Faith Science - Logically Indefensible

subbie said:
Most scientists are in fact people of faith.Please name 2?Let me name a few that aren't of faith:
Einstein, Hawking, Dawkins, Gould,
Darwin, Huxley, Eldredge, Mayr, Simpson, Johanson, Leakey, Sagan, and Asimov

I said this on a Christian forum in Appologetics and am now BOOTED.Scientists follow the evidence, and throw out incorrect data. When theories are found to be falsifiable, they throw out the theory. Its now almost been 150 years since "Origin of Species" and it is still going strong. There are countless errors and inconsitancies in the Bible, and it has yet to be thrown out. Who here is more arrogant? The scientist that accepts the possiblity that one of his theories may be wrong, or the Christian?Something to contemplate.

I don't think there is one Christian scientist that has not been given a lot of money by the Templeton foundation that is a Christian Fundamentalist.Another thought...

That is easy: you see I believe (with some evidence) that Christians that are not fundamentalists, doesn't fit my definition of Christianity. Think about it. Most Christians that go to say presperterian, or old methodist churches, are not concerned with atheists. In fact they are more agnostic, than most atheists. (the two aren't mutually exclusive).
I am not a "Sam Harris" whom has problems with Moderate Christians. They are not interested in thinking about Christianity deeply, just interested in establishing church relationships, singing, dinners, events and social friendships.

What's the problem with faith and science?...There is no problem with Science. It is the only reliable method we have in gaining knowledge.
Faith, for one is a stupid stupid word. You won't find it in the Greek.
"Believing in something without evidence for it". Hmmm, the problems with this is simple. The two towers that the Muslims knocked over was done in the name of Faith. The Hollocost, countless other atrocities.Even though some atrocious things are\were done in the name of science (some find terrible), it is stille technically the only reliable way of gaining knowledge.There you go, not too hard.

I was raised a presby, and I still can't spell the damb word.
Life experience.

Ringo, you missunderstood me. I didn't say faith was stupid. I said it was a stupid word. There is a difference.

Dawkins explained it pretty plainly in his book.When a person is practicing science He uses a set of rules. When a person is practicing "belief without evidence" he is deluded.
One person may practice one or other thing as a hobby, just not at the same time with the same respect.See, now isn't that easy?

Even as an atheist, I can decide to practice Faith, and possibly have a spiritual experience doing so. And at that time, in that respect, I am not an Atheist. But when I come back to reality, the real world where science and logic rule, those experiences become like something I did on the hooch, or some other drug.People can practice spirituallity, and experience spiritual events, and usually it doesn't matter which God they take along.

Those circles that were drawn can also be drawn with many God's as the topic, and a million circles done in 4 dimensions.Nice thought?

Another question?How can people have multiple personallities? I mean there should only be one conscience, one person right? When we as scientist work experiments, we don't put our hands up to our brains pressing on our temples and say "work--work". Do we? The analogy of the circle should be in 4 dimensions anyway. Time is a factor, not usually counted when dealing with science.How can I possibly go to sleep each night and be a scientist?
Because when I am a scientist, I am not asleep.

My grandfather was a person of Faith, and he was a Doctor. He didn't bring is Bible to work. Faith is used to entertain thyself. Science is used to heal others.

Thanks for that bit of info.Actually you would have to demonstrate that using a graphics engine.
And it wouldn't necessarily be a circle, it would look more like a pattle wheel turning into water. Where each pattle is a different slice of something. Like Faith is now in the water, then it is Logic's turn, then it is TV's turn, then it is etc etc etc...MID, I will find that useful in the near future. And I don't think I have it. Uh, wait, wait, ummmmmmmm.... Nope, don't have it.

That's nice. And this was found in a letter that Einstein wrote:"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." - Albert Einstein in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas (Einstein's secretary) and Banesh Hoffman, and published by Princeton University Press.

And how do you know these two fellows weren't paid by the Templeton Foudation?Ken Miller
Gerald Schroeder