eis

25 ms·

211.
by eis 4y ago
Nobody claims science can prove everything! I mentioned multiple times how science is honest about that fact. Unfortunately it doesn't seem like you addressed any of my points.
212.
by eis 4y ago
> No. I as mentioned in another post, God exists outside the realms of this reality, and is not bound by our laws. He created our laws, and he created logic, and they do not apply to him. Yea and once you leave our realm of logic
213.
by eis 4y ago
If you are leaving the realm of logic then any further reasoning becomes nonsensical. The argument will be pointless.
214.
by eis 4y ago
> I think we keep talking past each other. On this I guess we agree! :) > Which is why in Islam we have three sources of truth: observations, logic, and the honest news. We have established that Muhammad, Prayers of God be
215.
by eis 4y ago
> And so is any other argument to attempt to explain what was before the universe. Those are outside the realms of science. That's the point of the submitted article. That any theory that cannot be proven should not be paid
216.
by eis 4y ago
I can actually use his own logic to prove the opposite point of his claim. Since his reasoning only works if there was one (or very few) tries wouldn't it be very unlikely to have had few tries compared to a much high number of possibl
217.
by eis 4y ago
Fully agreed.
218.
by eis 4y ago
Yes we are limited by our genetics but what does that mean when you consider that we are starting to learn how to manipulate our genes? Evolution doesn't seem to stop. Science is advancing at an increasing pace and the boundary is push
219.
by eis 4y ago
> What we observe in nature. Everything in nature that begins to exist was caused by something else. (Some have suggested quantum exceptions to this rule, but even those claims are tenuous at best.) > The best observable evide
220.
by eis 4y ago
> Tell me, how many scientific "claims" that you rely on a day to day basis, have you verified personally? Many. Science claims when I push the brakes in my car I will slow down due to the friction. Seems to be working
221.
by eis 4y ago
> Not all texts are vague and open to interpretation. A proper religion with strong scholarly underpinnings like Islam has this issue figured out. The Quran itself calls out the issue, and Muslim scholars from the very beginning hav
222.
by eis 4y ago
> One that is backed by proofs and evidence. I have seen zero proofs for the existance of god. Not in your video or anywhere else. If such proof existed then that would be the biggest scientific breakthrough in history and it wou
223.
by eis 4y ago
Maybe a better analogy would be a spring that goes from contraction to expansion and back again? A lot of things behave like waves so could it be some space field swinging in a wave-like pattern? Is there some evidence for the expansion to
224.
by eis 4y ago
> His point is that experimental science is not in the domain of answering "why" in that sense. It's a metaphysical problem outside the realm of science. The question of finding which religion is true is a separate is
225.
by eis 4y ago
Erm, what? I disproved his point. He claims because us being in this unlikely universe is proof for a design. No, it's a logical fallacy as I outlined in the example of flipping coins. The video presenter is the guy who flipped 10 ti
226.
by eis 4y ago
I finished it now. It did not get any better. Most of his arguments can be boiled down to "science can't explain that so it must be god". No. Towards the end he shows a lack of understanding of statistics. He claims if any in
227.
by eis 4y ago
This reasoning does not hold up. Science does not claim the universe needs a cause to come into existance. Your premise is already wrong. Science tries to come up with explanations for the observed reality in our universe. It does not claim
228.
by eis 4y ago
Correct, I have edited the comment. Thank you.
229.
by eis 4y ago
> That's not 100% true. There can (and is) proof and evidence for validating religious claims. You're conflating belief in the unseen (with evidence) with blind faith without evidence, those are two different things. An
230.
by eis 4y ago
Science is not a religion. Scientists are not holymen as evidence by the constant questioning of their theories by other scientists. That's the whole thing science is about! Relentless checking of hypothesis through experiments that ma
231.
by eis 4y ago
> What does having texts with some degree of interpretation have to do with whether those texts are true or not? Sounds like a genetic fallacy. You are putting words in my mouth. I said texts that are vague and open to a lot of i
232.
by eis 4y ago
You don't need to post the video numerous times. I have commented on it on one of your other replies. > Proper religion and science do not disagree. What makes a proper religion? And can you tell me how it agrees with science
233.
by eis 4y ago
[flagged]
234.
by eis 4y ago
> Did you survey all religions to make such claim? That is the definition of religion. They are believes that relate to supernatural beings and sprituality. They cannot be proven or disproven. > And it's not like you
235.
by eis 4y ago
Science is not a religion. If scientism means thinking that science is the best tool we have right now to explain reality then I guess yea I'm pro science. But it's very far from a religion. BTW science does not claim to know it a
236.
by eis 4y ago
I think the ratio of babble to sound reasoning is much better in science than in religion. That being said, there is also a lot of science babble and we should call it out and try to keep it at a as low amount as possible. The core tenets o
237.
by eis 4y ago
But that doesn't get us any further than "We don't know yet." It doesn't prove or disprove anything. By the same line of reasoning one could say there is no time at all and all our memory of the past is an illusion
238.
by eis 4y ago
I don't think the line of reasoning is similar at all. The quoted text just says "We don't know. Hypothetical beings higher than us don't know because they came after the initial origin. A hypothetical creator might or m
239.
by eis 4y ago
This is false according to CNBC: https://twitter.com/CNBCnow/status/1563136384059285505
240.
by eis 4y ago
Actually the dollar is falling as well (in real purchasing power) due to inflation. It's doing quite a bit better at the moment compared to e.g. Euro. One factor could be the increased interest rates. Why would I keep Euros and get sti

More ›