway) are sick: their invention of gods and religion is proof enough of that.

[Losty]

---

Other religions existed during those ages, but they were persecuted.

http://www.thefinertimes.com/Middle-Ages...-ages.html

We have to use common sense, I am sure some of those religious scientist may have been crossdressers, only dressing in religion, but I seriously doubt the majority of them.

And you could plug in any other religion, or no religion, and they still would have been equipped with the brains that led them to their discoveries, and they still would have been correct about them. God did not hand down these things to them, they used their brains. Religion is completely irrelevant in the operation of their scientific minds.

This is what's so sick about religion, the way it simply has to lay claim to absolutely everything, to demand ownership over things they have no rights to. Or are you actually saying that, had Newton not been a christian, he wouldn't have discovered gravity?

Religion is not sick, man is. And Newton was predestined to be Christian and discover gravity; you cannot separate the two.

---

I'm starting to feel like you intentionally do this weird quote thing just to annoy Stimbo.
Don't do that. Beccs and I have the whole 'teasing' Stimbo thing handled already.

[The Valkyrie]

---

Religion is not sick, man is. And Newton was predestined to be Christian and discover gravity; you cannot separate the two.

---

I'm starting to feel like you intentionally do this weird quote thing just to annoy Stimbo.
Don't do that. Beccs and I have the whole 'teasing' Stimbo thing handled already.

I'm sure we do it better.

Plus, I suspect, Stimbo might actually like us.

[KichigaiNeko]

Has anyone pointed out that torture and cruelty are also children of the church?

[Esquilax]

Religion is not sick, man is. And Newton was predestined to be Christian and discover gravity; you cannot separate the two.

I don't need to separate the two; there's no connection between them to separate. Newton's Christianity did not cause him to discover gravity, and one could equally say, as I pointed out earlier, that Newton believed in his ability to defecate before he believed in god; clearly, if we're just randomly connecting beliefs to deeds here, there's stronger evidence that Isaac Newton's belief in his need to poop caused him to discover gravity, and you cannot separate the two.

After all, Newton definitely pooped more than he hung out in churches. He was pooping for longer, and I have no doubt the feeling of doing so was more satisfying. Hell, he would have died if he didn't, which should demonstrate his conviction about his poop. Clearly, Isaac Newton was a pooper more than he was a Christian. If any belief led him to his discovery of gravity, it's more likely to be the poop thing, just on the balance of probability.

Or could it be that these things are unconnected, and that trying to draw a connection between them is dishonest chicanery?