DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**jamemeveRhype** · 03-25-2008, 06:00 AM

One difference between most of natural science and religious faith IMHO is, that theories in natural science normally are based on reproducable experiments.

If you find out that under certain physical conditions a metal ball accelerates with 9.81 m/s² towards earth, you can be sure that you can get the same results if you reproduce te experiment under the same conditions (otherwise the theory can be falsified).

Not so for the works of the bible/Toah/Quran. for example, which normally aren´t reproducable (or even contradict observations, like for example fossil founds or just rational thinking)

I absolutely agree that when science asks why the natural laws are like they are (or what was before big bang) then it enters the dominion of religion, although this has to be a religions that has more in common with buddhism (which Blake already mentioned) than with any of the Abrahamix religions.

03-25-2008, 06:00 AM	#15
jamemeveRhype Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 415 Senior Member	One difference between most of natural science and religious faith IMHO is, that theories in natural science normally are based on reproducable experiments. If you find out that under certain physical conditions a metal ball accelerates with 9.81 m/s² towards earth, you can be sure that you can get the same results if you reproduce te experiment under the same conditions (otherwise the theory can be falsified). Not so for the works of the bible/Toah/Quran. for example, which normally aren´t reproducable (or even contradict observations, like for example fossil founds or just rational thinking) I absolutely agree that when science asks why the natural laws are like they are (or what was before big bang) then it enters the dominion of religion, although this has to be a religions that has more in common with buddhism (which Blake already mentioned) than with any of the Abrahamix religions.
	Quote