Can we define God by the way of science?

[kakaballi]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

@Southie

… But that doesn’t make them fact in the scientific community…Yes I used fairy tales in this context cause science and religion, just as govt and religion, don’t mix…

Not true. Several leading living scientists do believe in God and their work is not discredited because of that. You can have any belief you want, but please do not make sweeping statements.

Govt and religion don’t mix??? Why do I find 5 references to God in: Barack Obama Inauguration Speech - Jan 20 Inaugural ?

Not trying to put you down but please don’t ask people not to bring religion into a thread where OP is clearly asking about God. If you have a problem with religion, then it should be YOU who should keep out of the thread.

[usernamepassword]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

What a pointless thread. Discussing God without mixing 'religion'.

Wat nonsense?

[muqawwee123]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

oh that liberal fascist again blatantly called holy scriptures ‘fairy tales’. How convenient that has become for him.shame on him. Still he had an audacity to deny that he is not anti-religion and not making others’ beliefs.. isse kehte hain aankhon main matti jhonkna

Why don’t he make his signature ‘I have allergy from religion and religious based opinion’ to make other posters life easier, once and for all.

PS: I know he won’t read my post, so someone please convey him my best regards

[KKF]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

@muqawwee123

oh that liberal fascist again called holy scriptures ‘fairy tales’. shame on him. Still he had an audacity to deny that he is not anti-religion and not making others’ beliefs.. isse kehte hain aankhon main matti jhonkna

Why don’t he make his signature ‘I have allergy from religion and religious based opinion’ to make other posters life easier, once and for all.

PS: I know he won’t read my post, so someone please convey him my best regards

lol @ convey your message…do some of us have a personal reltionship with the said person? i don’t even know who you are talking about!

[muqawwee123]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

@KKF

lol @ convey your message…do some of us have a personal reltionship with the said person? i don’t even know who you are talking about!

ik hi to hai jiski obsession her kisi ko pata hai.. jaane na jaae gul hi jaane, bagh to saara jaane hai. gul = gul muhmmad who never have a junbash, instead of getting so much feed back.

[KKF]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

@muqawwee123

ik hi to hai jiski obsession her kisi ko pata hai.. jaane na jaae gul hi jaane, bagh to saara jaane hai. gul = gul muhmmad who never have a junbash, instead of getting so much feed back.

oh…is that gul a male or a female…i mean a Guppie or a Guppan?

mujhe bhii un maaliyoN meN shumaar kar lijiye jisko uske chaman ke har ‘gul’ ke baare meN 'ilm nahiiN.

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

@kakaballi

Not true. Several leading living scientists do believe in God and their work is not discredited because of that. You can have any belief you want, but please do not make sweeping statements.

Govt and religion don’t mix??? Why do I find 5 references to God in: Barack Obama Inauguration Speech - Jan 20 Inaugural ?

Not trying to put you down but please don’t ask people not to bring religion into a thread where OP is clearly asking about God. If you have a problem with religion, then it should be YOU who should keep out of the thread.

First, when I state religion and govt should not mix, I mean government should not have religion based laws. There are several here who would not hesitate to impose religion based laws on people. Hope that is clear.

Folks are entitled to their opinion. And I have given mine with regards to why ones faith is faith and science is science.

For me, these are perfect circles. For them there is proof in everything. No need to get upset about it.

The fairy tale part came well into the discussion. Just as some scientists believe in God, some scientists dont. But they won’t bite each others head off , would they. And neither would they “keep out of threads” when religious conviction passes off as scientific fact.

As i stated in one of my earlier posts, it is a good thing religion is being inserted into Science threads. This place is all but dead. Infusing life into it by having discussions on religion is a good thing. Gets more people here. And maybe a percentage starts participating in these threads. Bring religion into science by all means. But anything is possible may be perfectly ok if it’s said in the Vedas. But if Hari or Ram start using Vedic scriptures to prove their case, it is appropriate to say “what a fine circle”

No. Your post was not a put down. Neither is my clarification.

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

Anyway, this is a holy time of the year for most here. I agree use of fairy tales could be seen as hurtful. Will delete any reference to that term.

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

@Monk

kaka you asked for it.

ok see when we see a statement in quran, which we think beyond its time in its accuracy. Like some one from to day went back and wrote it.
See how language or quran is not, how human struggle to measure and name phenomena.

so we have believer saying look look this is true…
non beliver say, no its not precise. Essentially they are not denying statements in quran. What they are saying is its only odds that the statement is right.
Fair enough!!

So assume, statement like “if you go in deep in ocean , extend you hand you wont be able to see it”(in my words)
Non believer says, its just odd.
50/50
sea could be dark
sea could not be dark

chances of this statement being right was, with out any one actually knowing it, 50/50 like flipping a coin.

Thats where probability comes in.

1/1 right 50% chance or .2000 some thing probability.
10/10 statements being right, on the base of every statement could have only 2 options

100/100 statement right, on the base of, they could either this or that, just like coin flip chances are

I am sure you know the 10 power -31 means.

now the fun part comes.

What about the statements where there could be a 100 scenarios?? yet quran get it right??
like when quran say… milk come from animals between her blood and intestine …

so if you plug that into probability, I have NO freaking idea, what would still blind you from see the truth.

(is it better ?)
if not, I have to go sleep.

1. how is 50% probability equal to 0.2?
2. no idea what relevance of cow milk origin
3. did you get good sleep?

By the way, why would a believer or a non believer assign a probability of 0.5 to being able to see ones hand deep in the ocean. If you go deep enough, I would think the probability would approach 1 that one can’t see ones hand deep down?

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

not ture.

observation tell, because how far down people could with out modern equipments, there was light. To go that deep "where you extend hand and dont see" you need to put on driving gear which could withstand water pressure at that level . Know one knew that fact, untill that gear was invented.

Isn't that what probability is about? For a believer, the probability will be 1 that hand can be seen. Cause he will bring in what is stated in the puranas. How there were gods in the bottom of the sea who had their kingdoms. He will be convinced that it is possible. For the puranas said so.

A person who uses science to figure things out may come to the conclusion that beyond a certain depth, which would be a function of seawater concentration and the sun intensity, the probability would approach 1 that one can't see ones hand at depths > certain value

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

What should be the role of religion in science education and bioethics? | Michael Reiss - Academia.edu

Great article.

[Monk]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

1) how is 50% probability equal to 0.2? 2) no idea what relevance of cow milk origin 3) did you get good sleep?

By the way, why would a believer or a non believer assign a probability of 0.5 to being able to see ones hand deep in the ocean. If you go deep enough, I would think the probability would approach 1 that one can't see ones hand deep down?

1- My bad, its 20%
3-NO!! I want to sleep so bad.
2-milk and cow:
I started making my point with statements, Wichita would be either or. like its day or night. only 2 outcomes. Random guess you would have .5 probabily for being right.

Because arrogant people, no matter who much we cry, tend to ignore us, on the bases of this theory.
Theory:
its random talking, there is chance of being right. Specially language of the statements not being what we call precise.

Then I made my point, That even with 50/50 percent chance, if you expand it over more statements, probability theory/procedure show you clearly
its not possible to have statement after statement right.
Up to this point with simple to option,(day or night) we have established its not random guessing, rather some one talking who knows.

Then I added more example about the statements, like cow and milk(from quran) now in this case there for random talk, or guessing there are just too many possible out options/outcomes.

So if we add that to our probability analysis. and is we need to model it.
Its like a 100 surface coin or box, tossing and getting the right side up.

Probability of that happening more then once is like one in millions if not trillions.

I want you to stay on science. Precise and honest. Like a scientist.

You are smart enough. Probability is simple enough to read.
I made my case clear enough as well.

You don't need help, you can see for your self.

Water in the ocean:
I dont know, but my guess would be refractive index. when light goes into more or less dens media, it changes angel. Water being colder and being more dense would cause light to make U and go back(sort of)

Point is, know one knew this, Its not common wisdom, but its in quran. as example.

I put so much effort writing this..
I want you read it. Answer me. Precisely.
I swear i have no wish to win argument. So I consider my self loser.
Take your time weak,, or month... think about it.

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

I still don't get the cow milk analogy. I assume what you are saying is - the Quran accurately predicted where cows milk originated from?

As for ocean, I assume you are stating the Quran has mentioned the theory of refraction if not explicitly then implicitly by stating if u go deep enough in the ocean there may be no light there?

By the way, you type worse than I do. What does Wichita have to do with this (jk )

[redvelvet]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

^Perhaps you'd be interested (if not convinced) in Maurice Bucaille's findings, if you haven't already looked into it. Again, just to read, as it's relevant to this thread, not necessarily to be convinced. That's up to the individual.

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

I don't know who Maurice Bucaille is

[redvelvet]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

Bucaillism is a term given to connection of science to religion. He is a French doctor and scientist and has compared the Bible and Quran with scientific discoveries. Some say he did not do an adequate study of the Bible. I think he also examined the body of a mummy which maybe he hypothesized was the pharaoh that the Quran tells us died from drowning. I read a little about him ages ago. But if you're interested, you can look into it.

[Southie]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

Thanks. Will look into it.

[muqawwee123]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

Bucaillism is a term given to connection of science to religion. He is a French doctor and scientist and has compared the Bible and Quran with scientific discoveries. Some say he did not do an adequate study of the Bible. I think he also examined the body of a mummy which maybe he hypothesized was the pharaoh that the Quran tells us died from drowning. I read a little about him ages ago. But if you're interested, you can look into it.

Is he the scientist whose book is banned in France?

[TLK]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

There are certain things that dont have any scientific proof. They are built on faith, and that faith is a very important part of how we act as a society. Love, loyalty, respect, submission .. all these, even when applied within human relationships, have no scientific equation to prove their validity. I have absolute faith that my wife respects and love me and she is loyal to me. She has the same faith on me. Now if tomorrow, we start rejecting these feelings that create this amazing bond between my wife and I, just because I cant write a second order differential equation to quantify the feelings, or cant put them under microscope to see the tini tiny loyalty particles floating in her blood stream, then our bond will cease to exist. If everyone does that then you wont have the beautiful world that we have around us, anymore.

Not knowing that universe starts with a big bang, or proton and electrons have exact but opposite charge is not going to kill humanity. Absence of faith will.

God is not science. God is faith. Its as real as the H2O molecules in your glass full of water. If we dont have a way of quantifying it, then its our problem, not God's

[redvelvet]

Re: Can we define God by the way of science?

I never thought of it that way, TLK....that quantifying or basing everything in measurable amounts can be detracting. Usually we tend to think it can only make things better, more valid, more real. That's a interesting, profound angle you put forth.

The irreligious will, however, argue that it's faith that is killing humanity. :/