...that, with every new discovery science uncovers about our world and existence,
they insist all the more sternly that all "THIS" simply "happened"?
...that they are all the more god-like, simply because they discovered it?

I believe that God created everything and what scientist think or say has no bearing on my beliefs. Others can think what they want...

I believe that science is mankinds way of trying to understand and utilize what GOD has created.

Science - as it pertains to those that practice this craft...

Is a HUGE amount of people. Most I know, or have studied, had some humility where great discoveries lead to greater understandin.

To say that 'science' is insisting on an exclusive belief...

Is like saying that all religions are peaceful.

Lint in your belly button

Naw...

I got hungry a few minutes ago.

allready picked it out.

Yes, this is the way of man and those who do not believe...it is unfortunate that those who are so smart to discover these wonderful things are so closed minded that they can not draw a connection as to the orgin.

WHAT?

Please show me where science says there is no God?

Science doesn't deny a creator.

It's religious people who want to PUSH specific ancient DOGMAS as being the "Word of God" who are out to discredit the things that science has actually discovered to be true.

Science isn't against a belief in God.

It's just that the discoveries of science fly in the face of ancient mythological dogma.

As an example:

The ancient dogma demands that mankind brought sin, evil, and death into the world by falling from grace from a jealous male-chavinistic personified God not unlike Zeus in many ways.

Science has simply discovered that mankind has not always been around, and before mankind came onto the scene there already existed plants and animals that fought, ate each other, ate each other's babies and eggs, and died from disease as well as from natural causes.

So science has simply shown that these ancient mythological dogmas are clearly nothing more than fantasies written by overzealous and controlling male-chuvinistic mortals.


But science doesn't deny a creator in general. No where in science does it say, "There is no God".

Science doesn't say anything about any God.

It just exposed ancient dogmas to be the totally fabricated lies of mortal men.



So your views and understanding of science is totally wrong.

Science does not deny a creator. It just doen't confirm one either.

So it remains neutral on that issue.

In the meantime those ancient dogmas that claim to be the "word of God" and accuse all men of being sinners in need of repentance are clearly full of lies and just totally fabricated false myths of mortal male-chavinistic bigoted men.

Well said Abra!

Science is totally compatible with my spiritual beliefs.

There's no conflict at all.

I find a great many things ironic in this lifetime and it isn't science.

It just makes my spiritual beliefs stronger.

I simply do not hold beliefs that upon deconstruction loose their logical consistency.

It is far easier and more productive to withhold acceptance (belief) of a claim until a scientific theory (body of evidence that in its entirety supports a single conclusion) can be constructed.

This makes me an atheist. The fact that I find no proper positive ontologies for any beings that have been labeled god means that I withhold examination of evidence to support said undefined being's existence, this makes me agnostic to all such claims.

I find this to be the only intellectually honest position to hold on the matter.

I am always open to new claims. If the claim is that science states existence just happened then I have to laugh and say no more or no less then this thread just happened.

Dude...no offense, a compliment really, but have you checked out my thread, "Have You Ever Seen Someone...Who Looks Like A Celebrity?"
Please post your picture there...no words are necessary.
I'm looking at another celebrity right now.
You, JC!

Uhm...abra...I don't think I said science said, "there is no God".
But science does seem to imply this.
HOWEVER...
CREATION
I actually saw a huge article in The New York Times, no less, written by three scientists who began by stating, "We are IT." (no more life forms in the universe) So, I'm not all "anti-scientist".
HOWEVER...
So it wasn't a scientist who conceived the "Big Bang Theory" (creation...no God required?)?
Evolution?
Were evolution a fact, Who got that process going?
Do processes merely "happen"?
Did such an infinitesimal creation simply create itself?
Or, was a "Creative Consciousness", i.e, "God", required?

RELIGION
I agree whole-heartedly with you that religion has been used to control masses of people, by those who practice and propogate religion.
RELIGION...man plans, and God laughs (or cries, however the case may be...)
As we hurtle through history, coming to realize the vast complexities of our world and existence, it seems less and less likely that science will EVER say, "THERE IS NO GOD".

Define god using positive characteristics and we can talk about it, otherwise its like us all talking about the chargetrapolusilus.

Science treats all claims the same. Describe your claim, detail the data you have to support your claim and then we match that against the definition of your supposed extant entity and make a logical analysis.

I am not he.

He was the son of god.

I am the son of man... (male and female created me).

It's funny that part of the populations says that with each new discovery that it just goes to show that there MUST be a divine creator.

When to me it just goes to prove that there couldn't possibly be a divine creator.

Or if there is one, humanity is not something this creator cares specifically about.

To look at the scope and breath of the universe and pretend this was all made for us, is to see the simple minded nature of the presupposition.

This is a large reason many YEC hold to the anti science agenda.

I personally don't think science implies this at all.

But then again this might depend on how you define "God".

Like you say, science explains how evolution works. But you can always ask how it came to be that atoms and the laws of physics came to be that allows this to be possible. Science cannot answer that question, nor do they claim to answer it.

Same with the Big Bang. Science can explain the birth of the unvierse clear back to a quantum fluctuation that grew to the side of the physical universe without even violated the conversation laws of matter, energy, or entropy.

But when asked, they can say a thing about what caused that initial quantum fluctuation, or why the laws of physics are such that it can indeed become a universe like ours.

There's always room for "God", but clearly we have sound reasons to reject specific religious myths about concerning certain jealsou male-chauvinistic personified Godheads that claim that mankind fell from grace and brought sin into the world.

So it all comes down to how we define "God"

I think science has totally removed any possibly that the ancient mythological figure of Yahweh could be God. And of course that would automatically apply to and "son" he was supposed to have sacrificed to save mankind from eternal damnation.

However, in terms of some mystic intelligence behind all of creation?

No, science hasn't even remotely removed that possiblity.

Nor does it even imply any such thing.

All science has shown is that there is no need for a 'baby-sitting' God to intervene in the process as the universe evolves over time.