Science is Better than Religion

Believing in science is the future. Religion can't even compete. Science outclasses religion in every category.

Attached: Science-Logo.png (387x262, 11K)

I don't know who, but some renowned scientist said: "First sip of science and you're an atheist - finish the glass and you'll find God.".

You can't do Jihad on science

Attached: 1520544218779.jpg (407x408, 34K)

There's no contradiction to believing in evolution and believing in a creator.

>not knowing the failure of totalitarian absolutism

Good luck being told you are gay and that you are killing the environment by breathing.

You may be an agnostic scientist, but full on religious scientists are rare.

You special book says that the earth is only 6,00 years old, and that all people come from Adam and Eve. How can you believe in evolution and that at the same time?

The problem really shows in the fact that we on earth can see starslight that's sometimes billions of years old. That's not possible with a "young" earth of 6 million years old.

>I don't know
You just wrapped up every religious argument ever.

Some renowned dickhead quoted a retarded quote on Sup Forums

JESUS IS LORD!

PROVE ME WRONG FAGGOTS!

Attached: imagjes.jpg (264x191, 6K)

Attached: 7c7c0bc09445655080237626e631cc6d3e1730a4d58f032e28fb5314b4e2e6ea.jpg (521x522, 93K)

JESUS IS NOT GAY!

Attached: gay jesus.jpg (275x183, 8K)

>Deism doesn't exist

Also there were pre adamic people that were written into Genesis. A day can also mean a step.

Fuck off kike.

Not bad.

Attached: 2018-03-10-174227_369x436.png (369x436, 175K)

scientism is worse religion than islam

Reminder that if you are a true believer in empirical truth you must admit you have no basis or integrity when it comes to morality. And you have no excuse for adhering to moral ideals outside of punishment by other individuals.

problem is both are controlled by the same (((people))), the proof was that retard they got to play Hawkins far after he died.

>empiricism has no bearing on morality
tip zozzle

The amount of time is largely irrelevant, and is mostly used in the Bible to convey relative duration
I.e 40 days and nights may not be literally that long, but a long duration nonetheless

mentions of pre-humanity God used days as a measure of time, even before God presumably made the sun
So in a sense, time is just a useful human frame of reference for a god that doesn’t really adhere to time

Adam and Eve are a false belief.
Only Ganesh can remove all obstacles to your knowledge.

Attached: ganesh.jpg (317x402, 55K)

You go to science to understand the world.

You go to religion to get philosophy.

Nuff said.

>exact, literally stated times were actually a metaphor
Well, thanks for giving us the ability to apply this to the entire bible, I guess.

Attached: 1521359655515.jpg (960x541, 143K)

Define "scientist."

By and large you can apply it to the whole bible. The Bible is really just a series of short stories, written by humans to be understood by other humans

Any proofs of morality being anything but a subjective construct of society there Degrasse Tyson?

Just like comic books.

If you talk about "believing in science" then you don't understand what science is.

>Science outclasses religion in every category.
What comes after death?
Why does consciousness exist?
Science can't answer the really important questions in life.

Scientism is a disease.

>morality is my feelings!
Congratulations on not only denying religion's biggest claim to being useful (moral objectivism) but also sounding exactly like a liberal.

Which one describes the afterlife?

Oh? The bible describes the afterlife?

Yes, lad. Essentially, it's laymen delving into esotericism.

My question is whether comic books describe the afterlife or does the Holy Bible?

Except far less morally degernerate

JESUS IS LORD AND MY MASTER!

PUNISH ME WHEN I AM BAD!

Attached: index.jpg (275x183, 7K)

Got news for you kid.

Science is a religion.

>Scientism is a disease.
Well that escalated quickly!

There are more depictions of afterlife, several versions of it, in comics than there is in the bible.

>muh stories are less degenerate

Ironically, you're correct.

Only scientists are arrogant enough to consider the origin of existence settled science.

Attached: thank you science.jpg (474x474, 46K)

Science is the opposite of belief.

You actively seek to falsify your beliefs continually.

As long as you're satisfied with that, lad. I'd hate to be living amongst people that don't consider such things.

Science is not the primary function of existence (btw all the best scientists were theists planck, einstein etc)

> Believing in science
I think there is a misunderstanding.

>science thinks the matter is settled
Except that's not how science works. kek Nice projection.

You have to have a sense of belief in science.

Technically black holes are impossible to prove. Just as dark matter and dark energy haven't been proven yet.

>Only scientists are arrogant enough to consider the origin of existence settled science.
No "Scientists" are usually smart enough to understand that they don't know anything.

It is the people who write pop sci, who come up with that nonsense, which is a common form of "Scientism".

Not feelings, just constructed by society, if you really looked at the evidence you could see that Im right. Im not making a case for religion, Im an athiest, but Im tired of people trying to pussyfoot around like science provides a moral, happy, or fair society. The people who follw science are fallible as the clergy they attempt to distance themselves from. They have their own ideological and philosophical views that contraduct scientific evidence, beleiving in a universal morality or system of morality is one of them.

Atheism is a belief because saying that "There is no God" is a claim, thus needs evidence

No real scientist would ever say what you have said OP. Science is not a belief, it is an application of a method. Scientists never say something is absolutely true like people with faith do. They test things and try to shine light onto the blurry truth. So no, scientists do not believe in science, they simply believe in the application of the scientific method. And that is what they practice. Eat shit for making us look bad.

Historically, science wins every debate against religion. Always bet on science. Reals before feels.

Attached: 28E87A73-739A-4FE4-A47F-09F28BE1A1F2.png (796x588, 96K)

>If you looked at the evidence I'm not presenting you'd know I was right.
Constructed by society? You mean constructed by society's feelings.

That was the science of the 40's-90's
Modern science is more validation of previously established data, with a side effect of invalidating faulty models

they aren't science.

they are perfect examples of every thing wrong with "science" today.

that you believe in them without evidence shows you don't know what science is.

i agree.

atheism is an obnoxious religion of annoying bigoted zealots

>dur you don't have to believe in science
Except matter and general relativity is a belief.

Black holes currently defy our understanding of physics. Therefore you have to "believe" they exist. You can't observe a black hole.

yeah I agree, one of them is just evidence based and the other one is the abandoning of it, which I really dont get. But as long as people are honest that their "faith" isnt based on observable facts I see no issue with it.

any honest religious person almost is never a fundementalist, they know it's the metaphorical works of men not to be taken fully seriously

>it hasn't been disproven so that means its true

prove it to us faggot

philosophy isn't dependent on either tbqh, but they work on both

THIS

Daily reminder that atheism is a belief because you can't in objective way prove that "There is no God" and saying that is a claim

Attached: Laughing Grandpa.jpg (270x380, 41K)

The true redpill is agnosticism

If you think science is a belief then maybe you should stick to religion.

>they aren't science

Ok faggot explain gravity

>Modern science is more validation of previously established data...
Well, we live in an age where certain groups straight up push stories as facts and demand science be removed to "make room" for it.

lol

the method hasn't changed idiot.

just KYS

My dude, 30% of dark matter was found to be a relatively cool plasma that is difficult to detect (check out warmhot intersteller medium) and its been absolutely obliterated by recent discoveries concerning the rotation of galaxies. The clusters orbit eachother, and no matter the size they all exhibit a rotational period of roughly 1 billion years. Its also worth noting that dark energy and dark matter were spawned primarily by Einstein fudging his equation and randomly throwing a constant in there to make it work. It was not an intensely rigorous observational finding, as science fags would lead you to believe.

>a set of tools is better than the reason we use those tools
What did he mean by this?

Science is a belief because there is no absolute observation

God damn it do any of you actually understand science?

Religion is so grossly arrogant, and science only a little less so.

Any honest scientist will admit that science will discover the whole truth, but religion is so arrogant it assumes truth.

It's all just a fancy invention of humans

>Therefore you have to "believe" they exist. You can't observe a black hole.

lol

do you not see the irony there?

No science is a religion at all.

i fucking can't even.

pass the bleach.

>therefore make stuff up

That's the whole point asshat

You have to believe they exist otherwise our idea of physics would be defunct.

yes, i realised this when i was about 16.

decades ago.

The true redpile is fucking turbobydlo kurvas.

Attached: 1516443242001.jpg (639x506, 92K)

No it takes a scientific method for multiple observations to come to a round about theory.

I.e gravity is a theory

Is this the most reddit post ever made?

Your bravado isn't an argument, user.

Which replaces the theory of a floating invisible man in the sky.

Believing in science is a religion. (That is, putting your faith and hope in science --that it is the path to truth and happiness-- is a religion.)

Attached: 1463280073654.jpg (403x403, 48K)

Yah you should kill yourself. You might raise the national IQ of Australia by a butt load if you killed yourself.

>therefore make stuff up
Like science does, all the time.

Magical undetectable dark matter and dark energy are just fantasies brought up in an effort to make their half baked equations work.

>The method hasn't changed
t. brainlet who hasn't set foot in a modern lab
The scientific method is a philosophy that has been debated and amended for centuries

Don't kid yourself

gravity is the observed attraction between bodies due to their mass.

Discovery by Newton, proven by the Cavendish experiment.

How it works is still a mystery, Einstein really tells us nothing about how it works, just provided a novel way of visualising it's effect.

and?

The leap from "there is a god" to "there is a Christian/Muslim/Jew god" is immense and any attempt to do so ends in embarrassment.

Attached: the-oh-my-god-burger.jpg (550x412, 47K)

Religious debate has been the biggest proponent of 1984-like speech since these arguments started on Sup Forums.

Fine, by feelings. Any evidence you have to back up your claim that morality and moral systems exist independently from human societsl interaction or consciousness?

Ad hoc fudge factors to prop up a failed theory

They're desperate to prove the impossibility of the miraculous.

>gravity is a theory
Wrong! First, explain gravity and then tell me it's a theory.

>What's this stuff.
>Don't know yet. Just nickname it dark matter. We'll have to find out lat--
>YOU'RE MAKING STUFF UP! NOW BELIEVE MY FAIRY TALES!
tip kek

I'm agnostic. I don't believe in abrahamic religions.

But even biology on a grand scale shows a mechanism that is highly intelligent in regulating itself.

>intelligent design with no personal god

Do I need to? It's the religious argument morality is objective.

Ok. What's ya pinte?

Attached: 99123a.jpg (305x225, 57K)

i wouldn't know, i have never been on reddit.

>But even biology on a grand scale shows a mechanism that is highly intelligent in regulating itself.
Oh? You have proof of this? I mean, you don't, but go ahead and try.
>an agnostic just made an absolute claim near me

I was a reasearch scientist for 6 years (NIH grant, premedical torpor/hibernation and physiology/neuromechanisms). I would say that people have to "believe" science as much as anything. Reality is a belief-based construct. Lrn2sociology

>i wouldn't know, i have never been on reddit.
You encapsulate the spirit of the redditors who come here perfectly, maybe you should try it out?

It takes a series of observations to understand gravity in a theorem.

Gravity is based on general relativity. Something that has changed since newton, who believed in a static weight to the universe.

If you think Science, in it's current form, is absolute then you are inherently stupid.