Re: Existence of life
whats more believable;DNA, fossils, scientific evidence, or being sent to earth from heaven for eating an apple?
Re: Existence of life
What do you have against apples?
Re: Existence of life
We talked about this. Yes, it is different. I am not going to debate it again but I will say this; the two have very different forms of existence. While it is possible that we are in some sort of a simulation made by aliens, the matter with which we and computers are created are different. However at the subatomic level, we are still the same! It's like when we create a game, we create all of it using the same programming, graphics, and animation. However, the characters inside the game behave as though they are living but everything else is non-living.
If you ask a human if computers continue to exist, we would say no they don't because they don't have souls. We think we have souls, what if our creator who put us in this simulation knows we don't have souls. What if wanting to live on after death is our wishful thinking and hence we think we have souls and have all these mystical experiences as a result of it?
This is your belief, and alien are like 'gods'? or something else
Re: Existence of life
It's just sad when people start attacking each other's beliefs and this has been a case of each and every discussion on this topic from both sides. So I never understand why you people even bother with this.
Re: Existence of life
This is the great thing about science, whether you believe it or not it's remains true. Unlike gods...that demand faith and belief, otherwise fade away.
Peace kprasad
Actually your statement is false ... nothing is true ... because nothing is objective in the absolute sense ... everything requires some level of faith. And even if things are true without faith they serve no purpose at all until and unless someone believes in it.
A certain level of deduction can help us arrive at truth ... but it is a big mistake to conflate science with truth.
It is also wrong to put Zeus into the category of Allah (SWT) and I will show you why ... and yes ... I can take on a discussion about evolution if you don't mind.
First let's go back to your claim ...
Coherent - So let's see how coherent evolution really is ... Define the mechanism of evolution and then we will test this as we progress in the discussion ... All you need to do ... by what mechanism does evolution take place?
Re: Existence of life
Ethan Hunt, this for discussion purpose only.
If theorist says she/he is offended by my post, i appologize.
Re: Existence of life
Ethan Hunt, this for discussion purpose only. If theorist says she/he is offended by my post, i appologize.
Ajaz bhai, my post wasn't directed at you or theorist at all :)
Waise, some of the posts remind of Prometheus
Re: Existence of life
No, not offended. My reaction to your posts is always something like this: 
First, I never equated Aliens with God. Stop putting words in my mouth as you always do. You did not get what my point. As always, you are looking to pick a point to argue instead of debate. Second, I would admit evolution is wrong if I felt that way. Like obviously, it is so totally not as convincing as a woman being born out of a man’s rib spontaneously, right? The thing with evolution is, you could actually predict certain outcomes examining fossil records. When the results verify predictions, then there has got to be some truth to it. No?
Re: Existence of life
You’re making a rather absurd and twisted ontological argument that theists typically make. You’re trying to compare science to religion. There is no comparison. The two are not the same. Science provides objectivity via the scientific method and peer review, religion has no such constraints. Science does not require faith, it requires evidence and data. Faith is belief in the absence of evidence.
Religion only works when someone believes it, not science. Numerous religious texts speak of a geocentric universe. People believed it. There are still people that believe it, in spite of evidence. They take their religious texts on faith. Yet, regardless of what people believe and believed in ages past, the universe continues with the Earth as nothing more than a little spec in it’s vastness.
Science provides a way for getting the truth and understanding it. Science is a method. Your analogy is wrong.
There are several mechanisms by which evolution occurs. Some are: descent, mutation, genetic variation, genetic drift, natural selection, and co-evolution.
Here is a great resource: Evolution 101: Mechanisms of Evolution
Another issue, I’ll point out at the outset is: Theists have no counter theory. They have no counter evidence.
Re: Existence of life
well said!
Re: Existence of life
Science provides objectivity via the scientific method and peer review, religion has no such constraints. Science does not require faith, it requires evidence and data. Faith is belief in the absence of evidence.
Peace kprasad
Well it seems like you do not want to provide me the answer to my question. No worries ... I will accept your definitions above ...
I declare that I have 'science' in Islam ...
This is is because I am now prevented from calling it faith ... By your definition faith is belief in the absence of evidence ... So as a result my conviction in Islam must be science ... Because I do have evidence. The first piece of evidence is "The Holy Qur'an" ...
Can you accept that? If not why?
Re: Existence of life
Peace kprasad
Well it seems like you do not want to provide me the answer to my question. No worries ... I will accept your definitions above ...
*I declare that I have 'science' in Islam ... *
This is is because I am now prevented from calling it faith ... By your definition faith is belief in the absence of evidence ... So as a result my conviction in Islam must be science ... Because I do have evidence. The first piece of evidence is "The Holy Qur'an" ...
Can you accept that? If not why?
So if I write a book today and call it the word of God, will that become a piece of evidence? It doesn't work that way. Can we put every page of Quran to test? We haven't even allowed ourselves to question Islam fully and here you are equating Islam with Science. Who are you kidding, man?
You are seeing science in Islam even though it is not there. If that's not faith then I don't know what is.
Re: Existence of life
Simply transposing the word science for faith, doesn’t make the terms synonyms. You can call an orange an apple all you want, but it’s still not the same. If you want to put your faith through the same rigors that scientific theories must undergo, then lets start with evidence, data, and peer review.
If you want to present your holy book as evidence, let’s start with your evidence for your deity. The book isn’t evidence for it’s contents.
Re: Existence of life
So if I write a book today and call it the word of God, will that become a piece of evidence? It doesn't work that way. Can we put every page of Quran to test? We haven't even allowed ourselves to question Islam fully and here you are equating Islam with Science. Who are you kidding, man?
You are seeing science in Islam even though it is not there. If that's not faith then I don't know what is.
Peace Theorist
No no no ... You've got it wrong ... I'm only following kprasad's "well said" response ... Which was not well said at all ... I think it was flawed ... Now you say it does not work that way ... Let's do the needful ... Let's test the notion that the Qur'an is acceptable evidence for the truth of Islam.
Re: Existence of life
Simply transposing the word science for faith, doesn't make the terms synonyms. You can call an orange an apple all you want, but it's still not the same. If you want to put your faith through the same rigors that scientific theories must undergo, then lets start with evidence, data, and peer review. If you want to present your holy book as evidence, let's start with your evidence for your deity. The book isn't evidence for it's contents.
Peace kprasad
Please don't forget I am using YOUR definition of the terms science and faith ... I am technically not allowed to call my faith in Islam a faith anymore because you said a faith has to be belief in the absence of evidence. Not I !!!
Now to clarify my claim ...
My claim is that the Qur'an is a miracle ... Humanly impossible to make something like it ... Yet it exists ... That for me is the evidence in the truth of Islam ... that it is of Divine Source.
According to the Qur'an ... Deity is Unseen ... So you cannot ask me to provide evidence for a measurable, contained, prone to probing Entity because by definition it cannot be God ... As that would prove to be inferior to our probing ... That would rig the experiment to failure ... So it is an a priori that God is Unseen ... Meaning there is no physical way to commune with God that is objective ... Unless of course God Chooses to do it Himself, but even that would require the use of intermediaries. Yet we can utilise rational argument to see that it is true ... That if God exists and He has not yet been detected then it follows as possible that He is undetectable, which is the Islamic belief in God.
But at the same time we cannot say that God does not exist ... Because to say that we need to prove that we can detect everything all the time ...
Re: Existence of life
Okay so let's also pick up the coherence in evolution ...
These several mechanisms are they all working all the time or are they not all working all the time? Can something evolve without any one of these being present? Can evolution take place without mutation for example?
Re: Existence of life
Peace Theorist
No no no ... You've got it wrong ... I'm only following kprasad's "well said" response ... Which was not well said at all ... I think it was flawed ... Now you say it does not work that way ... Let's do the needful ... Let's test the notion that the Qur'an is acceptable evidence for the truth of Islam.
How?
Re: Existence of life
Peace kprasad
Please don't forget I am using YOUR definition of the terms science and faith ... I am technically not allowed to call my faith in Islam a faith anymore because you said a faith has to be belief in the absence of evidence. Not I !!!
Now to clarify my claim ...
My claim is that the Qur'an is a miracle ... Humanly impossible to make something like it ... Yet it exists ... That for me is the evidence in the truth of Islam ... that it is of Divine Source.
According to the Qur'an ... Deity is Unseen ... So you cannot ask me to provide evidence for a measurable, contained, prone to probing Entity because by definition it cannot be God ... As that would prove to be inferior to our probing ... That would rig the experiment to failure ... So it is an a priori that God is Unseen ... Meaning there is no physical way to commune with God that is objective ... Unless of course God Chooses to do it Himself, but even that would require the use of intermediaries. Yet we can utilise rational argument to see that it is true ... That if God exists and He has not yet been detected then it follows as possible that He is undetectable, which is the Islamic belief in God.
But at the same time we cannot say that God does not exist ... Because to say that we need to prove that we can detect everything all the time ...
That's an Agnostic view. Agnostic view is always right because it's neither true nor false.
Re: Existence of life
Peace kprasad
Please don't forget I am using YOUR definition of the terms science and faith ... I am technically not allowed to call my faith in Islam a faith anymore because you said a faith has to be belief in the absence of evidence. Not I !!!
Now to clarify my claim ...
My claim is that the Qur'an is a miracle ... Humanly impossible to make something like it ... Yet it exists ... That for me is the evidence in the truth of Islam ... that it is of Divine Source.
According to the Qur'an ... Deity is Unseen ... So you cannot ask me to provide evidence for a measurable, contained, prone to probing Entity because by definition it cannot be God ... As that would prove to be inferior to our probing ... That would rig the experiment to failure ... So it is an a priori that God is Unseen ... Meaning there is no physical way to commune with God that is objective ... Unless of course God Chooses to do it Himself, but even that would require the use of intermediaries. Yet we can utilise rational argument to see that it is true ... That if God exists and He has not yet been detected then it follows as possible that He is undetectable, which is the Islamic belief in God.
But at the same time we cannot say that God does not exist ... Because to say that we need to prove that we can detect everything all the time ...
You're not using my definition of anything. You're transposing words, and then insisting that it's my definition. That's not the case. The way you're using the word 'science', is incorrect:* I declare that I have 'science' in Islam
*
You're welcome to claim whatever you like! But where is the evidence? Where is your data? You can't use a book as the veracity of it's own claims.
So, just to be clear: What you're saying is that you're using a bronze age book to verify it's self, you have no evidence of a diety, and you cannot provide evidence for a deity. All you have is faith that your holy book is more miraculous than all the other miraculous holy books.
Okay so let's also pick up the coherence in evolution ... These several mechanisms are they all working all the time or are they not all working all the time? Can something evolve without any one of these being present? Can evolution take place without mutation for example?
They are working all the time. Some have a more profound effect at a certain time than others.
Re: Existence of life
You're not using my definition of anything. You're transposing words, and then insisting that it's my definition. That's not the case. The way you're using the word 'science', is incorrect:* I declare that I have 'science' in Islam * You're welcome to claim whatever you like! But where is the evidence? Where is your data? You can't use a book as the veracity of it's own claims.
So, just to be clear: What you're saying is that you're using a bronze age book to verify it's self, you have no evidence of a diety, and you cannot provide evidence for a deity. All you have is faith that your holy book is more miraculous than all the other miraculous holy books.
They are working all the time. Some have a more profound effect at a certain time than others.
Okay so I can't use the word science and I can't use the word faith ... So what can I use?
can you accept that faith can include evidence? If so, then I accept I have faith in Islam.
ok so they are working all the time ... Can evolution occur without mutation? What determines how their effects are more profound and when?