OT: Frank and Dave's Philosophical Kebab Emporium

I don't know, I haven't spoken with him in weeks.

People of faith are more intelligent than what you give them credit for there. I would say you are way off there totally wrong.

Of course they do, but it's not like they know what God did next so they cannot comment.

Anyway answer my question, you may have missed it?

 

To save you looking.

 

typical flat-earth#1 mentality.

 

Dr Gabrie Funes Chief Vatican astronomer “Just as there is a multiplicity of creatures on earth, there can be other beings, even intelligent, created by God. This is not in contrast with our faith because we can’t put limits on God’s creative freedom… “Why can’t we speak of a ‘brother extraterrestrial’? It would still be part of creation…

 

"Both Funes and Consolmagno are scientific advisors to the Pope and advise him on all matters concerning astronomy – which includes the likelihood of a future discovery of extraterrestrial life. It’s inconceivable that both Funes and Consolmagno would have been able to make public their beliefs about extraterrestrial life without the approval of the previous Pope, Benedict XVI"

"It may be that Vatican astronomical interest is driven by the possibility of discovering extraterrestrial life on some distant exoplanet in the next few years. Not so according to Putnam and Horn. They contend that Vatican astronomers have already found evidence of extraterrestrial life, much closer to earth."

Shall I carry on ....

 

Point made on that I think.

Still waiting for my answer.....

 

"Among the Catholic researchers interviewed is Dr Guy Consolmagno, a Jesuit and Vatican astronomer who generated much press interest in 2010 for his views on alien life. He said: “Any entity – no matter how many tentacles it has – has a soul.” When asked if he would baptize an alien, Consolmagno replied: “Only if they asked.”

Putnam and Horn cite a difficult to find document written by Consolmagno who makes a remarkable claim about the relationship between Jesus and extraterrestrial life: “
Perhaps it’s not so far-fetched to see the Second Person of the Trinity, the Word, Who was present “In the beginning” (John 1: l), coming to lay down His life and take it up again (John 10: 18) not only as the Son of Man but also as a Child of other races?”



'Flat earth' you say I think you'll find they're also far more highly educated/qualified on the subject than you!

 

Answer:

Because I use the powers of inference. Not deduction, as there is no proof either way... but inference.

Nature has 'blessed' us, modern human beings, with a great rational brain, inquisitiveness and guile on top of an amazing scientific treasure excavated by Newton and a thousand other geniuses. Use your rational powers to rummage this inherited knowledge that keeps growing, be inquisitive, be courageous, and you'll get to where I am. Lets not sit on fences and get sore asses.

 

Thanks JB, nice to know that they always trawl behind science. It's good to know that they are hanging in there.

 

There is no evidence that you are right, you could use reasoning based on your education, lifestyle, upbringing etc, but there's no evidence that you are right, there's more evidence to the contrary. Again it's arrogant to dismiss others beliefs, you don't have to join in, it's not a cult but you have to respect others opinions. Well you don't have to but it's the reason that people are so dismissive of your posts.

 

Define your concept of modern and how and when modern human beings differentiated themselves form non-modern.

 

Another arrogant reply, you were wrong in your opinion and then you mock the perfectly reasonable answer given.

 

Not606 football forum.?

ffs if people want to believe its their choice, when the lights go out believers have a 50% chance of an afterlife, non believers have no chance of one due to them turning their back on faith.

 

One swallow (astronomer Funes) doesn't make summer. Esp considering the church's vastly negative and very combative history with science. Rather than fighting the ship, now they're trawling it. Wiser move.

 

that's the definition of (faith by) opportunism

 

Perhaps they were just willing to listen and to learn, to consider other opinions.

 

Having viewed the thread with much amusement I have come to the conclusion that you are only an expert on asking questions on the subject and never give definitive answers to back up your rhetoric.

Unless you can conclusively disprove the existence of "god" your view carries as much strength as a fart in a hurricane.

 

I assure you that is a one-way street. Science has absolutely no need to listen, learn, nor consider the opinions of the Vatican. Oil and water, in that direction. Though for trawling purposes, the church claims compatibility.

 

says Livtor who has confirmed himself as having little or no understanding and therefore even less knowledge.

 

C olin Humphreys is a dyed-in-the-wool materialist. That is, he is professor of materials science at Cambridge. He believes in the power of science to explain the nature of matter. He believes that humans - like all other living things - evolved through the action of natural selection upon random mutation. He is also a Baptist. He believes in the story of Moses, as recounted in the biblical book of Exodus. He believes in it enough to have explored Egypt and the Holy Land in search of natural or scientific explanations for the story of the burning bush, the 10 plagues of Egypt, the crossing of the Red Sea and the manna that fell in the wilderness -and then written a book about it.

"I believe that the scientific world view can explain almost anything," he says. "But I just think there is another world view as well."

Tom McLeish is professor of polymer physics at Leeds. Supermarket plastic bags are polymers, but so are spider's silk, sheep's wool, sinew and flesh and bone. His is the intricate world of what is, and how it works, down to the molecular level. He delights in the clarity and power of science, precisely because it is questioning rather than dogmatic. "But the questions that arise, and the methods we use to ask them, can be traced back to the religious tradition in which I find myself. Doing science is part of what it means in that tradition to be human. Because we find ourselves in this puzzling, extraordinary universe of pain and beauty, we will also find ourselves able to explore it, by adopting the very successful methods of science," he says.

Russell Stannard is now emeritus professor of physics at the Open University. He is one of the atom-smashers, picking apart the properties of matter, energy, space and time, and the author of a delightful series of children's books about tough concepts such as relativity theory. He believes in the power of science. He not only believes in God, he believes in the Church of England. He, like Tom McLeish, is a lay reader. He has con tributed Thoughts for the Day to Radio 4, those morning homilies on the mysteries of existence. Does it worry him that science - his science - could be about to explain the whole story of space, time matter and energy without any need for a Creator? "No, because a starting point you can have is: why is there something rather than nothing? Why is there a world? Now I cannot see how science could ever provide an answer," he says.

Stannard will be one of a small group of scientists and theologians, having a go at the question next week in Birmingham. The Science and Religion Forum, founded by a group of scientists 25 years ago, meets on Monday to discuss questions such as the place of humans in the universe. They are not likely to actually come up with an answer, but they will certainly give the question a bashing. The forum embraces what one of its begetters, Arthur Peacocke, pioneer of DNA research in Britain, called "wistful agnostics" and sceptics, as well as Christians and people from other faiths. "It's about how we can worship a creator God who is creating now, and still hold on to the scientific world view as we understand it," says Phil Edwards, who trained in physics but is now a chaplain to the Bolton Institute.

The subject - the place of humans in the universe - is a challenge. To the scientific way of thinking, humans no more have a "place" in the scheme of things than hamsters or harp seals. The universe itself may be an incomprehensible event, and life a so far unexplained one, but scientists see no ladder of creation with humans at the pinnacle. They can see no "purpose" in being. We are here because we are here, a lucky accident - lucky for us - but there was nothing inevitable about the evolution of humanity, or its survival. God is not part of the explanation.

That is how scientists have grown to think, whether they come from a religious background or not. But modern science did not emerge 400 years ago to challenge religion, the orthodoxy of the past 2,000 years. Generations of thinkers and experimenters and observers - often themselves churchmen - wanted to explain how God worked his wonders. Modern physics began with a desire to explain the clockwork of God's creation. Modern geology grew at least partly out of searches for evidence of Noah's flood. Modern biology owes much to the urge to marvel at the intricacy of Divine providence.


Full article is here.........

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2003/sep/04/science.research