Aliens, yay or nay?

[Suspect]

There's this unique natural state of being that I have achieved with psychedelics and meditation, like a blueprint of morals, that is encoded in each of us, that is where religion is trying to squeeze in. We don't need religion, just like every seed contains a whole lot of information how the actual plant shall survive, do we humans have something encoded in our DNA, it is a natural way of being let's just call it that. :0.02:

 

[bombadil.360]

Unless you live in Texas....
Yes, I know I've said this already.

Well, it's not so much a debate as scientists showing the best evidence, and religion putting it's fingers in it's ears and going "La la la, I can't hear you"

Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive, thus, how can there be any such debate of one against the other?

there's no such debate in the Academia, meaning, no one respectable in a university at any level will teach or even discuss such nonsense.

you only see such debate in pop-culture books like the ones of Dawkins, or the opposite, books by some Creationist.

again, such pop-culture books are not in any serious curriculum of any higher learning institution. nor is the fictional debate within such books' pages discussed either in any serious manner, except maybe to illustrate common misconceptions.

 

[bombadil.360]

There's this unique natural state of being that I have achieved with psychedelics and meditation, like a blueprint of morals, that is encoded in each of us, that is where religion is trying to squeeze in. We don't need religion, just like every seed contains a whole lot of information how the actual plant shall survive, do we humans have something encoded in our DNA, it is a natural way of being let's just call it that. :0.02:

actually, what you wrote and described is a pretty good way to define 'religion' outside the diverse dogmas imposed by any given institution.

a point which btw has been made by many, including Hoffman, and even Shultes, needless to say also McKenna.

peace!

 

[Harry Gypsna]

Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive, thus, how can there be any such debate of one against the other?

there's no such debate in the Academia, meaning, no one respectable in a university at any level will teach or even discuss such nonsense.

you only see such debate in pop-culture books like the ones of Dawkins, or the opposite, books by some Creationist.

again, such pop-culture books are not in any serious curriculum of any higher learning institution. nor is the fictional debate within such books' pages discussed either in any serious manner, except maybe to illustrate common misconceptions.

4 words for you,
Texas Board of Education. Get on youtube and have a gander at some of the meetings, and people with no credentials whatsoever, disputing facts with highly qualified people who have spent their entire working lives in the field(biology). The only reason these people in charge of the board object to Evolution being taught, and want to inject religion into science lessons, is their religious bias.

 

[SooperSmurph]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

Statistically, the odds are likely that if we achieve interstellar civilization we will be the first to do so in this Galaxy, or perhaps this Universe.

Sad, but numbers are usually right

 

[unthing]

beware other planets if we were to be extraplanetary visitors.

 

[igrowone]

since religion has been let in the door so to speak, there is another recurrent science fiction theme
civilizations advance until they transcend this universe and go beyond it
provided of course they don't destroy themselves first

 

[ezak420]

Resource exploiting brutes or Loving peace makers?

 

[OGEvilgenius]

I can't say absolutely since I've never seen/met one, but I tend towards yes.

 

[SooperSmurph]

All the antireligious zealotry is unneeded, everyone has a different way of getting to sleep each night without being consumed by horror, for some people it's purely rational, for others it's purely divine, what is, is.

 

[BushyOldGrower]

So science is special. I am not saying it is just the same and I agree that peoples beliefs taint the scientific process. Science can't really tell you the odds on things it doesn't know however. Scientific opinions must change often actually so perhaps we are still just as far from the truth if there is one as ever.

Bad science is no better than religion really.

The likely hood is that we are just babies in the galaxy...

 

[bombadil.360]

4 words for you,
Texas Board of Education. Get on youtube and have a gander at some of the meetings, and people with no credentials whatsoever, disputing facts with highly qualified people who have spent their entire working lives in the field(biology). The only reason these people in charge of the board object to Evolution being taught, and want to inject religion into science lessons, is their religious bias.

also 4 words for you too:

Texas Board of Education hehehehe....

that some crazed creationist parents have tried to put science teachers out of work does not qualify as real academic discussions.

and that teachers defending some sort of mystical need for kids to learn evolution, also does not qualify as academic debate.

lets not get into the subject of kids' education, I could pop a vein in my forehead lol...

anyway, it's pretty fucked that adults try to impose their world-view on children, I agree with you that religious dogmas should not be taught at school. unless it is a religious school, in which case, pure sciences should also be taught.

however, pure sciences should be taught without any pretension of them being or explaining more than what they actually are and explain.

 

[legalizeDK]

found this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd82E0Q53u0&feature=player_embedded#!

 

[HempKat]

there's no such debate of Science vs. Religion.

it is only a phenomenon in non-academic pop-culture circles, to put it lightly.

Well that's your opinion, other opinions may tend to see it differently.

 

[HempKat]

Science and Religion are not mutually exclusive, thus, how can there be any such debate of one against the other?

there's no such debate in the Academia, meaning, no one respectable in a university at any level will teach or even discuss such nonsense.

you only see such debate in pop-culture books like the ones of Dawkins, or the opposite, books by some Creationist.

again, such pop-culture books are not in any serious curriculum of any higher learning institution. nor is the fictional debate within such books' pages discussed either in any serious manner, except maybe to illustrate common misconceptions.

The debate between science and religion isn't confined to just academia or pop culture, it exists whenever a person or people who believe in God start discussing their beliefs with a person or people that don't.

 

[bombadil.360]

The debate between science and religion isn't confined to just academia or pop culture, it exists whenever a person or people who believe in God start discussing their beliefs with a person or people that don't.

the debate is not confined to academia at all, and that's not an opinion, it's a fact.

try to find an academic curriculum busy with such debate, there isn't.

sure, dumb people can discuss the topic all day long, won't make it true...

it's akin to dumb people believing and discussing dumb myths and straight-up lies in regards cannabis, still, whatever is said in such dumb debates, it is irrelevant.

be good.

 

[HempKat]

the debate is not confined to academia at all, and that's not an opinion, it's a fact.

try to find an academic curriculum busy with such debate, there isn't.

sure, dumb people can discuss the topic all day long, won't make it true...

it's akin to dumb people believing and discussing dumb myths and straight-up lies in regards cannabis, still, whatever is said in such dumb debates, it is irrelevant.

be good.

I never said it had jack shit to do with academia, you were the one who brought academia into the discussion. Frankly I could care less whether people in "Academia" are debating religion vs science or not as it has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making about how the topic in this thread has shifted.

 

[bombadil.360]

The debate between science and religion isn't confined to just academia or pop culture

you need to learn how to write your ideas in a clearer way so as to not send a message you don't want to.

 

[DreamsofTesla]

Well, it's not so much a debate as scientists showing the best evidence, and religion putting it's fingers in it's ears and going "La la la, I can't hear you"

Well, then there's the flipside of this, which is people labeling anyone who believes anything that science can't quantify or replicate as a complete idiot. There's been a ton of that in this thread, actually.

Both science and religion (or philosophy, or deeply personal experience, whatever you'd like to call it) have their place. Trying to use one to solve the other's problem is a fool's errand.

 

[SooperSmurph]

Spirituality is a fact of sentience, it's a part of human biology, and it's even a part of many of our animal cousins.

Dolphins, Elephants, and many Apes display ritualistic behavior which can at least be described as "death culture".

As thought emerges, it seeks greater things, if Alien civilizations exist and have visited our planet, they undoubtedly have the same drive within them, and that drive would be what brought them here. Instead of judging what other people seek, we should learn to appreciate the different interpretations of divinity, whether that divinity is rational or mystical or both.