IBDaMann
Well-known member
This isn't a matter of opinion. It's not subjective. You are objectively incorrect.
All religions are anti-science
- Thread starter Legion
- Start date
So you say.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
All religions are not anti-science, and a majority of engineers in the US are Christian.
The head of the Engineers Society in the US is Christian. I know this to be fact.
The head of the Engineers Society in the US is Christian. I know this to be fact.
Last edited:
You appear to be missing the point.
People who self-identify as adherents of religions do and say things that are at odds with the core beliefs of the the religion they profess to follow.
Religionists and/or "the religious" are not the religion.
Definition of religion:
(1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
(3): a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
(4): a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
Not all people are hypocrites. The head of The Engineer Society of America is not.
That's just my personal opinion. Based on observation.
So you say.
People aren't the topic.
The topic is religion.
Religions are shared belief systems.
I contend that all religions are antiscience.
That does not mean that all people who claim to be religious are antiscience.
It does not mean that all organizations affiliated with religious denominations are antiscience.
It means that all religions themselves are antiscience.
Does that clarify matters?
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
I disagree with you, does that clarify matters?
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Yes I do. I'll also tell you that 2+3=5 ... and you have a 1st Amendment right to similarly not accept that either. Enjoy!
Obviously. if you're willing to discuss the matter, stop back in.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
2+3 does equal 5.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
I'm discussing it right now, wtf is wrong with you?
Can anyone rebut my contention that all religions are antiscience?
Definition of religion:
(1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
(3): a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
(4): a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
Definition of anti-science: a set or system of attitudes and beliefs that are opposed to or reject science and scientific methods and principles.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antiscience
Definition of religion:
(1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
(3): a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
(4): a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion
Definition of anti-science: a set or system of attitudes and beliefs that are opposed to or reject science and scientific methods and principles.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/antiscience
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
^Fail
These ain't Obama rules these days, faggot.
Your OP is shit, and you should feel bad for being a piece of shit.
No Muslim bullshit these days.
No atheistic bullshit, either.
Either you know how the world works, or you don't.
I am guessing you're in the "don't" category.
You have no clue at all. You are derp.
These ain't Obama rules these days, faggot.
Your OP is shit, and you should feel bad for being a piece of shit.
No Muslim bullshit these days.
No atheistic bullshit, either.
Either you know how the world works, or you don't.
I am guessing you're in the "don't" category.
You have no clue at all. You are derp.
Last edited:
I'm waiting for you to advance an argument.
So far, you have mischaracterized the assertion I made, and offered irrelevant and unsourced anecdotes about anonymous Christians and the Army Corps of Engineers.
The floor is yours.
Make your case, if you can.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
If Into the Night hasn't been able to get to this, I'll explain.
A debate is an event held for the benefit of an audience under rules forthwith agreed by the "debaters" with some authority like a moderator running the event.
Two people having a conversation/discussion are just two people having a conversation/discussion. A disagreement over an opinion within the conversation/discussion does not somehow transform the conversation/discussion into an event with a moderator and rules.
.
Since Islam is a religion, I assert that it is also antiscience, and Obama has nothing to do with this.
Is this your best effort to present an alternative point of view?
IBDaMann
Well-known member
You have not shown any religion opposes or rejects science and scientific methods and principles. Your contention is simply dismissed.
Interesting take.
Logic is never absent from any conversation that is intended to inform or persuade, is it?
Making sense of things by establishing relevance and meaning in a conversation seems logical, so that's the only "rule" I follow.
If something I say is challenged, I feel an obligation to support my position or abandon it.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
You're an anti-God idiot. I have no time for you. You'll out yourself as the idiot you are very quickly.
That's the way the world works.
In b4 you jump through hoops upon hoops to try and verify your wrong human-based theories.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
The root of your problem is that you simply don't know what science is. You have some secret, personal definition of "science" that isn't science and you somehow expect people to accept that religions run counter to science simply because you are confused.