🚀 go-pugleaf

collins@eol.ists.ca (Mike Collins) writes:

>In article (Angelo J. Paguia) writes:
>>How can religion prove or disprove anything in physics ? It has no
>>business to.

>religion isn't about proving or disproving anything.

YES! This proves my point !

>>How can physics prove or disprove the existence of God ? It has no
>>business to, either.

>this is a religious question, not a scientific one. the religious
>concept of god is framed to make the question unanswerable.
>reminds me of woody allen's line, i wouldn't to be a member
>of any club that would have me as a member.

This proves my point, too! Physics sets about to prove or disprove
things in a logical way. The fact that I had framed my question as
a scientific inquiry (How can physics prove or disprove the existence
of an electron ?) and you perceived it as a religious question
because of the word "God" in it shows that a logical inquiry
about God is the business of religion, no longer science.

By the way, that line was stolen by Woody Allen from Groucho Marx.
 
>>The two don't mix and do not contradict nor support each other. 

>no i think there are significant areas of overlap. religion makes
>some pretty absurd claims. the fact that the catholics have only
>just absolved galileo of "wrong-doing", is ample evidence that
>science and religion have many conflicting things to say on the 
>same subject.

>>Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

>not NOT (Since you just proved my point)

>>Angelo


>mjc
>-- 
>michael collins
>institute for space and terrestrial science
>toronto, canada M3J 3K1
>collins@eol.ists.ca