/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6053913
>is jesus real
as a historical character? probably did exist, yes

as a magic-man son of god? ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY NOT

>>5898829
well math is a good way to understand the universe, but religion is fucking retarded
<<<

>>5854033
why shouldnt it be?
if people are happy to pay for it, and other people are happy to provide the service and be payed for it, then whats the problem?

shouldnt be anybody elses business except theirs.

the only reason it was taboo in the first place was because of fucking religion
>hurr durr, no sex before marriage, no adultery, be with one person for ever and ever!

fucking bollocks
humans arn't naturally manogamous anyway. everyones thoughts wonder, even when they pretend to be faithful to their partner.

So if the Earth never had a moon, what physical differences would there be?

Bonus points for considering the Giant Impact Hypothesis.

fine by me.

the REAL difference between science and religion
<<<

>>3537601
I am dissapoint.
Physicists should have more sense and value evidence rather than bronze age texts or hearsay.

it makes sense for science and religion to be at opposition to each other. science is the persuit of knowledge and truth, scientists value evidence and amend their theories so that they have the best understanding of the world they can possibly have with the current evidence they possess.
faith is belief without evidence, believing something to be true just because you have been told to believe it, you do not have any previous knowledge to help you decide whether you have placed your faith correctly.

>>3402859
>in the supernatural world
the supernatural world isn't real. in fact by defnition it isn't real. the natural world is about all things that actually are in existence, everything in this universe which is real and true. things that are supernatural are imaginary, things like ghosts, demons, fairys etc.

Why would you have to throw out science? I don't have to throw out anything. the scientific method is he best method we have for knowing things, it allows us to replace old inaccurate models with new more accurate ones. if its a choice between valuing evidence or faith, its no contest.

>>3309345
agnostic atheists are usually very open minded. they are sceptical of claims without evidence that sound supernatural and unlikely, and this is the logical position to take. jumping to magical and fantastical conclusions without any evidence for them is pretty fucking retarded.
agnostic atheists tend to be very open minded people, if any evidence of god(s) arises, they will consider it all carefully. religious people are more likely to close their minds to contradicting evidence, and as such are NOT open-minded.

>>3179970
so...thats what heaven is going to be like?
yeh, count me out.

>>2907800
pic related

>>2704773
yeh, atheist pigeon is fucking shite.
try that atheist neckbeard advice dog, those are great for trolling atheists with.

>>2645803
fucking this!

i have about six images i want to post at once, but this sums it up best
<<<

because it is logical to not believe in a supernatural concept, if there is no evidence for it being true.

the scientific method is fuck'hen awesome.

there is no better way to establish truth.