We got a badass here. . cm the panel , tit week, we debated global waiitt. i., t, i, j.?. 1' isti. atar. e. ioo The good thing about is that it' s true whether  We got a badass here cm the panel tit week we debated global waiitt i t j ? 1' isti atar e ioo The good thing about is that it' s true whether
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (456)
[ 456 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#156 - englman
Reply +69 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Something I wrote on FJ a while back, it's relevant so I'm going to paste it here.   
   
"Science doesn't try to disprove God or Religion. People futilely attempt to do this and use Science as the tool. Then Science ends up getting blamed, when the true culprit is the person. The relationships between War and Religion tend to share a similar problem. "All wars are started be some Religion! They should all be abolished!". This may appear correct at first glance, but it's deeper than that. Ignorance (intolerance, nonacceptance, and many other words fall under this type of "Ignorance") is what actually causes most, if not all, War. To put it simply, "You don't hold my opinion on _______, so I'm going to kill you."    
   
Back to the main point though. Science and Religion are both tools with distinct 'properties' that can be used differently. Science is more concrete, while Religion is more interpretive. This allows for some flexibility, because you can use them together in many different ways. Without making this a 7 page paper, though, I'll just give one example that I believe clears up what I mean.    
   
Love is essentially just a series of Biochemical interactions between two people, with a dash of Psychology/Sociology.    
Does knowing that make love any less 'magical' or 'special' though?    
   
One Scientist might say "Yes, this is how it works and it shows our interactions to be nothing more than complex Chemistry."    
   
The second Scientist might say "No, understanding how it works doesn't make it any less valid. Our concept of love still exists, but now we know how it works."    
   
Now, which one is correct?    
Big finish... It's ultimately a matter of opinion."
Something I wrote on FJ a while back, it's relevant so I'm going to paste it here.

"Science doesn't try to disprove God or Religion. People futilely attempt to do this and use Science as the tool. Then Science ends up getting blamed, when the true culprit is the person. The relationships between War and Religion tend to share a similar problem. "All wars are started be some Religion! They should all be abolished!". This may appear correct at first glance, but it's deeper than that. Ignorance (intolerance, nonacceptance, and many other words fall under this type of "Ignorance") is what actually causes most, if not all, War. To put it simply, "You don't hold my opinion on _______, so I'm going to kill you."

Back to the main point though. Science and Religion are both tools with distinct 'properties' that can be used differently. Science is more concrete, while Religion is more interpretive. This allows for some flexibility, because you can use them together in many different ways. Without making this a 7 page paper, though, I'll just give one example that I believe clears up what I mean.

Love is essentially just a series of Biochemical interactions between two people, with a dash of Psychology/Sociology.
Does knowing that make love any less 'magical' or 'special' though?

One Scientist might say "Yes, this is how it works and it shows our interactions to be nothing more than complex Chemistry."

The second Scientist might say "No, understanding how it works doesn't make it any less valid. Our concept of love still exists, but now we know how it works."

Now, which one is correct?
Big finish... It's ultimately a matter of opinion."
#211 to #156 - anon id: 3a0caa54
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Did you major in philosophy or something?
User avatar #215 to #211 - englman
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Lol I'm flattered but no, I just think about this stuff 24//7. It drives me insane sometimes.
#279 to #156 - anon id: d63182ec
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
But there clearly isn't a God lol.
User avatar #280 to #279 - englman
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
That's definitely your opinion alright.
#158 to #156 - curlyhairedgoddess
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
THANK YOU!
User avatar #159 to #158 - englman
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it:)
User avatar #344 to #156 - pwincesswoona
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
that is pretty great. what user came up with it?
User avatar #501 to #349 - pwincesswoona
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
ah. thanks. :3 i read the first part wrong. i thought you said something i saw instead of wrote. thanks!
User avatar #505 to #501 - englman
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/28/2013) [-]
You're very welcome:)
User avatar #414 to #156 - kingpokerface
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
Perfect. To quote one of my favorite books "Science questions how , Religion asks why?"
#455 to #156 - cjasper
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
thank you for this
thank you for this
#463 to #156 - raikun
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
That's just your opinion though. But i like it!
User avatar #214 to #156 - retributionthepimp
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
englman for president of the world!
#218 to #214 - englman
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Haha! Thanks for that friend, I'm flattered
User avatar #160 to #156 - purealterego
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
can i hug you?
#162 to #160 - englman
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
We can sure as heck try friend:D
We can sure as heck try friend:D
#205 to #156 - thedeadlypajamas
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Thank you for this.
Thank you for this.
#206 to #205 - englman
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
You're welcome friend :) glad you enjoyed.
You're welcome friend :) glad you enjoyed.
User avatar #171 to #156 - whatevsnicktrololo
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Wow man, these kind of statements stay with me for a lifetime. Even in 10 years, I am pretty sure that this what i read now will affect my opinion on some matter eventually. Well said man, well said.
User avatar #175 to #171 - englman
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Comments like yours have the same effect on me and push me to continue/strive to do better:) thank you friend, I greatly appreciate your comment.

I hope you have a great day!
User avatar #180 to #175 - whatevsnicktrololo
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Likewise sir!
#3 - anon id: 2abc675c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
False. Science is not always correct.
#12 to #3 - anon id: b827e0db
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
False, science is always correct, individual theories may come and go but scientific method transcends them.
User avatar #60 to #3 - mostlyshits
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Scientists aren't always correct
Science is.
User avatar #17 to #3 - angelious
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
yes but the good thing is when science is wrong they dont start to claim the right theory as wrong and burn the man who brought the subject up in a stake.they admit their mistake and are happy it was corrected and go on with their lifes
#5 to #3 - curses
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Those few instances where it was wrong only meant the real truth got out because it was scientist that proved the previous statement wrong.

Religion just fails all around at everything.
User avatar #4 to #3 - deltoraquest
Reply +50 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
but science is still trying to prove itself right or wrong
#7 to #4 - anon id: 172fb166
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
...Methinks you don't quite 'get' science.
User avatar #75 to #7 - asmodeu
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Methinks the captcha for posting as anonymous or creating an account should be an IQ test. Anything less than 50 is excluded from posting.
#9 to #7 - SILENCEnight
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#2 - lempersy
Reply +41 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
I'm making this my profile picture.
#11 to #2 - anon id: 22a48b3c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
that guys a freaking psychopath
User avatar #296 to #11 - bothemastaofall
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
How so
User avatar #46 to #2 - arziben
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
yes you are
User avatar #48 to #2 - nuful
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
wingardium leviosa swish and flick
User avatar #347 to #48 - toxicdisorder
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
Oh my god my sides. I think Iove you.
User avatar #358 to #347 - nuful
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
... no homo?
User avatar #364 to #358 - toxicdisorder
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
well of course lol
User avatar #428 to #2 - CapnInterwebz
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
I don't believe you
#93 - thewellhungarian
Reply +37 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
MFW I see the comments section.
MFW I see the comments section.
#89 - mandasawsum
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Me and my roommate at VMI taking a picture with the man himself
User avatar #108 to #89 - nucularwar
Reply +33 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
I bet he gets sick of that
User avatar #201 to #108 - mandasawsum
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Honestly? Not really! We went up to him and he did it before we even asked, then shook our hands and thanked us for our service. Good Guy Neil.
#19 - anon id: bb1012c5
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
i am very shy on the internet, because i'm a lil pussy, so i keep anonymous. (I still dont care is you thumb me down, so please shut up about it). but read my post before you act.. or just ignore it.

i am scientist (meteorologist). i studied in the best institution for meteorology and physics in europe. global warming is my main topic. so stop arguing with me. scientifically the global warming is undeniable, but whats going on in media is a political issue and NOT a scientifical.

Neil DeGrasse is in my opinion completely wrong. He missed the important fact, that science should question things and try to prove them wring. this is how science work. if we wouldnt question science, we would still believe aristoteles. To question things imply that you dont believe them. doesnt matter if you are scientist or not. This ignorance he is showing is the same the church uses. "it is true, stop thinking about it, because we proved it". i am sorry for everyone here who doesnt fall for this. Neil DeGrasse evolved to a entertainer and lost his credibility to science.
User avatar #138 to #19 - robopuppy
Reply -14 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
"is NOT scientifical"
"scientifical"
...
#143 to #138 - partnerintroll
Reply +27 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
well, he didnt major in english
well, he didnt major in english
#139 to #138 - anon id: bb1012c5
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
sorry for not beeing native english speaking.
#184 to #139 - anon id: 545a35a6
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
now wait just a minute buster how do we know youre the same guy
#268 to #184 - lamarisagoodname
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
User avatar #210 to #184 - pwoneill
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
How do we know that you are a different person?
User avatar #141 to #139 - robopuppy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
No hard feelings. It just popped up to me.
User avatar #132 to #19 - bulbakip
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
I knew I didn't like him for a reason.
#167 to #19 - nofunzone
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Except science is always right regardless, it is our attempts to find out what science is that is wrong.
#370 to #167 - wadethegreat
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
science is not right or wrong its the process of seeing if something is one way or another so saying science is indesputably right dosnt make sense its like telling me that science says that a tv show is stupid when in fact science only is saying we dont know we only tested it... ask the scientist!.... you see what i mean? if not dont please message me and we can talk and ill try and explain better
#319 to #19 - anon id: b1623682
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
I think what he was trying to say is that science is true BECAUSE it questions things. It's true whether you believe it or not, so long as the evidence is there.
User avatar #169 to #19 - jimimij
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Science has been completely wrong in the past (spontaneous generation, most of the darwinian model of macroevolution). It is simply a model to explain what is observed. If it was wrong in the past, it may very likely be wrong now. It is the height of arrogance to say that it is indisputable now.
User avatar #64 to #19 - alleksi
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
there have been so many ******* times where people have misquoted neil degrasse tyson just so they could have a "legitimate authority" behind their religion debates, that I wouldn't be surprised if this is one of those times.

neil degrasse tyson is a smart man and he's not an ignorant man, so I am fairly sure that he either misspoke or this was misquote.

pretty much all Neil DeGrasse Tyson related content on sites like tumblr, funnyjunk and reddit are complete misinterpretation and misquotes of what he has said for them to act like "**** yeah atheism" when, in fact, he is agnostic
#134 - robopuppy
Reply +26 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
#1 - krasnogvardiech
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
#235 - avatarsarefornoobs
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(01/26/2013) [-]
Its a repost, its a ********* starter, its old, its not funny, and I'm cranky today and this post did not help.
Its a repost, its a ********* starter, its old, its not funny, and I'm cranky today and this post did not help.
User avatar #297 to #235 - thelegitmetalhead
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/27/2013) [-]
Dat face