Religious Beliefs/nutters Going To Screw Up First Contact?

Religious Beliefs/nutters Going To Screw Up First Contact?

Author
Discussion

Halb

Original Poster:

53,012 posts

182 months

Saturday 10th May 2014
quotequote all
Are Religious Beliefs (nutters) Going To Screw Up First Contact?

http://io9.com/are-religious-beliefs-going-to-scre...

mike-r

1,539 posts

190 months

Saturday 10th May 2014
quotequote all
Reminds me of the bit in that Star Trek film with Spock in the volcano.

MartG

20,626 posts

203 months

Sunday 11th May 2014
quotequote all

scubadude

2,618 posts

196 months

Tuesday 13th May 2014
quotequote all
Halb said:
Are Religious Beliefs (nutters) Going To Screw Up First Contact?

http://io9.com/are-religious-beliefs-going-to-scre...
Interesting you added the "(nutters)" tag... much as it pains many religious people (and a few scientists) to admit it the overwhelming majority of Science and Religion do not in any way cancel each other out! Scientists have never disproved any of the major religions and those same religions don't disagree with anything* science has found.
(* Ok, a few minor, obscure exceptions more likely related to the available language of the time the religious texts are from)

As an example, the Christian Bible is a dialogue between Humankind and God, it does not mention ET as they are not germane- it also doesn't say there aren't any. As such a religious "nutter" has nothing to fear from First Contact.
Equally a scientist has nothing to fear as many regard first contact (or at least detection) as inevitable.


That's not to say generic nutters won't run around like Headless chickens when Martians land on the front lawn of the White house with a box chocolates and a nice bottle of plonk for the Obamas.

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Tuesday 13th May 2014
quotequote all
scubadude said:
Scientists have never disproved any of the major religions.....
Nor any of the minor ones, nor the existence of dragons, trolls, tyranids, superman etc etc etc.

The fact that an assertion has not been disproved does not validate the assertion.

The burden of proof is on the person making the assertion to prove that assertion - not on others to disprove it. Life would get rather complicated if any assertion not disproven were taken to be valid.

Edited by Moonhawk on Tuesday 13th May 17:17

Halb

Original Poster:

53,012 posts

182 months

Tuesday 13th May 2014
quotequote all
Well my belief in the ancient religion fairy troll, Clinkerbell will hold me in good stead when our Plutoinian Overlords arrive.

budfox

1,510 posts

128 months

Thursday 15th May 2014
quotequote all
You really do have to laugh at the religious types. There's not one shred of physical evidence, whatsoever, of any kind of greater being. Nothing to support any creator or divine being.

Their beliefs, to a man, are what another man has told them. Their only 'proof' of their belief is that scientists can't readily disprove it. The delusion extends further as there are so many trains of religious thought, yet each believes that theirs is the correct fairy tale. There's only one place to go from this kind of 'logic', and that's the IPU:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicor...

Terminator X

14,922 posts

203 months

Thursday 15th May 2014
quotequote all
"Eventually make contact" rofl

TX.

Halb

Original Poster:

53,012 posts

182 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
Nutjobs. biggrin
Has Christ Been to Other Planets?
http://io9.com/how-would-christianity-deal-with-ex...

rhinochopig

17,932 posts

197 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
scubadude said:
Halb said:
Are Religious Beliefs (nutters) Going To Screw Up First Contact?

http://io9.com/are-religious-beliefs-going-to-scre...
Interesting you added the "(nutters)" tag... much as it pains many religious people (and a few scientists) to admit it the overwhelming majority of Science and Religion do not in any way cancel each other out! Scientists have never disproved any of the major religions and those same religions don't disagree with anything* science has found.
(* Ok, a few minor, obscure exceptions more likely related to the available language of the time the religious texts are from)

As an example, the Christian Bible is a dialogue between Humankind and God, it does not mention ET as they are not germane- it also doesn't say there aren't any. As such a religious "nutter" has nothing to fear from First Contact.
Equally a scientist has nothing to fear as many regard first contact (or at least detection) as inevitable.


That's not to say generic nutters won't run around like Headless chickens when Martians land on the front lawn of the White house with a box chocolates and a nice bottle of plonk for the Obamas.
It doesn't mention kangaroos either. That's why Australia is one of the most secular countries on the planet - they're surrounded by proof that the bible was slapdash when it came to Noah's exploits. Either that or Kangaroos are really Aliens!

Simpo Two

85,150 posts

264 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
scubadude said:
Scientists have never disproved any of the major religions
That is a fine example of non-logic. I could say to you that I have a diving helmet on my head. You cannot disprove it. Does that mean I'm wearing a diving helmet?

No. The onus of proof is on those who say 'There's a big magic bloke behind that cloud, I know there is 'cos it says so in this old book'. They are the ones who need to prove that their assertion is true. But oddly, millions and millions of people over 2,000 years have been unable to prove anything.


KareemK

1,110 posts

118 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
rhinochopig said:
It doesn't mention kangaroos either. That's why Australia is one of the most secular countries on the planet - they're surrounded by proof that the bible was slapdash when it came to Noah's exploits. Either that or Kangaroos are really Aliens!
Indeed. In fact why don't any of the religious texts of any religion tell us something that was outside of what was known at the time? Why do none of them say something that was later found to be true but unknown at the time.

The Earth revolves around the Sun. The existence of 4 entire continents (North America, South America, Antarctica, and Australia. Prehistoric Animals. The list is endless.

SlipStream77

2,153 posts

190 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
KareemK said:
Indeed. In fact why don't any of the religious texts of any religion tell us something that was outside of what was known at the time?
There are plenty of fulfilled Messianic prophecies in the Bible.

KareemK

1,110 posts

118 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
SlipStream77 said:
KareemK said:
Indeed. In fact why don't any of the religious texts of any religion tell us something that was outside of what was known at the time?
There are plenty of fulfilled Messianic prophecies in the Bible.
Thats debateable but isn't what I said anyway.

Sadly those prophecies regarding the Messiah which were then apparently fulfilled (ie The Messiah would be borne in Bethlehem) were all written with hindsight as was the bible and yet still give us no scientific facts or truths concerning anything that was unknown at the time.

Here's a few of the Messianic prophecies:

Messiah would be a prophet.
Messiah would be declared the Son of God.
Messiah would be praised by little children.
Messiah would be forsaken by God.
Messiah would resurrect from the dead.
Messiah would ascend to heaven.

etc etc etc.

There's 44 of them here: http://christianity.about.com/od/biblefactsandlist...

Where's the meat?

thegreenhell

15,115 posts

218 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
scubadude said:
Scientists have never disproved any of the major religions and those same religions don't disagree with anything* science has found.
(* Ok, a few minor, obscure exceptions more likely related to the available language of the time the religious texts are from)
Evolution versus Creationism, the age of our planet and human civilisation, dinosaurs... not much agreement between science and religion on any of those, or are they also 'minor, obscure exceptions'?

Simpo Two

85,150 posts

264 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
KareemK said:
There's 44 of them here: http://christianity.about.com/od/biblefactsandlist...

Where's the meat?
Teehee, that's just a list of facts from the bible's text! Honestly, it's laughable.

KareemK

1,110 posts

118 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
KareemK said:
There's 44 of them here: http://christianity.about.com/od/biblefactsandlist...

Where's the meat?
Teehee, that's just a list of facts from the bible's text! Honestly, it's laughable.
Well its a 'Christian' website and labels the list as '44 Prophecies Jesus Christ Fulfilled'

Do you have an alternative list I can peruse please?



anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
budfox said:
You really do have to laugh at the religious types. There's not one shred of physical evidence, whatsoever, of any kind of greater being. Nothing to support any creator or divine being.

You do understand what faith is?

They don't NEED proof, their beliefs aren't based on proof. It's not a theory.


Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Friday 25th July 2014
quotequote all
Are humans supposed to be 100% rational, logical beings?

Should there be space in our hearts and minds for abstract concepts?

Toltec

7,159 posts

222 months

Saturday 26th July 2014
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Are humans supposed to be 100% rational, logical beings?

Should there be space in our hearts and minds for abstract concepts?
There is a difference between being able to appreciate abstract concepts and believing they are real.

There have been studies into the brain which link the ability to have faith and the way you are wired. Iirc there was evidence that being able to believe in supernatural powers actually had benefits for life expectancy. A little ironic that faith may be an evolutionary advantage.