LOL I love this club...

[iaeolan]

If science is so great... can it define justice?

This is more of a problem of philosophy, as the notion of justice and what to expect from government (or god) in response to unsavory actions is all dependent on social norms and policy.

Are you are insinuating that religion has the answer to the question of justice, when it doesn't have a uniform agreement on such even within religious groups? You can't look to the bible for answers of just consequence because it is in itself a dated text.

find me a church that follows these verses:
"Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering." (1 Corinthians 11:13-15)
Christian churches do not bar men with long hair or women with short from assembling within

"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched." (Mark 9:43)
This clearly has not been followed

"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34)
indeed

"If any man takes a wife, and goes in on her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, 'I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin..." (Deuteronomy 22:13,14)
"But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)
Would be interesting to see

This is clearly all Christianity and Judaism. I have limited knowledge of other faiths and their practices so i don't clump them in with the flawed nature of the bible.


On the other hand, if you are sneering at science for not being able to explain something as trivial as justice, you are a fool. There are many things yet that science can not explain and does not try to cover the fact that it is an on going search for an explanation of everything.

 

[JoeMeyer]

The amount of science in scripture: None.

Here we go...

[take note, this all happened up to six thousand years ago..]

Where did the universe come from? Genesis 1: 1 - 25
Where did WE come from? Genesis 1: 26

What shape is the earth? Isaiah 40:22

Earth is suspended in space. Job 26:7

Living things produce after their own kind. Genesis 15:5

The Second law of thermal dynamics: Isaiah 51:6

This information didn't come by mathematics or by a space craft, but by revelation
from Heaven.

The best way to make an atheist is to read the bible.

When I was 12-13 I learned Hebrew specifically to be able to read the first testament in its original language. You are absolutely wrong.


Thats why I am an atheist in the first place. The entire thing is full of inconsistency and contradictory statements. Not to mention the grip of morally dubious things it tells you to do.

I can tell you for a fact that there is no real science in the Bible. You keep pointing at people and saying "you just dont know what your talking about" instead of proving them wrong. Show us some real evidence/quotes from this surprising amount of biblical science.

Where are the inconsistencies?

 

[Manluas]

Here we go...

[take note, this all happened up to six thousand years ago..]

Where did the universe come from? Genesis 1: 1 - 25
Where did WE come from? Genesis 1: 26

What shape is the earth? Isaiah 40:22

Earth is suspended in space. Job 26:7

Living things produce after their own kind. Genesis 15:5

The Second law of thermal dynamics: Isaiah 51:6

This information didn't come by mathematics or by a space craft, but by revelation
from Heaven.

Where are the inconsistencies?

Thanks for the perfect example why religious discussions are senseless. You believe in your point of view, they believe in their point of view, both defend it and there we go - throwing more or less valid quotes/assumptions on each other without really trying to understand the other one.

 

[JoeMeyer]

I was proving Wiz wrong. That was my point.

 

[Waldoff]

I pity anyone who thinks that their morals and ideas of justice and right and wrong spring from religion and scripture.

You say that science can not define justice... no it cant. Do you truly need thousand year old scripture to let YOU know what justice is? Do you only not commit cruel acts because you learned that the bible tells you not to? Does your humanity not reach far enough to tell you right from wrong without being shown it in an old book?

Not to say that some people find religion uplifting or worthwhile but going so far to say that "only religion defines justice" is offensive to the whole of us who know justice and morality from places that dont include a first century text.


Now to MMeyer on his science in the bible.

Where did the universe come from? Genesis 1: 1 - 25
Where did WE come from? Genesis 1: 26

Very scientific questions but the bible gives extremely unscientific answers. God made us in 6 days and the earth is only a few thousand years old. Proof of this? Nothing.

Lets look at some of the versus explaining this.

God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day. (1:14-19)

God spends the ENTIRE second day working on what the bible calls the "firmement". God then puts the stars planets and heaven onto this firmiment. It then goes on to read that god put the stars and planets so that they can be used as "signs"... as in astrology signs.

What shape is the earth? Isaiah 40:22

The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3);

The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1);

___________________________________________________________________________________________


Inconsistency time!


How many men did the chief of David's captains kill?

2 Samuel 23:6
The ... chief among the captains ... he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time.
1 Chronicles 11:11
the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain by him at one time.

How many sons did Abraham have?

Hebrews 11:17
By faith Abraham when he was tried, offered up Isaac, ... his only begotten son.
Genesis 22:2
Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, ... and offer him there for a burnt offering.
Genesis 16:15
And Hagar bare Abraham a son: and Abram called his son's name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael.
Genesis 21:2-3
For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son is his old age .... And Abraham called him Isaac.
Genesis 25:1-2
Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah. And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah.
Galatians 4:22
Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-woman, and the other by a free woman.

The two contradictory creation accounts. (This was my favorite because it confused me when I was just beggining to read the entire thing!)

First Account (Genesis 1:1-2:3)
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image.... So God created man in his own image.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

versus!

Second Account (Genesis 2:4-25)
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them.... And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

What is the correct recipe for the new moon sacrifice?

Numbers 28:11
And in the beginnings of your months ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the LORD; two young bullocks, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without spot.

Ezekiel 46:6
And in the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram.



Christ could I go on. They are endless and are littered throughout the book. If you want to believe in an all powerful being that is up to you but saying that the bible is an infallible book that has no errors, inconsistencies or discrepancies is just dumb. Read the thing and find out for yourself.

 

[Waldoff]

The thing that is funny with discussions like these is all the opposing side can do is say

"It is so because it is so"...

Which is fine if that is what you want to believe. If you want to imagine a flying teapot in the sky you are free to just don't go trying to push it off as science or any sort of rational logical ideal.

The bible is *not* science, *not* scientific and any attempt to make it so is a desperate plea to make thousand year old faith compatible with present day science. The two do NOT fit with each other and trying to make science more religious or religion more scientific insults both aspects.

 

[JoeMeyer]

I pity anyone who thinks that their morals and ideas of justice and right and wrong spring from religion and scripture.

You say that science can not define justice... no it cant. Do you truly need thousand year old scripture to let YOU know what justice is? Do you only not commit cruel acts because you learned that the bible tells you not to? Does your humanity not reach far enough to tell you right from wrong without being shown it in an old book?

Not to say that some people find religion uplifting or worthwhile but going so far to say that "only religion defines justice" is offensive to the whole of us who know justice and morality from places that dont include a first century text.


Now to MMeyer on his science in the bible.

Very scientific questions but the bible gives extremely unscientific answers. God made us in 6 days and the earth is only a few thousand years old. Proof of this? Nothing.

Lets look at some of the versus explaining this.

God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day. (1:14-19)

God spends the ENTIRE second day working on what the bible calls the "firmement". God then puts the stars planets and heaven onto this firmiment. It then goes on to read that god put the stars and planets so that they can be used as "signs"... as in astrology signs.

The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3);

The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1);

___________________________________________________________________________________________


Inconsistency time!


How many men did the chief of David's captains kill?

2 Samuel 23:6
The ... chief among the captains ... he lift up his spear against eight hundred, whom he slew at one time.
1 Chronicles 11:11
the chief of the captains: he lifted up his spear against three hundred slain by him at one time.

How many sons did Abraham have?

Hebrews 11:17
By faith Abraham when he was tried, offered up Isaac, ... his only begotten son.
Genesis 22:2
Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, ... and offer him there for a burnt offering.
Genesis 16:15
And Hagar bare Abraham a son: and Abram called his son's name, which Hagar bare, Ishmael.
Genesis 21:2-3
For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son is his old age .... And Abraham called him Isaac.
Genesis 25:1-2
Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah. And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah.
Galatians 4:22
Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-woman, and the other by a free woman.

The two contradictory creation accounts. (This was my favorite because it confused me when I was just beggining to read the entire thing!)

First Account (Genesis 1:1-2:3)
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image.... So God created man in his own image.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

versus!

Second Account (Genesis 2:4-25)
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them.... And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

What is the correct recipe for the new moon sacrifice?

Numbers 28:11
And in the beginnings of your months ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the LORD; two young bullocks, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without spot.

Ezekiel 46:6
And in the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram.



Christ could I go on. They are endless and are littered throughout the book. If you want to believe in an all powerful being that is up to you but saying that the bible is an infallible book that has no errors, inconsistencies or discrepancies is just dumb. Read the thing and find out for yourself.

Oh goodness.

Most of these I've read before to be honest.

Wow - I don't have time to go through all of those.

I'll hit this one though - two stories of creation:

No. The second REFERRED to the first creation. It isn't
saying God created things twice.

Actually..I'll go through more.

The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3);

Thats figurative.

He unleashes his lightning beneath the whole heaven
and sends it to the ends of the earth

The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1);

Isaiah and John aren't talking about the shape of the Earth
in those verses.

In Genesis 1, the light going out is His glory, not light from a star.

2 Samuel 23:6 doesn't say that.

It says:

But evil men are all to be cast aside like thorns,
which are not gathered with the hand.

1 Chron 11:11 doesn't say what you said either.

It says:

This is the list of David's mighty men: Jashobeam, a Hacmonite, was chief of the officers;
he raised his spear against three hundred men in one encounter.

The deal with Hebrews and Abraham isn't what you think. The writer of Hebrews (which I believe to be Paul)
was referring to Christ in an analogy with Abraham's son, Isaac. Christ is God's begotten son, and Isaac is Abraham's
promised son.

Moon sacrifice and MONTHLY SACRIFICES ..

They are different, therefore, require different offerings.

..did you go to a website and just copy this information?

 

[Waldoff]

First off i referenced a few websites but most of what I wrote from the first few books I referenced from http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/hebrew/Bible/. Some tho came from the Skeptics annotated bible and wikipedia. Let me go a bit in depth to what you say are not inconsistencies.

I'll hit this one though - two stories of creation:

No. The second REFERRED to the first creation. It isn't
saying God created things twice.

No... it really doesnt. In the first verse it CLEARLY shows this order in both English AND the Hebrew versions-

In the FIRST verse it states that humans were created after the other animals and that both man and woman were created at the same time. In the SECOND verse it states that humans were created before the animals and then thatman was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib...

Completely different order of events from both sets of scripture. Event if you think it is just referencing the first account it is referencing the first account in the wrong order.

The earth has ends or edges (Job 37:3);
Thats figurative.

He unleashes his lightning beneath the whole heaven
and sends it to the ends of the earth

The earth has four corners (Isa. 11:12, Rev. 7:1);

Isaiah and John aren't talking about the shape of the Earth
in those verses.

No... they are not used in the sentence "The earths form is flat" but they suggest that it is. The entire point is that the shape of the earth WAS mentioned multiple times in the scripture and each time it was professed to be flat. The fact that the Church spent years prosecuting people who didnt beleive the earth was flat or that it revolved around the sun is an effect of this. When religious people say "Well that is figurative" I say "Whenever something isnt explainable in the bible you say its figurative and whenever it is you say its fact".

Numbers 28:11
And in the beginnings of your months ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the LORD; two young bullocks, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without spot.

Ezekiel 46:6
And in the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram.

Moon sacrifice and MONTHLY SACRIFICES ..

They are different, therefore, require different offerings.

Two words: Lunar.... Calendar..... A new month in the hebrew calendar is from lunar conjunction to lunar conduction... or new moon to new moon.

This is the list of David's mighty men: Jashobeam, a Hacmonite, was chief of the officers;
he raised his spear against three hundred men in one encounter.

This is two tellings of the same encounter.

The deal with Hebrews and Abraham isn't what you think. The writer of Hebrews (which I believe to be Paul)
was referring to Christ in an analogy with Abraham's son, Isaac. Christ is God's begotten son, and Isaac is Abraham's
promised son.

It clearly mentions multiple times different amount of sons of Abraham born via different mothers. Here you go again with the "it was an analogy" and "it was figurative" stuff but the whole point is if the bible must be taken as a metaphor or an analogy so much of the time how the hell is it scientific? Are you just saying that there are attempts to science in the bible but turned out to be wrong?

 

[JoeMeyer]

First off i referenced a few websites but most of what I wrote from the first few books I referenced from http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/hebrew/Bible/. Some tho came from the Skeptics annotated bible and wikipedia. Let me go a bit in depth to what you say are not inconsistencies.


No... it really doesnt. In the first verse it CLEARLY shows this order in both English AND the Hebrew versions-

In the FIRST verse it states that humans were created after the other animals and that both man and woman were created at the same time. In the SECOND verse it states that humans were created before the animals and then thatman was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib...

Completely different order of events from both sets of scripture. Event if you think it is just referencing the first account it is referencing the first account in the wrong order.

No... they are not used in the sentence "The earths form is flat" but they suggest that it is. The entire point is that the shape of the earth WAS mentioned multiple times in the scripture and each time it was professed to be flat. The fact that the Church spent years prosecuting people who didnt beleive the earth was flat or that it revolved around the sun is an effect of this. When religious people say "Well that is figurative" I say "Whenever something isnt explainable in the bible you say its figurative and whenever it is you say its fact".


Two words: Lunar.... Calendar..... A new month in the hebrew calendar is from lunar conjunction to lunar conduction... or new moon to new moon.


This is two tellings of the same encounter.

It clearly mentions multiple times different amount of sons of Abraham born via different mothers. Here you go again with the "it was an analogy" and "it was figurative" stuff but the whole point is if the bible must be taken as a metaphor or an analogy so much of the time how the hell is it scientific? Are you just saying that there are attempts to science in the bible but turned out to be wrong?

Wow.

I'm out of this. No point.

In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'

This is similar.

Bye and blessings!

Another religion thread that started somewhere and ended no where.

 

[iaeolan]

I'm still trying to figure out how

6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens,
look at the earth beneath;
the heavens will vanish like smoke,
the earth will wear out like a garment
and its inhabitants die like flies.
But my salvation will last forever,
my righteousness will never fail.

is the same conclusion as

The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.

:what: :what:


This is like giving Einstein credit for the discovery of the existence dark matter.

 

[JayelleNephilim]

Wow.

I'm out of this. No point.

In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'

This is similar.

Bye and blessings!

Another religion thread that started somewhere and ended no where.

My setiments exactly. Truth does not need to be defended. That is why I no longer debate religion.

 

[Waldoff]

Truth does not need to be defended.

That is the quintessential quote as to why religion and science do not mix and why they should stay separate.

 

[csivils]

On the other hand, if you are sneering at science for not being able to explain something as trivial as justice, you are a fool. There are many things yet that science can not explain and does not try to cover the fact that it is an on going search for an explanation of everything.

Please lighten up and don't call me names like fool.

My point was simply that Science can be just as limited as religion in terms of where it should not go. Science is not an explaination of everything... only that which can be observed, measured or quantified in some manner.

When scientists conclude that the element of chance in their vision of how life came to be means that life has no meaning... they commit as grave a mistake as when religion tries to dictate science.

Craig

 

[vistachiri]

The best way to make an atheist is to read the bible.

When I was 12-13 I learned Hebrew specifically to be able to read the first testament in its original language. You are absolutely wrong.


Thats why I am an atheist in the first place. The entire thing is full of inconsistency and contradictory statements. Not to mention the grip of morally dubious things it tells you to do.

I can tell you for a fact that there is no real science in the Bible. You keep pointing at people and saying "you just dont know what your talking about" instead of proving them wrong. Show us some real evidence/quotes from this surprising amount of biblical science.

/cheer!

The amount of science in scripture: None.

/cheer x2!

You'd be surprised how much science is in Scripture (OT).

People say, "Because.." because they don't know Scripture.

No, no I really wouldn't. Funny I didn't see any the last y'know 11 times or so I had to read the thing. Nor any of the other times before that tbh. Granted new testament I suppose there might be a drip of science in the crucifixion itself, as the method by which people were crucified was quite scientific, and all of the torments were really to speed death up at the final spectacle. But I wouldn't consider that so much hard science.

But after y'know. Reading all of these attempts to show science in the bible, and having studied it on my own fairly extensively, first as a believer til around when I was 10ish, and then as a skeptic being forced to read it occasionally for various classes, and once or twice when I was really bored and had the option of the bible or say like a pdr for reading material. Not to mention the 3 or 4 400 level courses specifically focusing on the old testament, that were pseudo-requirements because I went to a catholic college that just happened to want to hand me a bunch of free money. After that, I'd have to say I know scripture pretty well. Even though I agree with next to none of it.

Please lighten up and don't call me names like fool.

My point was simply that Science can be just as limited as religion in terms of where it should not go. Science is not an explaination of everything... only that which can be observed, measured or quantified in some manner.

When scientists conclude that the element of chance in their vision of how life came to be means that life has no meaning... they commit as grave a mistake as when religion tries to dictate science.

Craig

Science can be limited, true enough. But generally that would be because it simply hasn't gone far enough yet. There are alot of things that prevent science from progressing as fast as it should after all, one of the larger obstacles being religion. Morality is also an obstacle quite often, but not one that I would consider bad per se in many circumstances (ie human use boards, as far as most morality laden religious arguments against scientific advancement well I consider most of those ludicrous.)

Not once, have I ever heard a hardcore scientist that was not under extenuating circumstances (ie depression etc) claim that life has no meaning. Even going by the randomness of its creation under certain scientific models, the meaning of life would be just that. Life.

 

[zodium]

Lo, I have returned! I bring with me the secret wisdom of ages; a solution to politics, religion, philosophy, indeed the very answer to life itself that I have discovered in my absence from here.

Unfortunately, I'm not telling. :toot:

 

[vistachiri]

Lo, I have returned! I bring with me the secret wisdom of ages; a solution to politics, religion, philosophy, indeed the very answer to life itself that I have discovered in my absence from here.

Unfortunately, I'm not telling. :toot:

:toot:

 

[Wiz]

Thats why my mother became Muslim as well (not athiest). Athiests are just lazy people who have given up after seeing to much BS that people blindly follow... . Do the same with the Quran and i'm sure you'll have a different view about it, but now that you're no longer looking i highly doubt that will happen. (PROVE ME WRONG!) Learning arabic has helped me a ton in understand the Quran, and has allowed me to feel the guidance coming from it, unlike watered down thrice translated stuff.
Feel free to flame

Oh, yeah, we're all "lazy people" beacuse we don't believe in your ridiculous fairy tales. Rational thought, if you have ever chanced on such a thing, pretty much precludes all religions from being true. They're all self-contradictory bundles of moral stories and archaic law (hello leviticus). Islam or Christianity makes no more sense than believing in UFOs or scientology.

You're free to believe whatever the hell you want, but don't assume that your delusions are in any way special or unique or right, you're just another believer in one of thousands upon thousands of religions that have been born and died in the history of mankind, and Allah is no more real than Zeus.

I rarely let out my true feelings on these matters, because frankly it's none of my business what people delude themselves with, and it has little bearing on what I think of them as people, but I am so sick of these threads and the smug, ignorance-worshipping fundamentalists they attract likes flies to a festering corpse. Go back to your holy texts and leave defining reality to the people who are not too scared to face it.

 

[Wiz]

If science is so great... can it define justice?

Science can't answer everything, but religion answers nothing. Furthermore, asking for an absolute answer to a subjective concept is intellectually dishonest at best.

Please lighten up and don't call me names like fool.

My point was simply that Science can be just as limited as religion in terms of where it should not go. Science is not an explaination of everything... only that which can be observed, measured or quantified in some manner.

When scientists conclude that the element of chance in their vision of how life came to be means that life has no meaning... they commit as grave a mistake as when religion tries to dictate science.

Craig

Science is the attempt to explain reality through testing, and produces consistent and usable results that make your life infinitely much better than it would otherwise be. Religion is the attempt to explain reality by making shit up, and has failed every single time it has been put to the test throughout history.

Life has a meaning: It's there to be lived. The meaning of life is to be alive, continue to be a live, and do whatever you want with your life. It has nothing to do with any imaginary guy in the sky.

 

[Wiz]

phenomena that can be explained by science? :what:

shit that is easily documented but not explained in scripture. contains science, does not explain science.


Sounds like Joe is saying the bible contains science when it just contained events and occurrences which can be found in a middle school earth science text. A simplistic view of nature and collectively calling it science due to misunderstanding of both nature and science by the person making the claim.

What I was trying to get across is that there is no such thing as a "nonscientific" phenomena. "Science" is just the observation of reality through the scientific method, and while there are things we cannot measure reliably with the scientific method (quantom uncertainity, for instance), that doesn't make them "unscientific", it just makes them beyond our scope of technology.

 

[Kyeld]

After seeing the epic ownage just laid down by Wiz, I think I'll subscribe to this topic.