Hikikamori wrote:
What kind of a suggestion are those?
I can use technology and still say that if science ruled the world it would not be good and I never said it was the cause of all our problems and I never said abandon it.
You claimed that "billions" have died in the name of science.
Hikikamori wrote:
I don't want to take an antidepressant pill that only works about half the time. The same with a sugar pill and placebo except with the sugar pill you don't get all of those horrible side effects. The medical field is now "all" about money. We don't cure things, we only treat the symptoms. A lot of the diseases science create, cause or unleashed itself.
What diseases did science create? The pharmaceutical industry is all about money, but I suppose you live in the United States and lack health care. I am in Canada and I can get taken care of medically because we have socialized medicine. Antidepressants do not work for everyone but the alternative is often remaining in a state of utter depression.
Hikikamori wrote:
I say what global warming? isn't that still in debate among the scientist or was it real and has science fixed it? what species exactly have you saved? What about All of those animal experiment subjects?...and the air is more toxic than ever because of the chemicals, that goes for the food and water also.
Not really a debate amongst scientists. Most have accepted it. Climate change is a more accurate term anyway. And as to "fixing it", that is something I consider virtually impossible, unless massive resources were put into "terraforming" the Earth to a stable climate. Even so new problems could arise.
What species have *I* saved? Uhh... scientists are the ones who pointed out that extinction is even possible. Christians had refused to believe that any of "God's creations" could ever disappear for many centuries. Some still do... As for animal experiments, I agree they are necessary, but I don't agree with inhumane testing practices. If Christians would stop lobbying against stem cell research, then cloned tissue (not even whole animals) could be used for experiments. But hey, its easier to just ignore that and keep preaching irrelevant Biblical jargon. The pollution can be blamed on industrialization and disregard for the environment. As I pointed out to you, the attitude expressed by Abrahamaic faiths is such that "The Earth is there for your desires". Consideration of the consequences were not given a great deal of weight when it seemed that the planet was a "gift" from God that would always be the way "God made it". Additionally you can blame conservative Christian politicians for the most part, for being associated with anti-environmentalism, and promoting it as well as denialism.
Hikikamori wrote:
If we are going to talk about the discovery of electricity and penicillin We can talk about the discovery of things like the A bomb, gun powder, chemical weapons and so on.
The things you list seem to be more like conveniences. I'm glad we have Ipods and TV thought.
There are always unforeseen consequences. If you want to go down this road, we might as well criticize the first cavemen who discovered fire, because fire has killed billions of people over the course of history, by accident or through malice. This is a poor argument to make against science.
Hikikamori wrote:
A world ruled by a single religion would also be bad...someone pointed out we can see that in our past. I agree.
When has a single religion ever ruled the world? Btw I don't want *any* religions involved in politics whatsoever. People and their governments rule the world. Religion is the way of the past. "Science" is not a monolithic institution out to get Christians, despite what many of you seem to think. You couldn't be more wrong
_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do
17 Dec 2011, 8:07 am
