Jump to content


Photo

Famous Scientists - Creationists


  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#41 Armen

Armen

    Veterinarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yerevan

Posted 23 February 2005 - 05:00 PM

QUOTE (ExtraHye @ Feb 23 2005, 04:59 PM)
Never said it was  smile.gif


Just clarifying smile.gif

#42 Arvestaked

Arvestaked

    Aspiring Memetic Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 751 posts
  • Location:Cacapoopoopeepeeshire

Posted 23 February 2005 - 07:12 PM

QUOTE (Armen @ Feb 23 2005, 02:05 PM)
No, but you could consider why a whole bunch of leading scientists (not only Einstein and even in modern days) believe in creationism. Don't you think they have thought about it A LOT more than yourself using their much more advansed logic.


I responded to this train of thought. I can also say that for the many who do not believe in a religion. It means nothing. And who says they thought about it at all? It is not a prerequisite.

#43 DominO

DominO

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,455 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 February 2005 - 07:40 PM

QUOTE (anoushik @ Feb 23 2005, 02:50 AM)
biggrin.gif

Domino (or Quebecer, I should say tongue.gif ) is Fadixist a person who believes in multiple universes? Did you come up with that?  smile.gif You use the word "Fadixism" quite a lot lately.


A Fadixist is someone that follow Domino, even when he contradict himself. smile.gif

#44 Stormig

Stormig

    Still water runs deep...

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,745 posts
  • Location:Je sais pas

Posted 24 February 2005 - 01:51 PM

Two questions:

1) Isn't a "creationist" different from your average Christian? Don't they believe that the world is 10,000 years old or so and that sort of stuff?

2) There may be scientists who kept slaves or nurtured racist ideas, sometimes basing their ideas/practices on their religious beliefs. Irrelevant?

#45 Armen

Armen

    Veterinarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yerevan

Posted 24 February 2005 - 08:44 PM

QUOTE (Stormig @ Feb 24 2005, 01:51 PM)
Two questions:
1) Isn't a "creationist" different from your average Christian? Don't they believe that the world is 10,000 years old or so and that sort of stuff?

I think creationists are not at all same with religious Christians, which follow the literal explanation of the Bible by church. They can be Muslim, Hinduist etc.
QUOTE
2) There may be scientists who kept slaves or nurtured racist ideas, sometimes basing their ideas/practices on their religious beliefs. Irrelevant?

You're basically saying that there may be people like Bush who say they are Christians. So? There are many.

Well, I don't think people of Einstein's calibre would ever fool themselves and be hypocrite. And here is why. Can you imagine how small was the tilt his mind that made him not to discreadit the idea of creation entirely. He knew exactly that he could discreadit this idea for lot of people and show the might of material science. It would be very tempting to do that actually. For example for the fun of it. To mock the church. And yet he was true to himself. I don't think people of that kind can fool themselves. This is why they were the greatest scientists. They never fooled themselves.

#46 Solaris

Solaris

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Location:The Expanding Universe

Posted 25 February 2005 - 02:40 AM

QUOTE (Armen @ Feb 25 2005, 06:44 AM)
Well, I don't think people of Einstein's calibre would ever fool themselves and be hypocrite.


Folks, have the decency not to drag Einstein into the "religioust" crowd. tongue.gif This is basically what his belief was about:

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiratation of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance - but for us, not for God. // The Human Side, 1954

#47 Sasun

Sasun

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ, USA
  • Interests:Art, Yoga, Spirituality

Posted 25 February 2005 - 11:11 AM

QUOTE (Solaris @ Feb 25 2005, 03:40 AM)
Folks, have the decency not to drag Einstein into the "religioust" crowd. tongue.gif This is basically what his belief was about:

Let's see how much of your statement corresponds to the reality about religions.
QUOTE
I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation.

He disagrees with the typical primitive explanation given by Christian churches. This is only a part of all religions, not all religions have the same idea of direct influence of God on individuals.
QUOTE
My religiosity consists in a humble admiratation of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality.

This is exactly the way some major branches of Hinduism view God - as an infinite and supreme spirit. Not to forget the Christian concept of the Holy Ghost. (Possibly other religions also agree on that, I don't know)
QUOTE
Morality is of the highest importance - but for us, not for God.

This view is shared by all religions. All religions without exceptions have moral codes that are very important for their followers.


Now, does it matter that Eistein was not part of a formal religion?
I don't think anyone is trying to portray Einstein as a religious individual, but the fact remains that he had ideas that are common in various theologies around the world.

Edited by Sasun, 25 February 2005 - 11:14 AM.


#48 Armen

Armen

    Veterinarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yerevan

Posted 25 February 2005 - 11:27 AM

QUOTE (Solaris @ Feb 25 2005, 02:40 AM)
Folks, have the decency not to drag Einstein into the "religioust" crowd.  tongue.gif


Einstein is on my side!

Yes and if you want to call me something intimate call me "Benito". I prefer it to "Folks" tongue.gif

#49 DominO

DominO

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,455 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 February 2005 - 11:55 AM

QUOTE (Armen @ Feb 25 2005, 12:27 PM)
Einstein is on my side!

Yes and if you want to call me something intimate call me "Benito". I prefer it to "Folks"  tongue.gif



Bullst, it disgust me when people that are dead, their positions are hijacked to support their convictions.

Let make that clear for you, so you stop using Einstein.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

Albert Einstein in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas (Einstein's secretary) and Banesh Hoffman, and published by Princeton University Press.

Einstein was a Pantheist, like a great many scientists, he is not on your side, stop hijacking his position to support your beliefs.

Einstein did believe in the "supernatural" but he as well believed that science was a tool that will one day able to answer all those questions.

There are Pantheist theists and Pantheist atheists, Einsteins Pantheism was neither pointing to one or the other position.

#50 Armen

Armen

    Veterinarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yerevan

Posted 25 February 2005 - 12:06 PM

QUOTE (QueBeceR @ Feb 25 2005, 11:55 AM)
Bullst, it disgust me when people that are dead, their positions are hijacked to support their convictions.

Let make that clear for you, so you stop using Einstein.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

Albert Einstein in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas (Einstein's secretary) and Banesh Hoffman, and published by Princeton University Press.

Einstein was a Pantheist, like a great many scientists, he is not on your side, stop hijacking his position to support your beliefs.

Einstein did believe in the "supernatural" but he as well believed that science was a tool that will one day able to answer all those questions.

There are Pantheist theists and Pantheist atheists, Einsteins Pantheism was neither pointing to one or the other position.


QB, I am just showing what some of the guys do. Exactly, that is disgusting. Like claiming that "technology" supports some arguments. Using highly doubtful theories to undermine the creadibility of faith.

Now, you can feel how disgusted I feel. And I don't need Einstein. You might guess that he is not the only great authority I turn to.

#51 DominO

DominO

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,455 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 February 2005 - 12:13 PM

QUOTE (Armen @ Feb 25 2005, 01:06 PM)
QB, I am just showing what some of the guys do. Exactly, that is disgusting. Like claiming that "technology" supports some arguments. Using highly doubtful theories to undermine the creadibility of faith.

Now, you can feel how disgusted I feel. And I don't need Einstein. You might guess that he is not the only great authority I turn to.


You were the one posting Einstein name first.

As for what you have raised here, I will not advanture there, because I disagree with both positions, but what I can say is that in my opinion Solaris arguments are stronger, while Sasun main points are about calling others ignorants and shouting the word knowledge here and there.

#52 Armen

Armen

    Veterinarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yerevan

Posted 25 February 2005 - 12:22 PM

QUOTE (QueBeceR @ Feb 25 2005, 12:13 PM)
You were the one posting Einstein name first.

That was meant to make some people disgusted. Because there are people who do not understand what they do until you put them in your shoes forcefully.
QUOTE
As for what you have raised here, I will not advanture there, because I disagree with both positions, but what I can say is that in my opinion Solaris arguments are stronger, while Sasun main points are about calling others ignorants and shouting the word knowledge here and there.

I think you're very unfare towards Sasun. As far as I can see they still debate. Some of Solaris arguments are strong but Sasun has some very strong points as well. So it is just your personal choice which arguments you like. For me it has no difference.

QB, you think YOU have knowledge? Like what? Paradoxical Singularity? Yeah, right.

Edited by Armen, 25 February 2005 - 12:50 PM.


#53 Solaris

Solaris

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Location:The Expanding Universe

Posted 25 February 2005 - 12:22 PM

QUOTE (Armen @ Feb 25 2005, 09:27 PM)
Einstein is on my side!

Yes and if you want to call me something intimate call me "Benito". I prefer it to "Folks" tongue.gif


No, Benito, Einstein is not on your side. See Quebec's quotation below. tongue.gif

And this is also one of my Einstein quotes:

QUOTE
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.


But perhaps Einstein'll help you to resign to the idea of BB, if you like him so much:

Einstein on the big Bang theory:

QUOTE
For every one billion particles of antimatter there were one billion and one particles of matter. And when the mutual annihilation was complete, one billionth remained - and that's our present universe.


Brevity is the soul of wit, Benito! tongue.gif

Edited by Solaris, 25 February 2005 - 12:24 PM.


#54 Armen

Armen

    Veterinarian

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,456 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yerevan

Posted 25 February 2005 - 12:34 PM

QUOTE (Solaris @ Feb 25 2005, 12:22 PM)
No, Benito, Einstein is not on your side. See Quebec's quotation below.  tongue.gif

Solaris, you feel realy insecure with this whole "Einstein" stuff, eh? You can have him back.

How about the other people? Like Maxwell and others.
QUOTE
And this is also one of my Einstein quotes:
But perhaps Einstein'll help you to resign to the idea of BB, if you like him so much:
Einstein on the big Bang theory:

Yet, he was not sure as that previous quote where he speaks about creation shows.
QUOTE
Benito! tongue.gif

I love that! More... smile.gif

Edited by Armen, 25 February 2005 - 12:43 PM.


#55 Solaris

Solaris

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Location:The Expanding Universe

Posted 25 February 2005 - 03:29 PM

QUOTE (Sasun @ Feb 25 2005, 09:11 PM)
Now, does it matter that Eistein was not part of a formal religion?


Yes it does, at least to me. I call myself an atheist for the sole reason of emphasizing that I don't believe in a personal god and the pious mumbo-jumbo of "formal" religions. mad.gif I don't have any objection whatsoever against abstract pantheism. smile.gif

I am convinced humans don't need a God and a religion to be moral, kind, honest, brave, conscientious or generous. The French existentialists, notably Sartre in his essay on Existentialism as Humanism, argued this point most brilliantly amidst the crazed "God is dead" refrain of the 1960s.
In fact, you should consider reading stuff like that, before devoting your precious time to championing the cause of stigmata. tongue.gif

Edited by Solaris, 25 February 2005 - 04:02 PM.


#56 Arvestaked

Arvestaked

    Aspiring Memetic Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 751 posts
  • Location:Cacapoopoopeepeeshire

Posted 25 February 2005 - 04:18 PM

QUOTE (Solaris @ Feb 25 2005, 01:29 PM)
I call myself an atheist for the sole reason of emphasizing that I don't believe in a personal god and the pious mumbo-jumbo of "formal" religions. I don't have any objection whatsoever against abstract pantheism.


This sounds quite a bit like my beliefs. An agnostic who hates organized religion. I think you have chosen the wrong word, especially since I believe atheism is illogical.

#57 Solaris

Solaris

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Location:The Expanding Universe

Posted 25 February 2005 - 04:34 PM

QUOTE (Arvestaked @ Feb 26 2005, 02:18 AM)
This sounds quite a bit like my beliefs. An agnostic who hates organized religion. I think you have chosen the wrong word, especially since I believe atheism is illogical.


It basically depends on what you mean under "god". If atheism is lack of belief in god, and god is the personal god the character from the scriptures, then it basically makes me an atheist. smile.gif I use the word to put that straight and clear any doubts in that account (without having recourse to that upside-down cross that Armjan & Sasun "adore" tongue.gif ).

But in a broader context yea, I am surely a "regular" agnostic. wink.gif

#58 Sasun

Sasun

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ, USA
  • Interests:Art, Yoga, Spirituality

Posted 25 February 2005 - 04:37 PM

QUOTE (Solaris @ Feb 25 2005, 04:29 PM)
Yes it does, at least to me. I call myself an atheist for the sole reason of emphasizing that I don't believe in a personal god and the pious mumbo-jumbo of "formal" religions.  mad.gif I don't have any objection whatsoever against abstract pantheism.  smile.gif

I showed that Einstein had common ideas with religions, and for that it does not matter that he was not religious.
QUOTE
I am convinced humans don't need a God and a religion to be moral, kind, honest, brave, conscientious or generous.

Look, if you give importance to morality the same way the religions do, then there is at least one thing in common. So I don't understand why you are so antagonistic to religions.
QUOTE
The French existentialists, notably Sartre in his essay on Existentialism as Humanism, argued this point most brilliantly amidst the crazed "God is dead" refrain of the 1960s.
In fact, you should consider reading stuff like that, before devoting your precious time to championing the cause of stigmata.  tongue.gif


I have read stuff like that (but I can't say I have been a big fan of Sartre), and influenced by them, had opinions like your opinions and attitude towards religion and the idea of God and even worse than that, etc... But this is not a one dimensional world. I have "grown up" now tongue.gif smile.gif

#59 DominO

DominO

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,455 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 February 2005 - 04:38 PM

QUOTE (Armen @ Feb 25 2005, 01:22 PM)
That was meant to make some people disgusted. Because there are people who do not understand what they do until you put them in your shoes forcefully.

I think you're very unfare towards Sasun. As far as I can see they still debate. Some of Solaris arguments are strong but Sasun has some very strong points as well. So it is just your personal choice which arguments you like. For me it has no difference.

QB, you think YOU have knowledge? Like what? Paradoxical Singularity? Yeah, right.


I did not profess any "knowledge" of a god, neither use the term ignorance where it does not fit, I refer here to the thread in which both of us participated, and where I developped regarding the term knowledge in what regard a god.

#60 Arvestaked

Arvestaked

    Aspiring Memetic Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 751 posts
  • Location:Cacapoopoopeepeeshire

Posted 25 February 2005 - 04:47 PM

QUOTE (Sasun @ Feb 25 2005, 02:37 PM)
Look, if you give importance to morality the same way the religions do, then there is at least one thing in common. So I don't understand why you are so antagonistic to religions.


Because it is precisely only that one thing in common. All of the "benefits" organized religion has to offer humanity are not dependant on it but much of the trouble organized religion causes is exclusive to it.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users