What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
370 Comments
- steelersfan7roe, on 07/12/2009, -11/+92Isn't it curious that only Americans are split on whether global warming is real or not?
- mapyqf, on 07/12/2009, -31/+89Breaking News: 1 in 3 Americans are stupid hicks
- eliot2000, on 07/12/2009, -15/+70I've never understood why it has to be science *or* religion. You can believe in God, and still study the mechanics of the world at the same time.
- trolleyfan, on 07/12/2009, -11/+64That's because religion is bunk...and it's difficult to prove bunk with *any* logic.
- avengedx47, on 07/12/2009, -6/+54Welcome to big corporations and politics, they are the ones who cast a shadow of doubt onto the scientists because they don't want to lose money.
- inactive, on 07/12/2009, -4/+43Hey religion, science brings me the internet. What do you bring me?
- inactive, on 07/12/2009, -5/+41LOGIC DOESN'T APPLY TO RELIGION. IT'S JUST........DIFFERENT, MAN. YOU GOTTA HAVE..........FAITH!
What a load of horse *****. - jsffive, on 07/12/2009, -8/+44I have a problem with people who think that science tries to explain the "why", instead of "how"...
Indeed, when Georges Lemaître (a Catholic priest) devised the Big Bang Theory, or as he described it, "The Primeval Atom", he wasn't trying to explain WHY it happened, he assumed that the motivation was God's and God's alone... Lemaître was merely trying to explain HOW the Universe came about.
But many self-described "enlightened" people want to try and mix the two things, as if one thing automatically follows the other. This is true not only in the fanatical religious sector, but also in the fanatical secular one.
Example: biological organisms, over long periods of time, through trial and error incorporate adaptations that either allow their species to survive or perish...
Ergo, God doesn't exist!
WTF?!?!?! - pintomp3, on 07/12/2009, -1/+34Science and religion may get along. Science and dogma not so much.
- Farth, on 07/12/2009, -0/+31"Government funding for anything is wrong", wow, the stupidity of that statement boggles the mind. Do you what you are saying?
- eliot2000, on 07/12/2009, -0/+30I've also had it with the government-run road system. Things would be so much better if we had to make our own roads, or pay private companies for it.
Also: what could be more wasteful than government-run water delivery? Especially since we have streams all over the place! - wookee88, on 07/12/2009, -3/+28Great comment by RGW123 on the original post:
"This is just another example of the falseness of supposedly being "fair and balanced". Journalists keep writing these BS pieces in which they put religious beliefs and scientific beliefs on equal footing, as if that was somehow "fair". It is one of the greatest falsehoods of modern society that all views are of equal value. Opinions based in ignorance are - ignorant. Scientific beliefs are based on decades of rigorously tested experimental evidence, which is continually subjected to critical and skeptical analysis from thousands of highly-educated competing professionals. For an idea to become universally accepted in science, it must have survived this relentless and unforgiving selective process.
Religious belief is based on unsupported inference from questionable interpretations of intentionally manipulated texts, which are themselves incomplete compilations of an unreliable oral tradition, and on willful ignorance. Most scientists are at least as well-versed in religious learning as the average fundamentalist Christian, while virtually no fundamentalist Christians are well-educated in science (and the few that are, like Michael Behe, have been publicly caught in outright lies in trying to reconcile their religious beliefs with science). To become universally accepted (although, religion really doesn't have such a thing, because their ideas are so flakey and poorly supported), it need only be spouted by someone who claims to be (without credentials to prove it) an "authority".
The religious side of this debate argues out of ignorance, not making the effort to bother to even learn more about the opposite point of view than the pseudoscientific rhetoric that their uninformed "prophets" feed them. They actually believe that an appeal to authority ("divinely inspired" texts, religious leaders) makes their arguments stronger, despite the fact that any educated person knows it to be a classic logical fallacy. While it is a problem of belief, it is also a communication problem - not because the right words can't be found, but because the religious side takes pride in remaining ignorant of them." - Yage2006, on 07/12/2009, -7/+29They have yet to accept the metric system and still put there dates in reverse. mm/dd/yy instead of dd/mm/yy.
I guess it takes time for developing nations to become civilized :) - trolleyfan, on 07/12/2009, -5/+26Yep - but they're on opposite sides of the "truth/fiction" barrier.
- AraleNorimaki, on 07/12/2009, -6/+27Oh that's very Christian. Believe what I say or I'll hurt you.
- Firstdaughter, on 07/12/2009, -1/+21Carl - I beg to differ... Nothing in science is ever proven, but rather there is a preponderance of evidence that supports each assertion. Whereas religion is pure conjecture created and written by man - in other words a type of fairy tale. I'm not sure where you think religion stays the same? For instance the Catholic church regularly changes its stance on many topics depending upon public opinion. I do agree that science is great! ;-)
- melissawm, on 07/12/2009, -0/+18So, you're saying that being wrong forever is better than being eventually right...?
- takamalak, on 07/12/2009, -2/+19That was a Great Wall of Stupid.
- inactive, on 07/12/2009, -1/+18-citation needed-
- dustinbolton, on 07/12/2009, -0/+15Please be a troll.
- Disgod, on 07/12/2009, -0/+16Young earthers are biblical literalists who think that people lived hundreds of years and that the Earth was created ~6000 years ago in October 4004 BC. Their beliefs are at complete and utter odds with reality. Believing in a god is not enough for them. They have the arrogance to assume that this Universe was created specifically for them.
- inactive, on 07/12/2009, -8/+24Obviously not. Tell that to all the creationist hicks. That is the entire problem everyone is ***** around about.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/12/2009, -2/+18Logical fallacy. You cannot prove a negative. The burden of proof lies on the one making the positive claim. It is you who must prove that God exists. Not the other way around.
At any rate, it's obvious that a question such as "Is there a God?" is impossible to answer, so why waste our time even asking it? What does it have to do with anything? Whether you decide yes, no, or even "maybe" you're always going to face the same troubling problem that actual experience offers no support for your position and that you could be just as easily right as wrong. It's like asking "Where does the universe end?" It's unknowable, so why spend your time trying to know it? It's futile and unhealthy.
Yet, people become so sure of themselves one way or the other, but no one actually knows. It's all just ignorance that does nothing but create suffering and confusion. - denizen42, on 07/12/2009, -1/+16Indeed, many aren't dumb, just greedy hypocrits.
- inactive, on 07/12/2009, -0/+13That's not because it's religion, though, but rather a disciplined lifestyle. You can have that without believing in a sky wizard.
- Dubbleyew, on 07/12/2009, -3/+16Um, talk to some religious people. They say that only god can end the world and thats why global warming is nothing to worry about.
- Yage2006, on 07/12/2009, -0/+13Im not religious but I did read the bible out of curiosity.
What I read does not seem like god frowns upon violence at all he demands and encourages it.
Try actually reading the bible instead of blindly following it. - inactive, on 07/12/2009, -2/+14The invention of penicillin has saved hundreds of millions of lives. Vastly more then all lives lost during all the wars in human history.
If you want to say "All those bombs that science created really helped the progress of humanity and religion was invented by Jesus a little over 2000 years ago... /s", remember that the exact same science also gave us such things as penicillin, religion didn't do that. So it's like 100 steps forward, a few backward. No thanks to religion.
But I agree with your other point though. - inactive, on 07/12/2009, -0/+11I'm not sure how to take your comment, because homosexuality is the new racism, so it makes sense that atheism would be the next homosexuality. If you are intending to slam atheists, then I think you could have done better.
- Bloodweaver, on 07/12/2009, -3/+14I can say I saw a purple unicorn yesterday and you can't prove that I didn't. It isn't possible to disprove something that does not exist.
- javy925, on 07/12/2009, -2/+12http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
- Plurkman, on 07/12/2009, -4/+14When religions are trying to push themselves into classrooms, and when people are killing each other because their imaginary friend is better than the imaginary friend of the other guy, religion vs science sort of becomes an issue.
- meimeimei, on 07/12/2009, -2/+12What if those two thousand years really is utter ***** though?
- Denominator88, on 07/12/2009, -5/+15Religion doesn't kill people. The powerful and greedy have realized that religion is a valuable tool and bend it and spin it to meet their needs. If I use your logic, I can say science has killed so many people, with the invention of weapons and bombs, and the race for countries to be superior or one another. Countries have destroyed each other in the race to be technologically superior.
But that is wrong. Science is a tool for good and a tool for evil. It cures disease, takes us to the moon, and advances our society. Religion is also a tool for good and evil. Church hospitals, missionaries, and charities that have existed, have helped this country and the entire world in difficult times, and have help strengthened America.
Power ideas, whether they be science or religion, are double-edged swords. Science and religion have been shown to co-exist peacefully, but they both still have their problems. - inactive, on 07/12/2009, -0/+10Science doesn't kill people, people kill people.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/12/2009, -0/+10I think Presbyterian is becoming my new favorite troll. I mean, look at this, they just pull out with a slanderous, anti-Muslim stereotype for NO REASON. It was totally unprovoked, yet Presbyterian still felt he should make his ignorance known anyhow. Incredible.
The idea of fighting a stereotype of yourself by repeating a stereotype of someone else is almost as ironic as it is illogical, and yet I bet it could still get a rise out of a few people. Well done, sir. Well done. - Disgod, on 07/12/2009, -0/+10The best scientists never mention god in their work... up until they hit the limits of their knowledge. Only when their knowledge failed them did they ever mention god. Their gods were gods of the gaps.
I can't find the exact quote, but it goes along these lines. A man created a system for Napoleon which explained cannon fire trajectories and the like, and Napoleon asked where god fit into the equations. To which the man replied "God is an unnecessary variable for these equations." It probably isn't the exact quote/story, but it is close. - Disgod, on 07/12/2009, -0/+10To the Young Earthers they aren't just mutually exclusive, they are outright in conflict. Practically everything in modern science is an affront to them, because it completely disproves their idiotic beliefs.
Plus bashing creationism /= bashing all religion. I'll gladly do both, however the arguments against the two are completely different. - UnpossibIe, on 07/12/2009, -2/+11This is some of the stupidest, mindless dribble I've ever read.
"You cannot independently discuss "science" as correct"
That's pretty god damn stupid. Science searches for facts, clear and simple. Science is correct, because it has gone through the ringer to prove the facts. If there are no facts, then it's not science. Intelligent Design isn't science, because it has absolutely no facts to support it. - Bloodweaver, on 07/12/2009, -0/+9Religion is very wrong and has been changed continually also. The only difference is science doesn't make the absurd claim to be lead by a infallible creature that is never wrong.
- moothemagiccow, on 07/12/2009, -5/+14religion doesn't kill people, people kill people
- rheaume, on 07/12/2009, -3/+12Newsflash: Your ass is getting dugg the ***** down
- Yage2006, on 07/12/2009, -0/+9Sadly you are an exception not the rule. The "religious" believe in the bible and or other scripture and anything that disproves it they will deny.
You are probably more a deist or pantheistic not religious.
- Rudegar, on 07/12/2009, -2/+11if the bible fetish people people looked enough into most sciences they would prob find then it's
all based on stuff which rely on the earth being older then 6000 years old even if i't not apparent - Samurai77, on 07/12/2009, -0/+9To Argoff and JanSimpson so was ARPANET was a failure?
I'm LOLing all the way to the Internet. - mojoe1185, on 07/12/2009, -1/+9To You:
Yes there are holes in science, but filling those holes with a personification that is the image of your grandfather is lunacy. Yes the questions will always "plague" us, or to use a better word inspire us to work harder to understand the world. You wouldn't be on a computer today if electricity didn't "plague" us for years and years.
To say human evolution was inspired by a god completely goes against the theory of "natural" selection.
And the definition of agnostic is you "cannot" know. - Moralogic, on 07/12/2009, -0/+8I am sorry to break it to you, but it is a lot more than 1 in 3.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/12/2009, -1/+9*Ignorant* people kill people.
- xenuxenuts, on 07/12/2009, -0/+8"The Bible is True and that is a Fact."
please provide evidence. -
Show 51 - 100 of 389 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is