Response to article: "Is conflict between God and science hardwired?"

The unborn child: a human in the parasitic phase. Has absolutely nothing to do with the female host, as far as rights are concerned. General rule of thumb...I know this doesn't apply to rape and such but anyway:
Only put it in your body if you really want it and it's good for you. Responsibility, folks. Responsibility.
This rule of thumb works for drugs, food, and piercings too. Nifty, eh?

-

I'd like to point out an interesting thing I have observed regarding origins theory:
It is assumed by the natural selection camp that organisms are similar because they are related to each other. This was an easy assumption, considering that not long before all organisms had been systematically grouped by similarity.
What this reasoning overlooks however, is the concept that everything "tastes more or less like chicken." Surely, if you dip into the pool of life and take out one random organism, you will be able to find an organism that is most like it, and also one that is least like it. Does this necessarily mean that the one most similar to it is related to it? There is nothing concrete which asserts that they are related; this is just assumed by modern scientific theory. That doesn't seem particularly scientific to me.

-

Gaaahhhkkgk! first reply to this post. God is not tolerant! Truer to say, he is not tolerant of everything, namely, what is evil. "Tolerant" has a too-positive connotation these days. If someone tolerated everything, well, just think about it. And for God, the only one who could possibly claim any sort of legitimate authority out of the whole lot of us, to have such a quality? Aurgkh!

-

So those who can't write can't be right? Excellent logic there, good chap! NOT!! Not to offend you or anything, I'm just sick of people playing educated-ness as a trump card.

-

No dual belief? How about all the stories of indigenous tribes that follow both the missionary's teaching and their own religion?
And even if we aren't dual belief, we sure are compartmentalized. Why do we view science as entirely separate from God, and God separate from our daily lives, and from our working lives? If God created everything, and is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, He could not be separated from anything. Athiest scientists should not wonder about Christianity's attempt to unify all these things. And to oppose it would seriously interfere with the religious freedom of Christians. Yet it seems that that is what is expected of Christians by our culture today...to put God in a compartment far, far away from all practical aspects of life, so as to avoid any disturbance. Enter the one-world-faith: relativism.

-

What type of arrogance does it take to authoritatively proclaim something fact? Seriously! We could be living in the Matrix for all we know. You spoke very foolishly, billytw.

(he did the "religion is belief, science is fact" bit)

-

He meant "middle ages". As in the dark age. Too bad that isn't when God began...only the "Catholic" religion.
And whether or not there are hallucinogens in Palestine is a moot point; the real Mount Sinai is a mountain known today as Jabal Al Lawz, in Saudi Arabia. The Isrealites really did cross the Red Sea, and there's actually two distinct places they could have done it, one being much more likely due to it's geography (and yes, I did find the spot on Google Earth, so the source I got this info from (video documentary, by the way) wasn't just making it up.

-

Assuming God to be real, He could no longer be purely philosophical. And what is saying that He is indeed not a physical reality? I don't know why anyone who is Christian would consider Him not to be. A physical reality, but on a different dimension...and there is not a complete absence of physical evidence for at least the supernatural, if not God per se, by any stretch of the imagination. Anyone who has spent any length of time around dying people, or in the occult, for examples, will know this.
Science's problem with God is that it can't figure Him out...not that it really tries, anymore, but anyway...
The issue here really isn't a choice between God and science, it's a choice of whether or not to accept the latest theories within science which attempt to replace God. God, as maker of everything, would have no problem whatsoever being compatible with the rest of science.
And yes, how could science be synonymous with Atheism? Why is it forced to be these days? If science is supposed to be the bold exploration of everything undiscovered, why does modern science come to a screeching halt when confronting the paranormal?
I say it is fear, fear of the inability to find out, and pride, pride in Human accomplishment and perfection, that drives the wedge between the two.
Funny thing, science is, it can never bring itself to say, "I don't know", or "I know I'm not supposed to know." That was Adam's problem in the garden, by the way. He wasn't satisfied with not knowing.