2006-12-28 01:40:28 · 34 answers · asked by Snowth 4 in Sports ➔ Boxing
Religion would claim to have won but couldn't prove it; Science would claim a win on a lack of evidence of defeat.
2006-12-28 01:54:12 · answer #1 · answered by ROVER T 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Science would win. Religion would believe it would win but when it actually came down to it the training that it had would be flawed and so it wouldn't be properly prepared. Science on the other hand has had training that answers all questions asked of it and it is always learning new techniques.
2006-12-28 22:18:35 · answer #2 · answered by Joel V 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmmm...very interesting Question Snowth...i studied both the history of religion and history of science at some ancient point in my life and remember finding the whole contrast fascinating...mainly because they both have points that outweigh the other...religion is based purely on the concept of faith...while science works off proof....both support...yet deny each other....and as people we can neither deny scientific proof nor refute another mans faith... and both have endless possibilities...i have to cop out and call it a draw...lol...;0)
2006-12-28 03:58:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
technology started decrease back interior the stone age while people discovered to start a hearth via friction , and gaining expertise of to kill animals much less puzzling via polishing a pole , later they related a flint or bone head to make it greater powerful . each merchandise that we've immediately is the effect of technology . It in no way stops . on the different hand , faith is slowed down , 2 thousand years in the back of the circumstances . Billions of sermons have been reported , yet no longer something new has ever been stumbled on or reported . it somewhat is the comparable previous ingredient repeatedly , utilizing new words and expressions , yet in no way somewhat stating something new . the guy who relys on technology will learn , paintings , learn . the guy who relays on faith will pray . i'm going to place my wager on the single that learn and works .
2016-10-19 02:14:12 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm a religious boxer, so I would say boxing. The two actually don't have to be opposed, however, unless liberals are the only ones entering the science field.
If science can prove what it says, religious people and others aren't going to deny it.
And timberrattler makes an excellent point below:
Religion would win because it hides nothing, whereas as science only tries to find the half truth. His answer should be chosen as the best.
We only get into conflicts when science tries to force theories upon people that are not proven.
2006-12-28 01:41:52 · answer #5 · answered by Joe C 5 · 3⤊ 5⤋
Science, because its based on empirical facts rather than some crusty old novel written at the time to scare the crap out of a largely un-educated population.
Kind of makes you wonder why so many people use it as an emotional crutch these days really.
2006-12-28 01:50:42 · answer #6 · answered by thecoldvoiceofreason 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
In my understanding: a true religion should be the Friend of the science and in the same team belonging to the same master.
Both should be competing the false religions ( amicably ).
2006-12-28 01:52:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Science cos religion has no evidence.
But science is more than just about the universe. It has given us the civilisation we have today.
2006-12-28 02:19:18 · answer #8 · answered by cloud 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Religion would forget to put on his boxing gloves, take it on faith that he was still wearing them despite no evidence and promptly get disqualified. Science would win by default because he actually bothered to check for evidence that he really was wearing his gloves and made sure he wore them.
2006-12-28 01:56:00 · answer #9 · answered by Groucho Returns 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Religion in 7 because by the time science figured it out the contest is over.
2006-12-28 01:51:02 · answer #10 · answered by Allen 4 · 3⤊ 4⤋