Shouldn't this argument between Christians and the Atheistic science community cease?

Question

If you truly look at the facts, both accomplish the same thing. They prove their own beliefs in the same manor. Each claims that they have support for their beliefs, but overall, both are merely beliefs. You have to believe the word of someone who died centuries or millenia ago just for a basis of either. Now, what sense does it make to force your beliefs on others? You can claim to know whatever you want, but the truth is you know nothing. A belief is a belief, not a definite fact. Let this argument die and rest in peace.

Alright...guess I have to get started with these answers. I didn't say atheistic science, but the atheistic science community, which means those of the science community who are atheistic.
Next, the only proof of dinosaurs is the bones found, but you have to believe they are found, that they are real. Can you say you have these bones, and know for a fact they're millions of years old? How do you know that? Carbon dating? That's, again, based on the "knowledge" that carbon breaks down over time, assuming carbon is an atom which has no proof beyond observations. To continue into the next, I know exactly what science is, a collection of observations, which a scientist believed to have merit, but is still an observation. Believe what you will, but science is no more fact than anything else. The only true knowledge is that you know nothing. Get off yourselves and stop trying to make it out like your view is the only right one. You have no idea what is right.

I know I need to break this down for some of you science geeks. If you smell a hundred roses, and they all smell the same, you can assume that all roses smell the same.
You continue, a million passes and you're now willing to accept it as a fact with proof because it hasn't failed. Now, you smell another million, and the last one smells completely different. How did that fact hold up now? It started as a series of observations, which came to be claimed as fact because of it seemingly never failing. In the end, it was disproven. Thus is the cycle of science, it is accepted as fact until disproven. Now, notice the keyword, "accepted." Any of you who claim to know that science is fact are the ones who truly do not know what science is.

Sketch, you are the true idiot. I have not contradicted myself at any point. Everything is based on observation and those obvservations do not prove anything beyond the limit of those immediate observations. Observations later may discover those ideas false, and the cycle starts again. At no point did I say "observations have no value." I just stated that they are nothing more than observations. Now, I used the phrase "look at the facts" because it was the most appropriate. If you want to pick apart the wording of something as literally as this, don't try it with me because you're only making yourself look more like an ignorant fool.

I forgot to mention something else. I didn't say you have to trust the word of others but, if you choose science or religion, that's exactly what you're doing. You have gravely misinterpreted everything I have said and have only made your statements look moronic.

Answer 1

Yeah, it's really a shame Fundamentalist Christians and Fundamentalist Science-Worshippers can't get on, because they think in such a similar way.

Me: But what makes you think your belief system is any more correct that theirs?
Fund Scientist: It's not a belief system, not like christianity, it's Proven Fact.
Fund Christian: It's not a belief system, not like science, it's the Direct Revelation of God.

Me: Well OK, prove it.
Fund Scientist: Duh! Read the Literature and get back to me...
Fund Christian: Duh! Read the Scripture and get back to me...

Me: Wow, you guys are actually a lot closer than you think. Why not agree on one single internally-self-justifying belief system and stop arguing with each other?
(Fund Scientist and Fund Christian both proceed to beat the shiit out of me, while telling me to Set Myself Free...)

Answer 2

You have made a terrible error in logic. You first begin by saying we must trust the word of others, but then you go on to say observation of reality has no value either. Since science always places emphasis on testability and reproducible results it will always be flexible and focused on searching for the truth. It is never dependent on the words of others. The scientific method not only requires testability, it also has a community that guarantees it.

FACTS: How can you have facts without observation? You say look at the facts, but then argue that observation can't give you any fact. Just restating your error in logic hurts. You are an idiot.

Answer 3

This argument has gone on since the beginning of religion, and will go on until the end of time. It is like a subway train, people get on, argue, realize that there is no way to prove either side, then get off. More people get on who have yet to explore the subject or argue about it. It's a process. So no, I don't think it should cease, because there are new members coming to this forum every day, and they deserve more than "This has already been argued before you came along." When I started on Yahoo Answers, I was a believer experiencing a loss of faith. The questions and answers here gave me some ideas worth exploring, and I am now a non-believer.

Answer 4

You are sadly mistaken.
Religion operates on "beliefs" -- science does not.
Science only rationally evalutates evidence -- if there is no evidence for something, it is not "believed" in science. That is the fundamental difference.
Relgious people can "claim" their bogus proofs all they want -- but according to the rules of science, they have no proof. That's fine if they still want to believe without any evidence, they're free to do so, no problem.
The problem arises when they want to teach their beliefs with no evidence as "science" -- which they clearly are NOT.
The other major flaw in your argument is that nobody in science has to take anybody's word for anything -- everything that is accepted in science is independently verifiable, and ANYONE can repeat the experiments and observations that have led to the logical conclusions.
You don't think Newton's laws of motion are correct? Repeat his experiments, or come up with your own scientifically valid ones -- you'll get the same results. Verifiable. By anyone.
Same goes for evolution -- go repeat the studies and observations of the hundreds of thousands of people who've gathered the evidence for it...
but of course, that's too much work for dogmatic superstitious believers in fairy-tale gods. They'd rather just ignore evidence, yet still claim they're "right." See the problem?

If the religious community would stick to teaching religion in their churches, we wouldn't have a problem. When they want to teach superstition and myth as "fact", we have a problem. Until they stop trying to pretend their superstitions are science, those of us who know better will continue to fight their efforts to spread lies as science.

Answer 5

first as a christian i dont force my belief on anyone. if they choose to follow then cool if not then cool. however i will let everyone know that i am a christian. and then i lead my life as a christian and some will see how happy i am all the time and later ask me stuff. the Bible teaches us to not be ashamed and to share the Word of God with everyone. if i share it with you then i have shared and done my part if you choose to not except or say i am not interested i stop and have done my part like Jesus said to. if you want to know more then you can come and ask.

and yes you are right both have not 100 percent proven the other wrong. they cant prove God does not exist and they have not proven evolution is wrong. i mean they cant show how old the earth is. they have there ideas and if you studied both sides you would realize yeah they cant prove it. creation believe it to be 6000 years old and evolution to be 4.5 billion years. neither have proven the other wrong or right. evolution will say the proved it but then there way of proving it is not accurate. so it is a mutual thing and i love everyone. and except everyone. just cause i believe in God that is my belief just as well as those who choose not to believe in God that is there belief.

Answer 6

Did you just say that you have to believe the word of someone who died centuries or millenia ago just for a basis of science?

You have no idea what science even is.

Answer 7

Fairly well put.
"They prove their own beliefs in the same manner."
If everyone (thats is all people) could just understand that one statement-the whole world would be a much better place. Christianity is based on a "belief" and there is no science behind it. Evolution is based on a "belief" and there is "no" science behind it either.

Answer 8

well this debate has been going on for centuries and probably will always go on as it's a back and forth argument between both sides i'm agnostic and i feel that debate is a good thing up to a point but when it crosses a certain line where people downright disrepect eachother then it's not good

Answer 9

Yes, it should cease. Everyone has their own respected beliefs and we all need to leave others personnal beliefs alone . We can not change what others have been brought up to believe in. And Respect others for what they Believe in as long as it is not evil. Only in my own heart, can I become what I want. I would not like it, if someone kept pushing beliefs down my throat, especially if I did not believe in it. Live and Let Live !!

Answer 10

sorry but scientist have prove of evolution it is the creationist that try to make excuses to cover up the facts, people take every word of the bible literally and miss out on the true meaning, for example the old language it was written in can have many differant meanings