Holy Wars

[Animal]

Pwnage

 

nice

[Bobbeh]

I wonder if they'll have Megadeth's "Holy Wars" as part of the soundtrack?

 

Hah, thats the first thing I though of when I read this thread title

[Purity14]

Religion arguments again.

The whole creation thing isn't really that hard to grasp, it took God 7 days including a rest day at the end.

 

I look forward to watching it though.

[Gaz6002]

I thought Hawking had previously hinted that there must have been a creator of some kind to make the observation that resultantly collapsed the probability wave that initiated the universe.

 

The BBC reported last night that he's retracted that, saying there's no reason (with modern scientific knowledge) to infer that anyone or anything had a hand in the big bang. They aired an interview with him about it.

[AndrewOW]

The BBC reported last night that he's retracted that, saying there's no reason (with modern scientific knowledge) to infer that anyone or anything had a hand in the big bang. They aired an interview with him about it.

 

 

Ah, but was it him, or his 'spokeperson', because I can never see his lips move?

[tbourner]

What if the "who" becomes a "what". The "what" could be a series of variables, constants, events, etc that we do not fully understand (yet?). Why do we have to play the God card everytime we don't understand something?

 

What's the definition of god though? Try to define 'GOD' in scientific terms. Would it be a being from another dimension, another m-brane (or is it p-brane, I get confused)? Maybe just from another galaxy or universe (if you believe a multiverse theory), would that being have a form or would they be energy, or not even energy (as that couldn't be omnipresent in our physics) maybe another type of variable or constant that we do not fully understand...... Oh... wait..... that's what you said.

 

If Hawkins really said:

He had previously argued that belief in a creator was not incompatible with science - but in a new book The Grand Design, he concludes that the Big Bang was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics.

Then he's a blinkered fool. the laws of physics could easily have been placed by a 'god' or if you don't like the term - a higher dimensional being, or an omnipresent force we don't yet understand outside of our limited 4D brains. We input data into computers, what's to say the creator of our universe didn't put in variables for the laws of physics and hit 'run'?

[Gaz6002]

Ah, but was it him, or his 'spokeperson', because I can never see his lips move?

 

I almost put the word interview in inverted commas

[Matt H]

or is it p-brane, I get confused

 

It's pea-brain

[Matt H]

As for your rather moronic comment regarding being forced to believe or be murdered as an unbeliever, were you not aware of the fact that it was Islamic scientists who measured the circumference of the Earth whilst the rest of the planet was content with the notion of a flat Earth, who compiled and formulated what we now know as algebra and made ground breaking strides in hydrology and medical science? Not to mention, creating the first university.

 

I'm not sure if the Muslim world, or the far east in general has contributed much if anything to the scientific progression of the race. Not that they should have though, it's always been hard times out of the West and Europe.

[Septic]

In regards to your reply Thorin:

 

Circumference of the Earth:

 

The techniques used to measure the earth and the radius were done by Biruni, a muslim scholar. In fact, he is considered by many as the 'father of geodesy'.

 

He found the radius of the earth to be 6339.6 km, a value not obtained in the West until the 16th century.

-John J. O'Connor, Edmund F. Robertson (1999). Abu Arrayhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Biruni

 

Alegebra:

 

Algebra is the arabic word for equation (aljabr). The word 'algorith' comes from the author's name, Al-Khwarizmi.

Diophantus and others created models that were used in some certain ways to solve problems but Al-Khwarizmi is considered the be the "father of algebra". Al-Khwarizmi is considered one of the greatest mathematicians of all time.

 

Hydrology:

 

 

Note I didn't say created the whole system of hydrology but made great strides in it. The Dam system was made in the Middle East not in Greece.

 

Medical science:

 

Please tell me you guys know about the great strides made in medical science by Islamic scholars. I am aware of the amazing contribution made by the Greeks too which contributed to the former in making those strides..

"The Islamic civilization rose to primacy in medical science as Muslim physicians contributed significantly to the field of medicine, including anatomy, ophthalmology, pharmacology, pharmacy, physiology, surgery, and the pharmaceutical sciences."

 

University:

 

'University' does indeed derive from Latin but in regards to the first medical universities, they have been influenced (or purported to be) by religious Madrasah schools. Al-Azhar University in Cairo (969 AD) is considered by some as one of the first universities in the world.

 

So er...not pwnage Animal.

 

If you read my post correctly you will notice that I'm talking about great strides and contributions made by Islamic scholars. Many of you seem to assume that I'm asserting that Islamic scholars were wholly responsible for all of the above contributions.

[Septic]

I'm not sure if the Muslim world, or the far east in general has contributed much if anything to the scientific progression of the race. Not that they should have though, it's always been hard times out of the West and Europe.

 

A very silly and sweeping statement. You need to read up A LOT

before coming to a conclusion as opposed to your very erroneous opinion stated above.

[Septic]

I always find your posts very interesting and well written. I wish I could express myself the way you do

 

Thanks mate Clearly a lot of what I'm trying to say is lost on some people. If I do sound condescending then its just the way it reads on the internet. I always seem to sound aggressive on the board when I read it back but its not my intention (unlike Ian C!!)

[tbourner]

FIGHT!!

 

Actually don't, we don't want this one locked.

 

 

 

 

hitler

[Septic]

No fighting please! I'm not trying to start on anyone, I just don't think we need silly posts like Ian C's on here. Lets get a long!

Then he's a blinkered fool. the laws of physics could easily have been placed by a 'god' or if you don't like the term - a higher dimensional being, or an omnipresent force we don't yet understand outside of our limited 4D brains. We input data into computers, what's to say the creator of our universe didn't put in variables for the laws of physics and hit 'run'?

 

Exactly, although I couldn't get myself to formulate my views so coherently. His new statement seems to strike at the heart of his previous one and with no real back-up to it. I was actually excited when I first read the title thinking he had based his supposed view of the non-existence of God one some new amazing discovery but alas, I was wrong.

[Digsy]

Regarding Septic's comments @ Ian C, its not a question of which race, colour or creed - and remember that the three don't have to go hand in hand - invented what first. Its more a case of science and religion have never been particularly good bedfellows and (IMHO) its best to keep the two apart. Faith is just what it says on the tin - belief in something without any tangible evidence. Science is the progression of our understanding through the proof and disproof of hypotheses through actual observation and measurement. When trying to crack a particular problem, say, in theoretical physics and two rival theory's crop up I'm sure you get many heated arguments between the "rival" camps. Another difference between science and religion is that even the most passionate rival scientists will tend to happily sit down together and argue their cases out over a cup of coffee rather than recruit as many supporters as possible and then go out and try to kill those with a different viewpoint.

 

That's not to say that science is totally without faith. Many a scientist has spent their whole life trying to prove something that they feel to be right, only to be proven correct after they have died. That must be faith by some definition.

 

And on the subject of who invented what, I don't think anyone particular group is going to score many brownie points by saying "we discovered this first". If someone from Afghanistan turns out to be the one who finally hits upon a unified theory of Everything it won't automatically follow that all Muslims are great scientists. White, Christian people invented the jet engine, penicillin, radar and (arguably) the world wide web, but they also went on the crusades. As I recall there were some very good Nazi scientists who helped the world get into space. Every race or religion is equally capable of creating geniuses or monsters.

[Abz]

I'm not sure if the Muslim world, or the far east in general has contributed much if anything to the scientific progression of the race. Not that they should have though, it's always been hard times out of the West and Europe.

 

Was an exhibition recently at the science museum which was pretty interesting.

 

http://www.1001inventions.com/

 

In regards to your reply Thorin:

 

Circumference of the Earth:

 

The techniques used to measure the earth and the radius were done by Biruni, a muslim scholar. In fact, he is considered by many as the 'father of geodesy'.

 

 

-John J. O'Connor, Edmund F. Robertson (1999). Abu Arrayhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Biruni

 

Alegebra:

 

Algebra is the arabic word for equation (aljabr). The word 'algorith' comes from the author's name, Al-Khwarizmi.

Diophantus and others created models that were used in some certain ways to solve problems but Al-Khwarizmi is considered the be the "father of algebra". Al-Khwarizmi is considered one of the greatest mathematicians of all time.

 

Hydrology:

 

 

Note I didn't say created the whole system of hydrology but made great strides in it. The Dam system was made in the Middle East not in Greece.

 

Medical science:

 

Please tell me you guys know about the great strides made in medical science by Islamic scholars. I am aware of the amazing contribution made by the Greeks too which contributed to the former in making those strides..

"The Islamic civilization rose to primacy in medical science as Muslim physicians contributed significantly to the field of medicine, including anatomy, ophthalmology, pharmacology, pharmacy, physiology, surgery, and the pharmaceutical sciences."

 

University:

 

'University' does indeed derive from Latin but in regards to the first medical universities, they have been influenced (or purported to be) by religious Madrasah schools. Al-Azhar University in Cairo (969 AD) is considered by some as one of the first universities.

 

So er...not pwnage Animal.

 

If you read my post correctly you will notice that I'm talking about great strides and contributions made by Islamic scholars. Many of you seem to assume that I'm asserting that Islamic scholars were wholly responsible for all of the above contributions.

 

Impressive, you always seem to write well constructed posts.

 

Though if you are snapped up by a law firm you might not have time anymore

[Septic]

Digsy, the point wasn't who discovered what first (i reiterated that in one of my previous posts), but highlighting the fact that religion or its followers aren't as blinkered as Ian C suggests. Furthermore, I don't agree with your point that religion is based purely on faith. It's not, or at least as far as Islam is concerned. It is a MANDATORY duty on all Muslims to continue seeking knowledge (known as Hidayat in Islam). The Quran repeatedly hammers the message home; think, think and think again. Why else would it state that;

 

Will they not then, ponder over the Quran? If it were from other than Allah they would surely have found in it much discrepancies. [4:82]

 

Many people, having never picked up a religious script or made any attempt to assess it have arrived at their conclusions about it based purely on rumours and conjecture. Surely we can all agree that doing research in the things we debate will enable us to be better equipped in our discussions and lend our particular points more credibility?

 

If you think religious texts are of no real value and consist entirely of fairy tales without reading them then so be it. But excuse me for not taking your views and opinions seriously.

[marc_p]

To put it simply, God is a Spank Monkey.

 

Now that's cleared up I'd just like to say.........Racists!!

[Soop Dogg]

Was an exhibition recently at the science museum which was pretty interesting.

 

http://www.1001inventions.com/

 

 

 

Impressive, you always seem to write well constructed posts.

 

Though if you are snapped up by a law firm you might not have time anymore

 

Are law-firms on the look out for people who can cut & paste articles from wikipedia these days? Cool!

[Gaz6002]

[Abz]

Are law-firms on the look out for people who can cut & paste articles from wikipedia these days? Cool!

 

No, his qualified.

 

And backs up all his conclusions with examples, points & care.

 

Better than can be said for some of the posts which just assume everything.

[Tricky-Ricky]

Regarding Septic's comments @ Ian C, its not a question of which race, colour or creed - and remember that the three don't have to go hand in hand - invented what first. Its more a case of science and religion have never been particularly good bedfellows and (IMHO) its best to keep the two apart. Faith is just what it says on the tin - belief in something without any tangible evidence. Science is the progression of our understanding through the proof and disproof of hypotheses through actual observation and measurement. When trying to crack a particular problem, say, in theoretical physics and two rival theory's crop up I'm sure you get many heated arguments between the "rival" camps. Another difference between science and religion is that even the most passionate rival scientists will tend to happily sit down together and argue their cases out over a cup of coffee rather than recruit as many supporters as possible and then go out and try to kill those with a different viewpoint.

 

That's not to say that science is totally without faith. Many a scientist has spent their whole life trying to prove something that they feel to be right, only to be proven correct after they have died. That must be faith by some definition.

 

And on the subject of who invented what, I don't think anyone particular group is going to score many brownie points by saying "we discovered this first". If someone from Afghanistan turns out to be the one who finally hits upon a unified theory of Everything it won't automatically follow that all Muslims are great scientists. White, Christian people invented the jet engine, penicillin, radar and (arguably) the world wide web, but they also went on the crusades. As I recall there were some very good Nazi scientists who helped the world get into space. Every race or religion is equally capable of creating geniuses or monsters.

 

Eloquently (from Latin eloquentia) put sir:salute:

Not being much of an academic, and rather not have the self considered intellectual superiors take the piss, i find your reply sums up my feelings on theis part of the subject rather well:)

[Rob]

When I read "Holy Wars" I thought it was going to be like Robot Wars. Teams of fundamentalists in a ring, fighting to the death to see who's best. The pit could represent Purgatory, and with a few additions like a flamethrower, we could have Hawkings as "Professor Bash."

[AndrewOW]

When I read "Holy Wars" I thought it was going to be like Robot Wars. Teams of fundamentalists in a ring, fighting to the death to see who's best. The pit could represent Purgatory, and with a few additions like a flamethrower, we could have Hawkings as "Professor Bash."

 

He's certainly got the hardware for it!

[Soop Dogg]

No, his qualified.

 

And backs up all his conclusions with examples, points & care.

 

Better than can be said for some of the posts which just assume everything.

 

Yeah - ok, fine.

 

But he did pull at least a paragraph from wikipedia in post # 35 to back up his claims on medical science.

 

I noted that there was a reference given on the evidence supporting the claims regarding the circumference of the planet, but no references on the rest of the 'evidence' provided - so I went looking to see where at least some of this 'evidence' came from and found some here. (Go to the second paragraph of the section entitled 'Islamic Middle Ages')

 

So he may be qualified - good on him.

 

But has he backed up "all his conclusions with examples, points & care" when at least some of his supporting evidence has been shown to be a cut & paste job from the Wikipedia site?

 

I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions as to the degree of care demonstrated by this.

 

As regards the whole debate about science vs religion, I'm abstaining from making any comment.