At first no, then I read your explanation so yes. Science should not be used to disprove Gods that is not it's purpose, in my view. It is meant to be objective and to help educate ourselves about the world we live and how things work.
2007-10-02 02:53:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by A-chan 4
·
5⤊
0⤋
A lot of people ask questions here that have nothing to do with religion or spirituality, simply because there's a whole lot of people who post here, or because they like the answerers here.
Make sure you're actually looking for answers though, not just picking a fight. When all is said and done, you'll probably get better answers in the science sections, even if you don't get as many.
2007-10-02 03:06:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by Drake the Deist 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
You should wait longer. People don't frequent the science sections the way they do R&S. Wait a day or two and you'll have more answers to your science questions. They'll also generally be more informed answers than the ones you get here.
Personally, I have no problem with you asking science questions in both places.
2007-10-02 02:54:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yes, it's to show the entire world how bad the american educational system is.
Posting a science question in the religion and spirituality section often means the asker does not really want an answer. His goal is to ask a question that he believes proves some scientific knowledge to be wrong, or that science does not yet answer, and make the implicit claim that the only other explanation is a god, and specifically, the same god he happens to believe in.
It's the "god of the gaps" - intellectually bankrupt, since it favors ignorance instead of knowledge, and because of the contained logical fallacy.
And it seems to be almost exclusively a christian thing.
2007-10-02 02:53:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dreamstuff Entity 6
·
4⤊
3⤋
The late, large Isaac Asimov wrote some very reliable and obtainable books on technology, mutually with Asimov's New handbook to technology, however the worry with technology is that it strikes on and various of different the practise in them could be somewhat dated now. bill Bryson's "a short background of almost each thing" is powerful, yet could be somewhat huge for you, and then of direction there is often Hawking's "a short background of Time" whilst i replaced right into a toddler the ingredient that have been given me into technology and astronomy replaced into Carl Sagan's television sequence "Cosmos" that's accessible on DVD and likewise Netlfix on call for, in case you have that, and that i'm no longer able to advise it fantastically adequate. there is likewise an accompanying e book.
2016-10-10 04:05:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can understand asking in a place where you may get more answers. But as they say, quality over quantity ;-)
If you have enough knowledge of science to discern whether the answers are of quality, then I too would understand.
Eeek, a lot of uptight atheists on a Tuesday? Sheesh fellas...
2007-10-02 02:55:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Bajingo 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Because the questions you're asking are psuedo-science and not science. That's why people in the biology section write you off as a nut job.
2007-10-02 02:53:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes
2007-10-02 02:53:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes I do understand this,God and science are not going away so we have to deal with both aspects in life and on this forum,I agree with Aby`s answer.
2007-10-02 02:56:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sentinel 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No. I don't. Is it just because you get a lot of answers? If so, does that mean that all you care about is the quantity of answers and not the quality? There are questions that only have one answer, so if you get 15 that are wrong and 1 right one, does that make the discussion a lot better?
2007-10-02 02:54:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by William D 5
·
2⤊
2⤋