DIYbanter - View Single Post

Han

wrote in news:etg0l75bnr6desab5ubucthrfmplmnjjtg@
4ax.com:

Han, you are dealing with what I (and many others) refer to as "pure
science" - or "applied science" where you are investigating something
that happens - in real time - and studying all the effects of
different compounds - which can be identified, and hopefully,
eventually, understood.
No "faith" required.

I know. That's my field, so to speak. I'm using the story to emphasize
that science at times cannot explain things, at least not easily or in
real detail. Later, when other studies add more detail things become
clear(er) in some respects, but pose novel questions to be further
studied. The same holds true for mathematics, theoretical physics or
cosmology, or other aspects of science or "life". In other words, what
is a "mystery" now can later be logically explained/proven. And similar
things happen to ethical/moral behaviors.

Theoretical science - and theoretical physics in particular, is a
horse of a different colour - at least today. The Perimeter Institute
of Theoretical Physics is just down the road from my home - less than
2 miles away. Progress is being made - and some of the geniuses
working there actually have some pretty good and well established
theories and are making progress towards understanding.

Yes, I see that no different than "real hard" science like mathematics.
The lingo may be different, and the starting points perhaps a bit fuzzier
than the concept of zero and 1+1=2, but that is where it ultimately goes
back to. You have to add quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle
and thermodynamics, but those are now well understood by those who study
it even a little.

The "science" of history and understanding the origin of the
universe, earth, and life are relatively in their infancy - and while
theories abound NOTHING has actually been "proved".

There are gaps in some details, perhaps big gaps, and the hypotheses may
not yet be real hard theories, but the real hard mapping points are well-
defined. Big Bang, formation of our galaxy from hydrogen as well as from
the results of earlier supernovas generating carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and
all the other elements, accretion on Earth of water, start of life and
all the extinctions, etc, etc are facts. Period. Even the development
of morality/ethics is now observed in animals and lower forms. That CAN
be explained as driven by evolution, without a God principle.

The whole "quantum" physics is totally beyond my understanding -
although the concept of parallel universes and different planes and
time/space continuums actually has a lot of possibilities for
explaining the "spiritual", and the concept of "eternity".

IMO, that is still SciFi or a rather far extension of quantum theories,
but indeed entirely possible, although so far not observable, the key to
real science.

My guess is that a LOT of scientists in this field will find there is
a lot more "truth" to the biblical record than they are currently
willing to entertain. ( as have many archeologists and physical
historians - as places mentioned in the historical biblical records,
foprmerly thought to be ficticious, are found - and the basics - if
not all the details, are found to be historically accurate.)

(see below)

You (as well as the hard core believers) need to understand and
remember that although the old testament scriptures may be "inspired"
they are based on a long verbal tradition before they were written -
and they are based on what was understandable by those people at that
time.
You (or they) cannot base a 6000 year old earth on the information
contained in the first 3 books of the old testament - and science CAN
prove that something existed long before 4000BC. Any "reasonable"
Christian, or other Theist, needs to admit that there is a strong
possibility that the 7 day creation is more of a metaphore than a
detailed scientific explanation.

Now are you saying that the Bible is a SciFi-like description of observed
realities, orally transmitted from person to person until it got finally
written down, with distortions from reality? I'll never dispute that the
Bible has historical facts, and that some facts are strung together
metaphorically.

And any "reasonable" scientist needs to also accept that - and the
FACT there is much they still cannot explain or understand which MAY
be related to some power they cannot prove or disprove - and the
concept of "time" or "age" may have been severely distorted by some
event, or some power, which is not yet understood by science - and
this "power" MAY be the "god" power or entity on which religion is
based.

Now you are inferring a God where I just see uncertainty as to what,
where, how and when. But that is fine with me grin.

I won't even get into discussions of New Testament scripture or the
diety of Christ - other than to say anyone who doubts the EXISTANCE of
the "historical Christ" has a strong bias and has blinkers on. That he
existed is a well established historical fact. Who or what he was is a
matter (at least to this point) of faith.

The only God-like thing I see here is Mary's conception of Jesus, if the
Bible is factually correct.

Of course, it has been pointed out before that for almost any statement
in the Bible, one can find another statement that is opposite, but I'm
definitely not a Bible expert!!

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid