Did God create Dogs?

[Stone]

I hope your cuzzo is better now....

Science is 2+2-4 and my religious doesn't prevent me from delving into science. If you say that that will be an accusation to believers in almost all major faiths.

The point here is not that science be demeaned but at the same time science being a secondary 'gift' of Nature or God cannot have the same status as Faith.
If one has no Faith in something....anything...he is nothing but nothing.
Science cannot teach me to love my loved ones nor teach me to hate the hated ones.
It's your faith in good and evil that makes you do so. And, Faith doesn't stop you to use your scientific models to asses the secrets of Nature ie God.
No sophistry.....it's something from the divine we are discussing besides its greatest gift of intellect and zeal for science. Science is human curiosity to study the secrets of mother Nature and Nature is essentially the source of science.

Science never was designed to teach moral or ethical lessons. Science has no ability to 'love' or to 'hate'.
This is a common mistake because men with out ethics and morals have used the knowledge from scientific investigation to produce the most horrific means of torturing and murdering of humanity for their own benefit.
From nuclear weapons to biological/chemical weapons, it was men and women designing them for their specific intent, not science.
Science is about as true to the definition of 'secular' as could be possible.
Science is not to be worshiped, it's merely a tool to understand the mechanisms of and within our physical reality.

Scientific method:
http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html
Especially note this:
http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html#Heading5
"Common Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method"

Worth a read^^^

 

[Stone]

am so sorry to hear that. In Pakistan we don't have social security or medical. However, there are many philanthropists who are providing free medical services and other social services to us people....On the whole health situation is bad..and very expensive in private hospitals and doctor's fees are high and beyond even a upper middle class citizen can afford. Much of the donations to charitable hospitals and healthcare units comes from abroad....both from expatriates as well as locals.

Education too has become too expensive to afford by a middle class family.
National economy is in shambles .....black economy is strong.

I have no doubt the conditions in your nation are far more dire than in the US.

Be well.

 

[mazHur]

I have no doubt the conditions in your nation are far more dire than in the US.

Be well.

true, here we lack rule of law and justice. If it becomes available all the terrorism and terrorists would automatically get eliminated and Karachi would be as peaceful as it was during my hey days!!

Today I cannot even travel to several places of the city.....it's dreadful to go there. Ethnic violence mainly.

Until beginning 90's I had a good number of my Japanese, European and American customers visiting me every now and then, so much so that a Japanese customer was
stationed at my work place to monitor his interest. I too used to travel round the world meeting my good customers on a goodwill note. There were many foreigners to be seen in hotels and some in market places....but all is gone now. Dogs are eating dogs....sorry Darwin. but this can't be 'evolution'!!

 

[Stone]

true, here we lack rule of law and justice. If it becomes available all the terrorism and terrorists would automatically get eliminated and Karachi would be as peaceful as it was during my hey days!!

Today I cannot even travel to several places of the city.....it's dreadful to go there. Ethnic violence mainly.

Until beginning 90's I had a good number of my Japanese, European and American customers visiting me every now and then, so much so that a Japanese customer was
stationed at my work place to monitor his interest. I too used to travel round the world meeting my good customers on a goodwill note. There were many foreigners to be seen in hotels and some in market places....but all is gone now. Dogs are eating dogs....sorry Darwin. but this can't be 'evolution'!!

It's the dark side of evolution in action..... the prospect of extinction.
In this case, heavy on mankind's intellectual failings.....meaning the negative effects from artificial evolution, man's choices.

Mankind is nearing a crossroad where his future depends more on the relative short term successes of his intellectual abilities than long term biological evolution.
But as mankind culls it's own out of his own madness for power and greatness, the power and influence of intellectualism takes a back seat to extinction.

 

[mazHur]

''The hallmark of good science is that it can be repeated by others and achieve the same results. In the realm of religion, no such cause and effect experiments can be devised. Belief and disbelief are personal matters. Conclusions — both positive and negative — are reached by self-study or persuasion by others.''

''He accepts Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, but with a proviso. He believes evolution was preordained and that it was not a random, unplanned, and unintended process as advocated by nonbelieving scientists. He mentioned Richard Dawkins’ 1986 book The Blind Watchmaker, in which the evolutionary biologist argues that the only watchmaker in nature is the blind force of physics.''

''To rely on science to settle a religious argument is tantamount to asking a scientist to explain the science of falling in love.''

''Nonbelieving scientists pray at the altar of Newtonian physics. Those who are religiously inclined pray at the altar of a deity of their choice.''

http://www.toledoblade.com/S-Amjad-...ither-needs-to-be-exclusive-of-the-other.html

 

[Stone]

Sounds like theistic evolution which I referred to earlier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

 

[mazHur]

Sounds like theistic evolution which I referred to earlier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution

I know that but......read Nobel Laureate's utterances.

 

[Stone]

I know that but......read Nobel Laureate's utterances.

You're going to have to explain because I don't see anything objectionable, one way or the other.

 

[mazHur]

You're going to have to explain because I don't see anything objectionable, one way or the other.

huh! You are a know-all...help yourself and google. Am not here to teach...

 

[Stone]

huh! You are a know-all...help yourself and google. Am not here to teach...

Am not here to teach

Obviously.
You don't teach, nor frequently back up your claims nor explain yourself on topic.

Since it's your point to make, you will have to make it yourself, I'm not a mind reader.

 

[mazHur]

Obviously.
You don't teach, nor frequently back up your claims nor explain yourself on topic.

Since it's your point to make, you will have to make it yourself, I'm not a mind reader.

[[[[[Grumbling, grumbling, grumbling,,,,,that's the best you could do!
If you are unable to catch up chew some bitter almonds for brain power
at least for an year before you are 'cognitively, able!!]]]]

 

[Stone]

But I did read the article you linked to.

He accepts Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, but with a proviso. He believes evolution was preordained and that it was not a random, unplanned, and unintended process as advocated by nonbelieving scientists.

I've already posted I have no issues with theistic evolution.

In his lecture, Mr. Plantinga made the case for theism — the belief that God or gods exist. While he refrained from proving God’s existence, he also allowed that intelligent design couldn’t be proven scientifically.

I have no issue with that statement.

When asked whether his belief in theism is driven by independent reasoning or on his faith, he said that his faith has much to do with it.

I have no issue with that statement, either.

Whether it is a higher power figuratively bent over a workbench — the sighted watchmaker — drawing blueprints for all living things, or a process independent of any supervisor is beyond the scope of science to settle.

This is obviously directed at empiricists (atheists) and what is not possible through empirical evaluation.
Since Plantinga has embraced scientific investigation of our physical reality, it's not a denunciation of defining our reality in scientific terms.
I have no issue with it.

To rely on science to settle a religious argument is tantamount to asking a scientist to explain the science of falling in love.

I have no issue with that.

Nonbelieving scientists pray at the altar of Newtonian physics.

Earlier, Plantinga stated:

The hallmark of good science is that it can be repeated by others and achieve the same results. In the realm of religion, no such cause and effect experiments can be devised. Belief and disbelief are personal matters. Conclusions — both positive and negative — are reached by self-study or persuasion by others.

So the contexts of 'belief' and 'prayer' in religion and science do not have identical meanings, but his first comment does make a point.
Morality and ethics are achieved through different processes.
Empiricists tend to weigh heavily on cause and effect while those of faith weigh heavily on persuasion.
I have no issue with that. And it should be pointed out that while the methods are different, standards are often shared.



Why did you even present an article in support of theistic evolution?
You deny that the biological event (evolution) that's recorded in the fossil record ever occurred.
Did you understand what you linked to?

 

[Stone]

[[[[[Grumbling, grumbling, grumbling,,,,,that's the best you could do!
If you are unable to catch up chew some bitter almonds for brain power
at least for an year before you are 'cognitively, able!!]]]]

As you can read in my previous post.....you're full of shit.

 

[mazHur]

Doesn't this explain everything??lol

 

[mazHur]

But I did read the article you linked to.


I've already posted I have no issues with theistic evolution.


I have no issue with that statement.


I have no issue with that statement, either.



This is obviously directed at empiricists (atheists) and what is not possible through empirical evaluation.
Since Plantinga has embraced scientific investigation of our physical reality, it's not a denunciation of defining our reality in scientific terms.
I have no issue with it.


I have no issue with that.


Earlier, Plantinga stated:


So the contexts of 'belief' and 'prayer' in religion and science do not have identical meanings, but his first comment does make a point.
Morality and ethics are achieved through different processes.
Empiricists tend to weigh heavily on cause and effect while those of faith weigh heavily on persuasion.
I have no issue with that. And it should be pointed out that while the methods are different, standards are often shared.



Why did you even present an article in support of theistic evolution?
You deny that the biological event (evolution) that's recorded in the fossil record ever occurred.
Did you understand what you linked to?

If you have no issue with what the article states then what the heck are you doing here?? Grumbling, grouching, complaining, crying?

 

[The Man]

Doesn't this explain everything??lol

Thats called child pornography here and highly frowned upon

 

[mazHur]

As you can read in my previous post.....you're full of shit.

I can realize how flustered and frustrated you are at your defeat! Man, try to be a sportsman and behave!!

 

[mazHur]

Thats called child pornography here and highly frowned upon

Dammit, you can divide everything to your choice or whims.
This is NOT child pornography.....seems you haven't been to your shitty porno sites...do go and be ashamed!

 

[mazHur]

 

[Stone]

If you have no issue with what the article states then what the heck are you doing here?? Grumbling, grouching, complaining, crying?

I think you are confused

Aren't I allowed to agree with the article you linked to?.....