Concur Chucky. I hate to say it but it seems the number of absolutely moronic threads on SimHQ keeps increasing as time goes on.

A Christian who interprets the Book of Genesis literally or interprets it as allegory? That distinction makes a huge difference for any science vs. religion debate.

No, no it's not. Why? There's a little something called GEOLOGY which has a mountain of evidence disproving such a notion. So go ahead and post as many links to fictional tv shows as you want and I'll go with my trusty Geology.

Depends on you call worlds PM. The oceans are largely unexplored.

As I said, I'm also a man of science.

I believe much of the Bible is allegory and metaphor to be interpreted--Genesis in particular. General and special relativity do a great job providing a foundation for some of this interpretation, as well as other concepts such as M-Theory.



Consider, for a moment, encountering an alien civilization who were primitives. You were on a starship, of course, capable of interstellar travel and other wonders. When you meet them, and tell them stories of your world or even their future, would you speak to them on your level, or would you speak on theirs? To do so would require heavy metaphor.


I don't believe in science vs. religion. I feel they complement each other.

We haven't been to the center of the world. I read a book by Jules Verne....




No one knows what's in there. There may still be dinosaurs that survived. Atlantis or something similar may exist. All those UFO folks seen may come from the ocean like that Abyss movie.

Yep!

and Santa Claus is in charge of the whole thing! Except Atlantis of course. Jason Mamoa has taken that over in the name of Polynesia.

I think NFB has raised the trolling level now to 11. Spinal Tap would be impressed.

I always thought this was a pretty good logical look at bringing religion into creation:


And I think it can apply to the origin of life, as well. Bringing in something supernatural is an extra step, and once brought in, it then should be held to the same standard. If supernatural forces are being brought in because some of the natural processes can't be explained or are unknown, then to accept the supernatural forces, they need to be explained, or they are just an extra unexplained step.

They can complement each other as long as the religion in question is not a fundamentalist version.

Wasn't there a movie about nazis on dinosaurs living inside the Earth? Seems legit.

I think we both agree that literalism is a detriment.

The way I see the duality of these two concepts, is science provides the logical understanding, while religion provides insight into the unknown, speculation for theories, and moral and ethical underpinnings that science cannot address. Both concepts fill a void the other lacks. I watched a movie this weekend that coincidentally semi-addressed this, much to my surprise, which I'll mention in the movie thread. I did not expect that from the film at all, but, I never know what to expect when watching independent film.



Arthonon: Sagan was a true genius. He was also wise enough to proclaim he didn't know if there were a God or not, thus remained agnostic, instead of atheist like many of his peers. Isaac Asimov, one who was among the certain and decided, respected him immensely, and even admitted Sagan was smarter than he.

To those of us who know science in and out and more, but whom are also religious, we see an inherent beauty in how the Universe works, based on scientific concepts, laws, and even theory. We're okay with admitting we don't know everything, for we don't, and our Faith fills this void. But make no mistake, we unrelentingly crave knowledge and understanding. Science is our God-given tool to explore the unknown.

Perhaps there are some answers to questions, and realities, that mankind does not have the ability to understand.
I'm betting on that. We are an obnoxious, flawed species. We know fook all.