Re: Are Helmets Completely Worthless as a Safety Device for a Bike Commuter?

On Feb 24, 8:54 am, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote:
In respose to Frank's ( and a few others') constant derision of those
who believe in a "faith", "religion" or "GOD",, whatever theypercieve
it to be.

A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the
students, 'Let me explain the problem with religion.' The atheist
professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of
his new students to stand.
'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'
'Yes sir,' the student says.
'So you believe in God?'
'Absolutely.'
'Is God good?'
'Sure! God's good.'
'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'
'Yes.'
'Are you good or evil?'
'The Bible says I'm evil.'
The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible!' He considers for a
moment. 'Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here
and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you
try?'
'Yes sir, I would.'
'So you're good...!'
'I wouldn't say that.'
'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you
could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't.'
The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 'He doesn't,
does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he
prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you
answer that one?'
The student remains silent.
'No, you can't, can you?' the professor says. He takes a sip of water
from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.
'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'
'Er...yes,' the student says.
'Is Satan good?'
The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'
'Then where does Satan come from?'
The student falters. 'From God'
'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil
in this world?'
'Yes, sir.'
'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?'
'Yes.'
'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God created
everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to
the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.'
Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness? Immorality?
Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this
world?'
The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'
'So who created them?'
The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his
question. 'Who created them?' There is still no answer. Suddenly the
lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is
mesmerized. 'Tell me,' he continues onto another student. 'Do you
believe in Jesus Christ, son?'
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes, professor, I do.'
The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five senses you use
to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen
Jesus?'
'No sir. I've never seen Him.'
'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'
'No, sir, I have not.'
'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus?
Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for
that matter?'
'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'
'Yet you still believe in him?'
'Yes.'

'According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,
science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?'
'Nothing,' the student replies. 'I only have my faith.'
'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the problem science
has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.'
The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of
His own. 'Professor, is there such thing as heat?'
'Yes,' the professor replies. 'There's heat'
'And is there such a thing as cold?'
'Yes, son, there's cold too.'
'No sir, there isn't.'
The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The
room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. 'You
can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat,
unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't
have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero,
which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no
such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the
lowest -458 degrees.'
'Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits
energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit
energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see,
sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We
cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat
is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of
it.'
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom,
sounding like a hammer.
'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?'
'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation. 'What is night if it
isn't darkness?'
'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence
of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light,
flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing
and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to
define the word.'
'In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make
darkness darker, wouldn't you?'
The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This
will be a good semester. 'So what point are you making, young man?'
'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to
start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.'
The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. 'Flawed? Can
you explain how?'
'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student explains.
'You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a
bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite,
something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought.'
'It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less
fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is
to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive
thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.'
'Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved
from a monkey?'
'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man,
yes, of course I do.'
'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?'
The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes
where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.
'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and
cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you
not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a
preacher?'
The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion
has subsided.
'To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student,
let me give you an example of what I mean.'
The student looks around the room. 'Is there anyone in the class who
has ever seen the professor's brain?' The class breaks out into
laughter.
'Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt
the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one
appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of
empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have
no brain, with all due respect, sir.'
'So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures,
sir?'
Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his
face unreadable.
Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 'I guess
you'll have to take them on faith.'
'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with
life,' the student continues. 'Now, sir, is there such a thing as
evil?'
Now uncertain, the professor responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it
everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is
in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These
manifestations are nothing else but evil.'
To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at least it
does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is
just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe
the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of
what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart.
It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness
that comes when there is no light.'
The professor sat down.

If you read it all the way through and had a smile on your face when
you finished, mail to your friends and family with the title : God vs
Science

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

This little story is cheesy and is used by some by preachers to show
that science contradicts itself and cannot disprove the existence of
god, or prove evolution.

Problem is that true scientists will not engage in part of such a
discussion because it is not in the realm of science to argue faith,
to prove it or disprove it. Scientists may or may not have faith, but
they don't mix it with the current scientific paradigm.

The scientific paradigm argues that we infer that something is, based
on induction by asking questions that can be observable and
measurable. Science always stipulates that answers are always posited
in the form: "there is no evidence to deny that there is a brain
inside my head".

Lets start with a simple example. If you open the door of your house
you will see the street. After opening the door repeatedly, you can
infer that the next time you open the door, you will find the same
street. Of course, one day, you may open the door and you could find
Jupiter. Science cannot disprove that you will find Jupiter. All it
can tell you is that based on repeated observations, there is no
reason to deny that you will find the same street.

Same with the brain example. A scientist will simply argue that after
opening many skulls, there is no evidence to deny that the next time
you open a skull there will be a brain inside. So, arguing that there
is a brain inside your head is based on principles of inductive logic
and inference based on repeated observations to make a
generalization.

Applying inductive logic and the scientific paradigm to evolution, is
the same as applying the paradigm to everyone's skull, you induce from
observable evidence, mathematics and logic that there is no evidence
to deny such and such. A scientist will argue that such an element is
present on a given surface, and after a certain amount of time the
element turns into something else. After repeated observation you
determine that it takes a certain amount of time to see the presence
of a given element instead of another element. mathematically you can
determine how much time it will take you to see the presence of
something and date it. So, based on observations you can state that
there is no evidence to deny that something has a given age.
Scientists can, in this way, date the age of certain regions of the
earth and look at fossils present along with those dated elements Then
they can date the fossils and infer hypotheses.

Regardless of the cold hot stuff. You are right that there is only
heat in the literal sense. However, cold and hot are used as reference
points based on an observable characteristic of something that you may
be trying to study. Say, for example that the human body's average
temperature is 98.6. In the presence of so much heat in the
surrounding environment you can increase the average core human
temperature and viceversa. So, based on how much heat you need to
increase or decrease the core temperature of the human body, you apply
terms like cold or hot to state that x much heat and below represents
cold and y much heat and above represents hot. Humans are inherently
sensitive to this. so, when they feel that they heat in the
surrounding environment can cause their body temperature to drop,
then, they refer to this as cold. Scientists use these terms to refer
to directly observable phenomena.

Note, scientists do not deny the existence of god. They simply state
that under the accepted scientific paradigm, you cannot make claims
about the inexistence or existence of god. It is not a question for
scientists to study.

Choosing to have faith has nothing to do with science. Faith is
something personal and it is not questioned by science. Faith implies
that you don't know, and hence the term (faith). mixing faith with
science is trying to force someone to accept or deny the
indemonstrable. Scientists should not be in the business of proving
that god does not exist, to the faithful and preachers should not try
to prove scientifically that god does exist to the non-faithful.


Andres

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Chimp and Emma...
    ... "Yes sir," the student says. ... "So you believe in God?" ... The student does not answer, ... "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, ...
    (rec.scouting.issues)
  • Re: OT - Judeo-Christian nation?"
    ... GOD vs. Science, good argument! ... "Yes sir," the student says. ... is there such thing as heat?" ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Chimp and Emma...
    ... "Yes sir," the student says. ... "So you believe in God?" ... The student does not answer, ... "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, ...
    (rec.scouting.issues)
  • Re: Are Helmets Completely Worthless as a Safety Device for a Bike Commuter?
    ... A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the ... 'Is God all-powerful? ... The student does not answer, ... 'There's heat' ...
    (rec.bicycles.tech)
  • Re: An atheist professor & his student
    ... So you believe in God? ... Student: Absolutely, sir. ... Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)
Loading