NASA Goddard: Webb Telescope Planetary Studies The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) will study planetary bodies with our solar system and planets orbiting other stars to help scientists better understand how planets form and how they evolve. --- Please subscribe to Science & Reason: • www.youtube.com • www.youtube.com • www.youtube.com • www.youtube.com --- From our small world we have gazed upon the cosmic ocean for thousands of years. Ancient astronomers observed points of light that appeared to move among the stars. They called these objects planets, meaning wanderers, and named them after Roman deities - Jupiter, king of the gods; Mars, the god of war; Mercury, messenger of the gods; Venus, the goddess of love and beauty, and Saturn, father of Jupiter and god of agriculture. The stargazers also observed comets with sparkling tails, and meteors - or shooting stars apparently falling from the sky. Since the invention of the telescope, three more planets have been discovered in our solar system: Uranus (1781), Neptune (1846), and Pluto (1930). Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet in 2006. In addition, our solar system is populated by thousands of small bodies such as asteroids and comets. Most of the asteroids orbit in a region between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, while the home of comets lies far beyond the orbit of Pluto, in the Oort Cloud. The four planets closest to the Sun - Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars - are called the terrestrial planets because they ...
@Neron: Of course not! And I am convinced there will be many questions left unanswered when the human race is about to extinct. But that does not mean the answer lies in a deity.
@lights779 I used to be a mainstream atheist until I began to accept that these great figures in human history were indeed religious. People like to ignore the fact that these great thinkers were religious and scientists. It contradictory in their feeble minds, but the fact is you can't discount one persons understand about life when you hold their discoveries and inventions on a pedestal.
@eelexa once you accept that they had superior intellect yet remained religious, you can't deny that they were confirming basic religious belief in God. You don't have to accept the same dogma and set of rule imposed by the hierarchy, but we should not take for granted the evolved learning of 1000s of years of studying life and the basic guidelines that religion established.
@moety2 and it wasn't them who studied God. Hawkins knows that science will always prevail in the understanding of how things work, but never will it full comprehend all of existence. Science can only probes the depths of the Plank length and reach to the edge of the observable Universe, yet there will always be an unknown extent to which we will never full understand. The Uncertainty Principal has forever imposed a impression of Gods will that can never be calculated precisely
@jnthnbush If it wasn't them who studied god they there is no relevance in bringing them up in the defense of it. You just tried to toss around great scientific minds like that would justify religion or god. Sorry, no free pass. I don't care how sophisticated and intellectual you try to say what we don't understand we call god. There is always going to be more questions then answers but I will not label the unanswerable questions or the unknown god. History clearly shows that is flawed logic
@moety2 right, hard to play the devils advocate on this one. But, I will still hold that everyone is entitled to their personal beliefs even if it is not founded on science, we still need that to make the personal relationship with science fact. This is a developing concept for me, like I said before I was raised an atheist and I agree with you more than any creationist or religious bigot. The worst thing is to discount any pursuit for knowledge because of religion.
@moety2 then again, I believe since we have a specific past since the big bang we must have a specific future. All events are from the effect of the previous one, so that means our future is defined? But the only way to fully predict the future is to know all the speed and locations of every single object in the universe, will that ever be known? I also think there is a element of human intelligence that has developed to see the patterns in this chaos and interpret a system, known as religion
@moety2 in my 28 years of life, I have perused my own truth and answers. This is what I have make up so far. Averaging out all event and normal circumstances leads to predictable outcomes. However, what if there are quantifiable ebbs in the flow of life that result in supernatural events, sometimes happening in humans. the supernatural may only be extraordinary by a small measure, but enough to pronounce a difference. Maybe this is what divinity could be. Religions is the study of this.
@jnthnbush It takes faith to understand what I mean, and I don't really get it yet. Sa la vie, maybe we will in the end. So, what I am trying to say is that religion may have been the way to understand life on a supernatural scale. Science ignores that all and only deals with the facts. But at some point we will have to re-look at what was dogma and reinterpret the mind of those people who wrote the religious books. We may find they were onto something, but needed more facts. I dunno!!!
@lights779 How about antiquated? That better than "useless"? It served its purpose for primitive man, sure it did... but just like you pulling away from your moms tit... there comes a time when it must end. Its time to abandon the childish ways of a unsophisticated species and embrace logic, reason and understanding... not grasp at shadows. We don't practice alchemy here in modern times for good reason... chemistry is much better at achieving viable answers. Religion is much like this.
@pogan1983 Wrong. You simply cannot justify the incredible stupidity of religion. Science is a self correcting enterprise that has made huge strides in progress in a relatively short amount of time. However, religion is the massive, shitting elephant in the room who's fucking up your furniture.
@jnthnbush Your position is admirable, but you made a few assumptions that are unwarranted. You said "WHAT IF there are quantifiable ebbs in the flow of life that result in supernatural events" Until such a discovery is made there is no point speculating. Giving the history of what we have learned so far, considering a supernatural reason for anything we may come across is highly improbable. I am not saying to completely rule it out but there is no evidence to suggest we should consider it.
@jnthnbush Religion was never a way to understand life on a supernatural scale, it was a way to try and understand that which was not understandable at a point in time. You need to stop making leaps in understanding and take things for what they are. To say science ignores is very disingenuous. Science investigates and because they have no evidence to support preconceived notions of certain beliefs and dismisses them you claim that they ignore. I take proof over faith.
@moety2 err, I can't debate this anymore, my beliefs are not formulated enough to argue your point here. just know that I agree with you more than you know
@adsensus Someone else said earlier that religion and knowledge are enemies. It was an ignorant statement. Religion and scientific knowledge have had rough points in their relationship, no doubt. But enemies? It ignores 2000 years of astounding intellectual thought that has taken place in the context of religion. The nuances of Augustine, the brilliance of Kant, and so many others. That was all childish? Grasping at shadows? You and I are intellectual children compared to these giants.
maybe one day they will find kolob
ReplyDelete@Serethen ah good point sir. Seems religion in trying to cock block science in a way.
ReplyDelete@Neron: Of course not! And I am convinced there will be many questions left unanswered when the human race is about to extinct. But that does not mean the answer lies in a deity.
ReplyDelete@lights779 I used to be a mainstream atheist until I began to accept that these great figures in human history were indeed religious. People like to ignore the fact that these great thinkers were religious and scientists. It contradictory in their feeble minds, but the fact is you can't discount one persons understand about life when you hold their discoveries and inventions on a pedestal.
ReplyDelete@eelexa once you accept that they had superior intellect yet remained religious, you can't deny that they were confirming basic religious belief in God. You don't have to accept the same dogma and set of rule imposed by the hierarchy, but we should not take for granted the evolved learning of 1000s of years of studying life and the basic guidelines that religion established.
ReplyDelete@eelexa see me response below on light779, I disagree with you.
ReplyDelete@moety2 and it wasn't them who studied God. Hawkins knows that science will always prevail in the understanding of how things work, but never will it full comprehend all of existence. Science can only probes the depths of the Plank length and reach to the edge of the observable Universe, yet there will always be an unknown extent to which we will never full understand. The Uncertainty Principal has forever imposed a impression of Gods will that can never be calculated precisely
ReplyDelete@jnthnbush If it wasn't them who studied god they there is no relevance in bringing them up in the defense of it. You just tried to toss around great scientific minds like that would justify religion or god. Sorry, no free pass. I don't care how sophisticated and intellectual you try to say what we don't understand we call god. There is always going to be more questions then answers but I will not label the unanswerable questions or the unknown god. History clearly shows that is flawed logic
ReplyDelete@moety2 right, hard to play the devils advocate on this one. But, I will still hold that everyone is entitled to their personal beliefs even if it is not founded on science, we still need that to make the personal relationship with science fact. This is a developing concept for me, like I said before I was raised an atheist and I agree with you more than any creationist or religious bigot. The worst thing is to discount any pursuit for knowledge because of religion.
ReplyDelete@moety2 then again, I believe since we have a specific past since the big bang we must have a specific future. All events are from the effect of the previous one, so that means our future is defined? But the only way to fully predict the future is to know all the speed and locations of every single object in the universe, will that ever be known? I also think there is a element of human intelligence that has developed to see the patterns in this chaos and interpret a system, known as religion
ReplyDelete@moety2 in my 28 years of life, I have perused my own truth and answers. This is what I have make up so far. Averaging out all event and normal circumstances leads to predictable outcomes. However, what if there are quantifiable ebbs in the flow of life that result in supernatural events, sometimes happening in humans. the supernatural may only be extraordinary by a small measure, but enough to pronounce a difference. Maybe this is what divinity could be. Religions is the study of this.
ReplyDelete@jnthnbush It takes faith to understand what I mean, and I don't really get it yet. Sa la vie, maybe we will in the end. So, what I am trying to say is that religion may have been the way to understand life on a supernatural scale. Science ignores that all and only deals with the facts. But at some point we will have to re-look at what was dogma and reinterpret the mind of those people who wrote the religious books. We may find they were onto something, but needed more facts. I dunno!!!
ReplyDelete@lights779 I don't know, I am just making this shit up as I go along.
ReplyDelete@lights779 How about antiquated? That better than "useless"? It served its purpose for primitive man, sure it did... but just like you pulling away from your moms tit... there comes a time when it must end. Its time to abandon the childish ways of a unsophisticated species and embrace logic, reason and understanding... not grasp at shadows. We don't practice alchemy here in modern times for good reason... chemistry is much better at achieving viable answers. Religion is much like this.
ReplyDelete@pogan1983 Wrong. You simply cannot justify the incredible stupidity of religion. Science is a self correcting enterprise that has made huge strides in progress in a relatively short amount of time. However, religion is the massive, shitting elephant in the room who's fucking up your furniture.
ReplyDelete@jnthnbush Your position is admirable, but you made a few assumptions that are unwarranted. You said "WHAT IF there are quantifiable ebbs in the flow of life that result in supernatural events" Until such a discovery is made there is no point speculating. Giving the history of what we have learned so far, considering a supernatural reason for anything we may come across is highly improbable. I am not saying to completely rule it out but there is no evidence to suggest we should consider it.
ReplyDelete@jnthnbush Religion was never a way to understand life on a supernatural scale, it was a way to try and understand that which was not understandable at a point in time. You need to stop making leaps in understanding and take things for what they are. To say science ignores is very disingenuous. Science investigates and because they have no evidence to support preconceived notions of certain beliefs and dismisses them you claim that they ignore. I take proof over faith.
ReplyDelete@moety2 err, I can't debate this anymore, my beliefs are not formulated enough to argue your point here. just know that I agree with you more than you know
ReplyDelete@jnthnbush That is fine. Your honesty is very refreshing and appreciated.
ReplyDelete@adsensus Someone else said earlier that religion and knowledge are enemies. It was an ignorant statement. Religion and scientific knowledge have had rough points in their relationship, no doubt. But enemies? It ignores 2000 years of astounding intellectual thought that has taken place in the context of religion. The nuances of Augustine, the brilliance of Kant, and so many others. That was all childish? Grasping at shadows? You and I are intellectual children compared to these giants.
ReplyDelete