Why's there a thread about me and science?  I think it goes against the rules to have topics on religion.

http://forums.demigodthegame.com/132685

One word, no.  What you said isn't logical.  Just because caveman would be amazed at what we can do does not mean we can over come everything.  That is like saying lifting weights make you stronger and therefore you will be able lift an elephant one day.

And science simply brings forth more questions than answers.

No science and god are not one in the same, science has proved god is a hoax long ago.
as god is asociated with religion, wich is only a belief nothing more.

I think 'god' is vague with an ever broadening concept, and 'science' is something intent on being as specific and exact as possible.   So I'd say there were near opposites in concept.  Though "quantum science" might argue against me.

I didn't say God existed. That's exactly my point, God doesn't exist. What I said science could prove, is the concept of god. It would show that the concept of god is nothing special, only a set of mathematical equations, formulas, and so forth.

Guys read the book "Dante's Equation" by Jane Jensen to get a better idea of what I am talking about.

Why should the concept of God need to be proven? What's next, using science to explain the true nature of the Easter Bunny?  Either you believe in God or you don't, if you don't, then there's no aspect of God which needs explaining, as those aspects don't exist in the first place.

Someone please prove that there is no God. 

In fact that line of thought is illogical.

Anyone who assume there is no God is just arrogant.  Watch implies watch maker.  Especially when that watch is infinitely complex and infinitely large.

I don't think you understood at all what I was talking about. I wasn't talking about physical strength. But if you want to use your little example, yes we could. With advancements, in medicine, genetics, robotics, so forth, we damn well could lift an elephant one day.

Anyways, I was talking more a long the lines of mathematics. AND if you had even read my post you'd see that I acknoloedged that science does indeed bring forth more questions than answers, but the point is, things that humanity at one time could not explain, are now explainable due to science! Understand now? Matter and space is next to be understood.

 
[/quote]

I used strength as an example.  lets talk again if you can lift an elephant.

I can make that argument all day as well, maybe in three thousand years we can understand this and that.  So maybe this post is thousands years too early. 

The difference being that while a watch is something we know to be of intelligent design, the same does not apply to the Universe. Naturally, we like to assume that anything that exists had to have been created by something else, but you can prove that no more than I can prove that God does not exist, but I also can't prove the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, so what?

Also, the very existance of a God in the first place is contrary to your argument that everything needs to have been precedented by something else. The argument that God has always existed is no more or less valid than saying the same of the Universe.

In general, it's much harder to prove that something doesn't exist than to prove than it exists.

I say Invisible Pink Unicorn exists. How do you disprove that ? Furthermore, I can quote two proofs:

http://www.stonemakerargument.com/1.html

The argument that God has always existed is no more or less valid than saying the same of the Universe.

Apply Occam's Razor here.

Can we disprove god? No. Therefore, it is not science.

"The myth has to deal with the cosmology of today, and it's no good when it's based on a cosmology that's out of date. That's one of our problems. I don't see any conflict between religion and science. Religion has to accept the science of the day and penetrate it to the mystery. The conflict is between the science of 2,000 B.C. and the science of 2,000 A.D., and this is one of the problems with our tradition: where our inherited mythology, let's say our Judeo-Christian tradition relates to the Near East in the first millenium B.C. and it has nothing to do with life here and everything has to be explained. A mythological image that has to be explained to the brain is not working. When you move through a culture that is so alien to your own that the images don't click off any response, any recognition, then you're out of sync." - Joseph Campbell

First, just because we have technology that people in the past did not have does not make us any smarter/more intelligent than them.

Second, if I put you into a blacksmith shop (from the 1400s) and asked you to make me a sharp sword and a suit of amor I'm sure that you wouldn't know what to do.  That is even banking on that all of the appropriate tools are there as well.

Third, you say that THEY wouldn't be able to speak because they would be in pure awe of the technology that we have.  It seems that you think that everyone that lived prior to the 19th century on downwards was a complete mooncalf.  All of the technology that we have is just built off of some previous technology.

People did some amazing things way back in the day from the vikings extracting metal from marshes/swamps, to navigate accross the oceans by the stars, and I'm not even talking about the weapons they had.

To make a statement that eventually science will be able to explain everything as a scientist yes this is our goal but we are not foolish enough to speak such a claim.  So don't be lepton and make such a foolish claim.

Speaking of Leptons.  We thought that atoms were the smallest particles BUT it wasn't until 60 years ago that we realized oh wait atoms are made up of something as well called quarks. 

We don't even completely understand our very OWN bodies.  For example, it use to be a common procedure to remove someone's appendix because we didn't think it did anything.  Now, appendix aren't being removed unless necessary because people in the medical field are thinking may be it does do something.

I don't have the time nor the energy to discuss the irrational/illogical of borsuk's and alway's post.

As Scientists we are always exploring and looking.