Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THREE YEARS AGO, I walked into university to attend a conference on the meaning of traditional clothing in the West of Ireland. It was called “Threads of Discovery: Cloth, Clothes and Culture” and, by some strange and fortunate coincidence, this conference and NUIG’s Malaysian society World Hijab Day event were in two rooms side by side.
World Hijab Day is the 1st February every year when Muslim women dress others with the hijab in order to promote the Day’s motto of “Better Awareness. Greater Understanding. Peaceful World”.
I was assured I wasn’t appropriating but instead it would be a chance to find out for myself the reality of wearing a piece of clothing truly imbued with meaning in not just the West of Ireland, but the Western world.
I’ve been subjected to pretty colourful jibes and jokes about redheads for much of my life, yet I have never endured serious abuse for what was on my head. I’m privileged to be part of the scenery, fading into an abundant crop of pasty Galwegian redheads.
Listening to the open, kind and funny members of NUIG’s Malaysian and Muslim societies recount their stories of public and official abuse, whilst wearing myself the otherwise innocuous object of their persecution, it brought home to me how unjust and cruel their treatment was.
Love and kindness
To be able to experience wearing the headscarf in such a friendly atmosphere was a privilege, but I felt odd and appropriating.
I’m grateful for that chance for allowing me to see the hijab for what it is – not a threat, not a tool of oppression – but a reflection of care for others, a love of one’s culture and sense of belonging.
Women expressing their identity and self must be respected and supported, rather than seen as helpless victims of oppression or a target for violence.
European Court ruling
I find the recent case from the European Court of Justice appalling in light of that February day in 2014 and the headscarf-wearing friends I have made over the years, many of them avowed feminists.
The European Court ruled that you can’t fire someone because your customers don’t like being served by a woman in a headscarf. However, it appears you can fire a headscarf-wearing employee if after you employ them a customer complains and you subsequently formalise an informal rule requiring all employees to dress “neutrally”.
All women live under the male gaze, but for a European court to puts its focus on a piece of cloth on the heads of a tiny proportion of the EU population feels decidedly like the eye of Sauron.
The EU has done little to protect Irish women from death and disability under the anti-abortion and anti-contraception stance of religious institutions. It has done even less to protect Ireland’s poorest cohort in the workplace – single mothers – from EU-imposed austerity.
Furthermore, from a gender equality perspective, this ruling will further alienate Muslim women and prevent them from strengthening their economic independence and their emancipation.
Whatever your stance on religion or feminism, it is also frightening that an employer could have such power over how an individual chooses to express deeply held beliefs.
Legitimising across all workplaces the intrusion of consumer, corporate or managerial desire – unconnected to any health or safety concerns – into the everyday life of an employee is a dangerous precedent to set.
This case also cannot be pulled from a context in which the EU moves to militarise its borders as 3,740 refugees – many Muslim and many fleeing wars Europeans have stoked and started – died in Mediterranean waters in 2016 alone.
European Principles
There is no doubt that in an increasingly globalised world, as all that is solid melts into air and nationalism rises to fill the void, the EU is seeking common principles with which to define itself.
Will the EU define itself by borders, increasingly privatised and increasingly lethal? Will our common European culture be dictated by a minority of multinational corporations profiting from the disintegration of a people’s dignity? Or will we define ourselves by excluding others as we begin in Ireland to uncover plot upon unmarked plot of unmarried mothers and their stolen children?
With my upbringing as an Irish Catholic in an internationalist EU, came the duty to understand and accept faith and culture in other forms as but one of the myriad mediums through which people give effect to love and kindness in their lives.
A far more wholesome option, would be to see the great beauty in seeking to live lives along guidelines of understanding, love and kindness to others, a promise which World Hijab Day’s motto “Better Awareness. Greater Understanding. Peaceful World” reflects.
Sinead Mercier is a researcher for the Irish Green Party and has worked with Amnesty International, the Irish Penal Reform Trust and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.
“What was the scientific aspect of the resurrection itself and why did it happen?”
You don’t understand how the scientific method works at all. You’ve started with an assumption – the resurrection of Jesus happened – and then decided you’re going to prove your assumption correct somehow.
That’s the antithesis of scientific reasoning. Science is about proving hypotheses wrong, not starting off with a belief based on faith and desperately clamouring to prove yourself right. Scientists consider the alternative – “what if my hypothesis is wrong?” – not once in the article did you concern yourself with the possibility that the resurrection never happened (which is what the evidence would suggest).
Please, do not invoke the name of science when all you are really trying to do is justify your baseless belief in a supernatural event. Admit that you have faith (a belief in something without evidence) and leave it at that.
@Malachi: Succinctly put Malachi.
@Malachi:
Science is forever proving itself wrong.
There is no truth in science, only temporary laws agreed upon by scientists.
@Malachi: Faith is not belief in the absence of anything. A mature faith is belief because of something.
@Thomas McGilly: faith is belief without fact.
@Jack Cassady: Scientific inquiry is better than the religious way of thinking precisely because scientists can change their theories based on the evidence.
Religion is confined to dogma that was written millennia ago by people who knew far less about the world than we do now (thanks to scientists).
It’s why science innovates and discovers, while religion stunts and undermines the progression of human knowledge.
@Malachi:
Religion concerns itself with man’s spiritual and moral developement, not discounting the profound insights religion provides into human psychology, science looks into the physical reality of matter. In essence there is no conflict between the two.
@Jack Cassady: No. Religion doesn’t confine itself to the spiritual and moral, if only that were true.
They all make grand claims about the nature of the Universe (e.g. an omnipotent, omnipresent being exists, they made a child spring out of existence via immaculate conception, then resurrected this child, among other miracles).
There is a major conflict between the two when religions make such baseless claims and claim them to be divine truth.
@Jack Cassady: Religious leaders have constantly ignored, restrained and disavowed scientific research and findings to ‘protect’ there belief systems.
@Tony Gordon
Conversely scientists have constantly ignored moral and ethical questions in pursuit of monetary gain.
Ah…its not real!
@Malachi: God works on the Quantum level as does consciousness as it seems???
@Jack Cassady: still doesn’t make the research incorrect
@Malachi: cmon Malachi. This guy is at least trying to at least taint the age old dogma with a Filip of science.
If you want to be entirely critical –
Religion asks for a leap of faith and belief in …..god
Science asks the same but calls it the ……Big Bang.
All the rest is simply mankind trying to get his her head around an imponderable.
@vNblxOSQ: There is no leap of faith – ever – in science.
The acceptance of the Big Bang theory is based on ample cosmological evidence – ironically first hypothesised by a physicist who happened to be Catholic Priest. There is no faith involved, comparing it to a belief in god is irrational.
@Malachi: well said. Couldn’t have put it better myself. Trying to apply scientific rigour to a fairytale is laughable.
@Malachi: Well said.
I wish we’d grown up with a more realistic story.
@Malachi: I think, partly why some believe in this fairytale. Is their fear of dying, they are so scared of it and want to believe there’s more to this life after death. Folks, there is nothing after this life and get over it. Now, get on with your life and enjoy it. You don’t need Religion, to do good and you are in control of your own life. You’re not a sheep, the church is not your shepherd and all they want is your money!
@Malachi: There really is no big bang theory. There is no sound in space and light did not exist until about 270,000 years after the event we call the big bang. Physicists think that the observable universe once fit into a region smaller than an atom. But that is just the observable universe, and outside that envelope it may in fact be infinite. Infinite!, when there should be nothing at all, not even space or time. If you are so sure that the universe was not created, you have a poor understanding of the astro physics involved. Most of the leading theoreticians wouldn’t be so bold as to make that claim.
@Paraic McDonagh: ‘There really is no big bang theory’.
What an opener. Everyone, pack your bags and go home, Paraic has done away with the big bang theory and asked us all to convert to our most convenient local religion, one qualifier is that that religion must have as one of it’s central tenets that the particular deity attached to it is also the creator of the Universe.
@Grainne Abdulaziz: wow
@Grainne Abdulaziz: Did I say that? Interesting how you invented your own rhetoric there Grainne.
@Jack Cassady: And are you a scientist and so what business have you saying that? It is up to science to see if they fit not you. And they do not. If science shows there was no Adam and Eve what then? Dont lie that they were symbols for the Bible gives no such hint. Even Mormons with their pack of lies about life in America 2000 years ago that is the laughing stock of archaeological science still pretend that science and Mormonism fit.
@Malachi: It seems to me that you’re approaching this from the assumption that the resurrection didn’t happen..If you’re truly abiding by the scientific method, then surely you also need to allow for the possibility that the resurrection did in fact happen, which is the alternative view to the one you profess above. You also claim that the evidence suggests that the resurrection never happened – what is that evidence?
@Malachi: ‘…while religion stunts and undermines the progression of human knowledge’. With respect, do you know that the Catholic Church established the Pontificial Academy of Sciences to fund, sponsor and support scientific research? It also founded Europe’s first universities. Some European cathedrals were also designed in such a way that they could also function as world class solar observatories…hardly the actions of a religion stunting and undermining the progression of human knowledge. Not to mention the major scientific discoveries made by practicing and devout Catholics, even clergy (who couldn’t have studied or conducted research without the financial support of their bishops). People cite Galileo as evidence of the Church’s antipathy towards scientific progress, yet there are so many more examples of how it has promoted and enabled scientific progress.
You have made an overriding statement about all religion in your comment above, and have argued for the scientific method throughout this page, yet all it takes to disprove a hypothesis like ‘Religion stunts and undermines the progression of human knowledge’ is one exception, and there are several points that contradict yours. You have come with your own assumptions to this page, and I’m not convinced that you have genuinely applied the scientific method to them.
@Tony Gordon:’Religious leaders have constantly ignored, restrained and disavowed scientific research and findings to ‘protect’ their belief systems’ Constantly? Do you have examples of that besides the case of Galileo? You must surely have numerous examples and no exceptions to make a statement like yours.
Your beliefs just dont wash in the world of science or history for that matter.
@lez ferguson:
Without God there would be no world.
Science is like the mechanic who understands how the parts work and where they go but without the designer there would be no car.
@lez ferguson: So science holds all the answers to any question ever asked and history (which is entirely dependent on perspective and therefore is hugely subjective) is beyond question?
@Jack Cassady: Provide just ONE piece of evidence for the existance of your god. Just ONE, not 10 or 2738…..just one.
@Michael Coyle:
The proofs of God are all around you.
Open your eyes.
@Jack Cassady: man created god, not god created man
@Jack Cassady: do to explain the complex car, there must have been a designer, that omnipotent being you call god.
But this is only explaining the existence of the complex car, with the appearance of an even more complex designer. If we accept there is this even more complex designer, does that not leave us an even larger issue of who created the designer??
Seems idiotic to explain the existence of something complex by involking something even more complex dont you think.
@Thomas McGilly: yes you are correct. Science is fact. Faith is fiction.
@lez ferguson:
‘Man created God’
The type of arrogance which has brought mankind to the brink of destruction.
@lez ferguson: Science is fact which changes regularly. Surely therefore, science is unreliable?
@Jack Cassady: you see proofs, I see only your delusion. You have spent your entire life being brainwashed.
@lez ferguson: Faith is real. Perhaps not tangible but real nonetheless.
@Michael Coyle: Ha, you’ll be waiting for that, meanwhile you’ll be told its all around you and its in the bible and can you prove he doesn’t exist etc. etc.!
@Thomas McGilly: science updates
@Thomas McGilly: “So science holds all the answers to any question ever asked and history (which is entirely dependent on perspective and therefore is hugely subjective) is beyond question?”
Ask yourself, who do you trust to answer your questions about the nature of the universe more? People from the time of Jesus who hadn’t even grasped Aristotelian physics, or people who have figured out how to reach Earth’s escape velocity with spaceships and land rovers on Mars?
As for things being beyond question – that’s religious dogma you’re thinking of (i.e. God’s existence is a given, no questions allowed). The combined body of scientific knowledge has changed continuously over the years precisely because nothing is beyond question.
@Michael Coyle:
‘Provide just ONE piece of evidence for the existance of your god’
In my opinion there is only one proof.
The Prophet of God and his Book.
Important to remember also that religion is not an experiment capable of being carried out in a laboratory.
It is a living force.
@Thomas McGilly: the fact blind faith doesn’t change in the face of overwhelming evidence to its contrary is the prt more worriesome.
@Tony Gordon: on what basis do you decide his is a delusion tony,? Just asking
@Thomas McGilly: “Science is fact that changes regularly”? A bit of a broad statement. Maxwells equations (published in 1861) are a fact and haven’t changed. Without them we wouldn’t be reading or commenting on this article.
@Jack Cassady: God (I’m assuming you’re referring to the Christian one) doesn’t have a book. He has a compendium of 73 (or is it 66?) (often anonymously authored & contradictory) manuscripts stuck together centuries after the events they claim to depict.
@Tony Gordon: Are you really suggesting that cars can’t possibly have designers because designers are more complex than cars and it seems idiotic? Because that’s the premise of your argument.
@Jack Cassady: ‘Science is like the mechanic…’
Word games and mental gymnastics from a gullible believer…are you Tom Burke?!
@oldschoolcelt:
Are you Richard Dawkins?
No you’re not.
@Jack Cassady: But god didn’t write a book?
And the prophet wasnt his, he’s yours and was a man, not a god!
I don’t see any proofs here, only more of your delusion.
@Jack Cassady: Nor do I claim to be. And nor do I claim absurd fantasies to explain our existence!
@Thomas McGilly: No. That’s a straw man. Find where anyone has asserted that in this thread. Science may do so at some stage, in the future, but hasnt.Also, try doing science or even just apply the scientific method. The “hugely subjective” suggestion is a contradiction of how science is done (experimentation, peer review, repeatability of experiment, investigation of confounding variables, highly engaging debates with data, improving experiments); Science is constantly self-improving, which you may have noticed in the progression from untested Bronze Age nomads’ world views to the science and correspondingly validating technology of today.
@David On Tour: Actually, the New Testament accounts were written within 100 years of Jesus’ death and resurrection, not centuries. Further, how does the fact that the Bible consists of many books support your assumption that God or Christianity doesn’t have a book? The books or manuscripts taken as a whole tell the story of salvation history. Generally, books are chapters ‘stuck together’ – how exactly is a Bible less of a ‘book’ than any other?
@Tony Gordon: Can you provide proofs that Jesus was a man and not a God?
Easter. Another pagan festival hijacked by Christianity.
@Celtic Spirit: Yet it arrives near passover each year???
@Alois Irlmaier: there you have it, near, but not at Passover, and wasn’t the carpenter, who went on to become the most famous zombie in literary history, crucified on Passover? Explain to me then, why different Christian sects celebrate Easter at different times.
@Larissa Caroline Nikolaus: You and your insults…
@Larissa Caroline Nikolaus: Because of the Popes always changing what they want Christianity to be rather than letting it be what it is. It is like photocopying in reality, if you only photocopied the photocopy then after 266 copies it would be hard to read and the mistakes would soon take over. This then leads to rife and also nothing has as much money or control like being head of a religion either and without churches anything can be religion. Easter should be tied in with the Passover for it to be right but I am sure the next daft thing the church will do is make Easter a permanent date as many Easter egg and card makers might like that???
I’d say the same science behind the talking snake, virgin birth, fish turned into loaves, parting of the Red Sea and the desruction of the Death Star, oh wait, forget that last one.
@Grainne Abdulaziz: …and fish turning into loaves
@Grainne Abdulaziz: I have faith in the Death Star, so it has to be real, and you can’t prove it’s not, so there….
How dare you even question the Death Star….you should be stoned to death, and when you die the god (who loves you, but the way) will cast you into eternal torture where (his former angel) the devil will see to that.
Amazing really that atheists still cannot differentiate between books of profound human insight such as The Mahābhārata e.g. and children’s fairy tales like Harry Potter or science fiction movies like Star Wars.
All that symbolism,allusion and allegory.
Must have been hell for them studying the Romantic poets.
I really feel the state needs to introduce an increased focus on religious education in our schools to bring them up to scratch.
@Jack Cassady: oh you mean when those religious guys were fcukking and raping those children in their charge and using ‘the fear of their god’ to keep them quiet about it?
@Tony Gordon: Atheists are capable of raping, paedophilia and using fear too.
I find it kind of scary and a bit weird, that in 2017 with all the atrocities worldwide all the war all the suffering and with all our education and advancements in technology and medicine, that grown men and women still actually believe in religion.
Its time for governments world wide to tackle this nonsense.
They’ll get right on that…
It’s even funnier that people are getting their knickers in a twist in this day and age about what a guy who believes in magic, eating zombie crackers and virgin births etc. is saying. Here we are at the beginning of the 21st century seriously discussing the dead coming back to life. Remember it wasn’t just Jesus who did it in the Bible. According to the mythology at the hour of his death the dead walked among the living. You’d think the Romans might have mentioned this mini zombie apocalypse. In fact considering all that’s suppose to have happened that weekend there should be volumes on Jesus.Let’s for the sake of argument though say Jesus did exist.. isn’t the simplest explanation that he didn’t actually die on the cross? Might put a kink in the whole god bit though..
@Lord Clanricarde: sadly, it’s that religion that’s the root cause of the problems facing the world.
@Lord Clanricarde: All it takes is more training in critical thinking in schools and more religious freedom. There is no support for the child who feels Catholicism is nonsense and who wants to opt out of being confirmed. There is no true religious freedom in a nation where children are pressured and nobody is encouraged to become another religion if the one they were raised in does not suit.
@Smiley: Actually, it would seem that people are the root cause of problems facing the world, not religion.
Science: Bruno discovered that the sun and not the earth was the centre of our solar system.
Faith: The pope of the day burned Bruno at the stake for his discovery.
Blind Faith: Bruno is to this day still listed as a blasphemor as the pope is infallible, so had to have been right. (Even though we know he is wrong)
@Tony Gordon: infallibility only applies to articles of faith. The Pope was wrong. If the Pope said the tide would come in 5 times a day he would be wrong too. Infallibility only applies to articles of faith.
Science and most religion is just not compatible
@Conor Power:
Religion and science are like two wings of the same bird. Without either the bird cannot fly.
@Jack Cassady: Weird, it looks as if science is doing just fine despite the dwindling influence of religion in the Western world.
@Jack Cassady: Bullshite
@Jack Cassady: Science flew man to the moon, religion flew him into buildings.
@Grainne Abdulaziz: And that same science has almost destroyed the planet we all live on with nukes, chemical weapons, pollution all in the name of your own god of science as man really does not know or understand how to contain the wonderful things they have achieved through the sciences except use most of it for the destruction of man and the planet we are responsible for looking after. We have half the world with nothing and the other half just take take take to feed the pockets of a handful. Don’t blame God for the wrongs of man if you don’t know God all you have to do is seek him and you will find him. He gave us the free choice either to believe or not believe and its up to each of us to believe or not. Here’s a good read http://time.com/77676/why-science-does-not-disprove-god/
@Charliegrl80: That’s an opinion piece in the ‘Faith’ section of Time Magazine, science does not seek to disprove a god, as it is of zero value and importance to the scientific community.
I’m not blaming ‘god’ for anything, how can I when there is no such thing? That’s like me blaming the Easter Bunny because I lost my wallet.
I also never said science was my god. I think you have a pre-prepared script that gives you comfort and helps you try to negate the water-tight arguments that are put before you. I’ve seen an almost identical line of thinking to the one you’ve put in your comment almost a thousand times by now, it’s the view of the religious fundamentalist, who would probably go into apoplectic shock if they thought outside of their ‘faith’ box even once.
Next time you require surgery or life-saving medication, refuse the offer and pray to Jesus instead, I’m sure you’ll be fine, and how’s that posting on the Internet with your electronic device working out for you?!
@Grainne Abdulaziz: Wasn’t it men who flew themselves into buildings?
@Jack Cassady: That is true. Both faith and reason are necessary for the contemplation of truth. Science can fall into idolatry and religion can fall into superstition without truth. World events today tell us that more than anything.
When you cant prove something just close your eyes and pretend its real? FFS.
@Guill Ire: Like big bangs to explain matter and the universe lol.
@Alois Irlmaier: actually, there is a lot of evidence for the Big Bang, a good popular overview is in Simon Singh’s book which I strongly recommend; it goes into the measurement data and why the hypotheses were formed.
@Patrick Denny: The big bang is confused with creation. The current view is that there was something that banged. If God wants to be seen as creator he went a funny way about it.
@Patrick Denny: What caused the big bang as nothing can create something when it belongs to the form of matter. So something that was not matter created the big bang then but what was it and what keeps atoms together over billions of years as the energy needed to keep them together and busy with their electrons makes you wonder what fuels them if everything exists by releasing heat and how does it gives off heat as most of an atom is space but seems to have the energy to exist. What was the big bang in order to do that with what became hydrogen?
Happy Easter everyone!
Atheists are like armchair travellers pontificating about a country they’ve never even visited.
@Jack Cassady: AKA Americans.
@Jack Cassady: Religious fundamentalists are like armchair travellers pontificating about a country they’ve can never visit.
@Jack Cassady: coz jack, you have been to the kingdom of heaven. That must’ve been some ride and in more ways than one.
@Jack Cassady: You are an atheist when it comes to the thousands of other religions on offer. We just go one step further ;-)
@Jack Cassady: That’s just name-calling bluster, not an argument of any kind.
Just Incase anyone isn’t familiar with the scientific method.
1. Ask a question.
2. Do background research. (Your question may have already been explained.)
3. Construct a hypothesis. (Basically a proposed explanation for the question you pondered.)
4. Carry out an experiment.
5. a) Experiment works then analyse your data. Show your peers your findings for review.
B) Experiment fails then recheck your steps carefully to make sure no simple mistakes were made.
If the experiment still fails then go back to step 3 and think harder.
@Gary: OR….. you could just make up the answers. Write them in book. People always believe stuff that’s in books, you know because it’s written down. Keep it vague just in case you need to backtrack. You know like horoscopes a one for all kinda thing. Add in something scary like eternity in a bad place. The thought of that will make them listen.that actually sounds a bit neggy. Why not something a bit fun. Like a load of virgins. Yeah yeah. That sounds great. Ahh maybe not. They’re probably virgins for a reason and who would believe that anyway.
Stopped reading after he admitted liking csi, can’t take him seriously after that
@William Clay: too right
Well written.
Something,someone somewhere created the universe and mapped out human life. There is no way our bodies were created by accident, if they were then that was some amazing fluke.
@An Observer: Its called evolution ffs. Catch up.
@An Observer: Evolution by natural selection is no accident – indeed it is the opposite of an accident. The principle of natural selection ensured that the most desirable traits were passed on, meaning complex functional beings were engineered by nature.
@An Observer: and who created this entity who is even more complex, and was able to create us and the universe?
And was this entity created by an even bigger more extraordinary fluke?
@Tony Gordon: That was an excellent answer to a stupid question.
@An Observer: you are correct, we weren’t an accident. We have evolved over millions of years. There have been remains found of most of the different stages that we evolved through. We are designs of nature, who adapted to our environment over time.
I’m not saying anything about an entity…you say we are where we are because of evolution… So evolution was just switched on one day billions of years ago? No need for insults… Just asking a question.
@An Observer: silly comment, no one says our bodies were created by accident, that’s not the theory of evolution or natural selection.
@An Observer: and all this statement is true coz… Oops. No proof. Next.
@Tony Gordon: Can I assume that is a rhetorical question? You’re answer being No? While I agree with your argument-ending unknown surely the same could be asked of the scientific theory(!) as to where exactly the big bang happened, where was this vacuum within which an explosion of energy occurred? Why was it ‘there’? Honestly, I am hopelessly open-minded about whether there is a God or not. I don’t know. I don’t buy into any religion including atheism which seems fairly dogmatic in itself I feel. Science is good in many respects, but it can’t ever tell us Why we are here or give us purpose in life unless the purpose is to become scientists and figure out How we got here.
@Lord Clanricarde: evolution created the effin universe? And you want someone flaw to catch up?
Quit thr fuc^%g drink man you’re not able for it.
@Lord Clanricarde: And yet many scientists now believe that evolution explains difference but not reason…
No proof of what? I was only asking a question,not shoving something down your throat… Get a grip.
@oilscalp: Does there have to be a WHY to us being here. Maybe is just a HOW we are here.
But involking the magical sky fairy explains nothing.
There is nothing in this universe I see that requires one.
The problem with these discussions is both sides frequently argue from a point of arrogance where what’s more important is not what’s right but who is right.
I believe in a continuation of consciousness. Proof is all around us. For many though, any amount of testimony will never be enough but that’s ok too.
@Tom Burke: As comedian Jim Jeffries said, if there is a god then I want to go to hell, cause thats where all the hookers and coke are!!
@Tom Burke: An Youtube said it was so and it was so.
Take the healing of the waters of Lourdes, any scientific research has shown the percentage of remissions (miracles) of ill visitors is no greater than that seen in non visitors.
@Tony Gordon: I’d be careful about the whole Holy Water thing… 86% of all Holy Water was recently found to contain fecal matter. Basically there’s a very good chance when the priest is chucking that stuff about he’s basically chucking about toilet water….
@Tom Burke: agreed tom. Both sides seem mired in their own dogma tho neither can fully explain why 42 is the answer.
@Tom Burke: @Tom BurkeThe side that believes in testing and checking is still the best side to take. If science is arrogant religion is worse for it is untestable and does not care for evidence.
@: as one of the twins in the womb said to the other
“You are telling me there is a whole world outside this dark cramped up space. You provide zero evidence and can’t provide evidence. Sorry buddy.
I rely on science. If you can’t prove it scientifically then you have no credibility. Science relies on proof.
You can’t prove it therefore it’s not true’.
CSI shows are fiction and bear no resemblance to what happens in reality, sorry and all, but your religious beliefs are the same.
People in a locked room only know whats in a lock room and that becomes their reality. We judge everything by what we know and what we know is based on what our senses precieve and what we are told.
Do we trust our senses, do we trust other and can we really know what reality is without knowing what reality is. Is the Universe a giant hologram, is reality just a set of beliefs, is matter mostly space, can you use matter to research what matter is as well as other substances that exist but are invincible to matter because there is no reaction to it?
What is the nature and reality of matter, can matter be made out of a big bang as something had to cause the reaction to cause the big bang, how can all that energy come from nothing and trave from a single point to travel distances which would mean the big bang itself was faster than light. How can hydrogen come together to create stars that explode and create metals and gases that come together to form planets, life and us. When evolution doesn’t really make sense when focused in on.
People choose what to believe to fit what they want to be true for them as well as use it to bash others over the head with to tell them that their wrong. All we can do is say we don’t know anything until we know everything but that is just a big thought of mine?
@Alois Irlmaier: “How can hydrogen come together to create stars that explode and create metals and gases that come together to form planets, life and us.”
All these things have been addressed extensively by modern science and we have a fairly comprehensive picture of the timeline of the universe, if not the fine details (yet).
“When evolution doesn’t really make sense when focused in on.”
It makes perfect sense.
@Malachi: I think you missed alois’ point Malachi. If I read correctly it’s not about what happens when they come together, rather how did the circumstance arrive that they exist and that they did come together.
More existential than Lab based. I thought.
@Malachi: So matter is like Frank Spencer, it keeps having accidents that create something that has a role and function them that has a role and function that just keeps on happening by accident? Is that what you believe?
@vNblxOSQ: The universe is too big to fit into just one test tube lol.
@Alois Irlmaier: No, that’s not what I’m saying at all.
I’m not going to explain the theory of biological evolution to you, but it’s clear you don’t understand it – do a little research on basic genetics as well. I already explained why biological evolution is not ‘accidental’.
@Malachi: So you say I don’t understand it because I don’t agree with you. Scientists and others who are into biology have come to the eventual conclusion that evolution can’t explain biological function because of its complexity. So how can DNA create form to act due to function caused by enviornment and environmental changes over a spectrum of different areas of DNA and chromosomes in order for these to come together.
Evolution can’t explain this but it is the closes excuse to sweep the question under for some in the scientific community and many scientists are realising this as are some now willing to question what happened to cause the big bang that they use to ignore.
I can’t understand people complaining of not winning the Lotto, when they don’t even buy a ticket. What is there to gain with no belief? Genuine question, by the way.
@Paul Culligan: a life based on truth and fact. Not wasting it hoping for the next (non existent) life after death. Do you remember life before you were born? Of course not, and it’ll be same after death, so no reason for sadness, without consciousness there is no emotion. Make the most out of the life you have.
@Paul Culligan: Do you always believe things to be true or not based on the “what’s in it for me” principle?
It’s a question of truth, some people still care about what’s real and what isn’t. Not as many as you’d think, clearly.
@Paul Culligan: Either way, I just don’t think it has to be hinged on a particular set of rules/codes. Surely people can (I think) believe in God without believing in a particular prophet or a defined religion.
@Scundered: Fair point but sadness about what?
@Malachi: who told you, or where did you learn that theres no God? If you don’t mind me asking.
@oilscalp: I agree entirely.
@Paul Culligan: I don’t believe in a God because there’s no credible evidence that suggests one exists. I didn’t have to be told anything and it wasn’t learned. All you need to do is apply the scientific method.
@Scundered: can you prove there is no life after death?
@Paul Culligan: the sadness associated with death, that we are mere mortals, and the acceptance of that.
Like Stephen Hawking said the belief in after life without any fact to support it, is just a fear of the dark. It’s a nice idea that we exist in another world after death, but with no fact to support that, it can only be treated as a thought created to make us fear death less.
@Charliegrl80: the evidence is stacked heavily that it doesn’t exist, since there is zero evidence to say there is an after life.
Like why would you suddenly start believing in something with no reasoning to support it?
If people suggest there is an after life, the onus is on them to explain why they came to that conclusion. Otherwise I could say I believe Postman Pat is king of the universe, and ask you to prove he doesn’t exist. See where I’m going with this?
@Malachi: So I’d be correct in thinking that you’re a Scientist of some sort?
@Scundered: genuine question. What about NDE’s, some even experienced by Scientists of various nationalities and different disciplines and many other professional people from the highest order?
@Paul Culligan: NDE are suspected to be nothing more than the demise of electrical impulses in your brain (the beginning of brain death)
Again, no need to involk afterlife and sky fairies.
@Tony Gordon: So the beginning of brain death tantalysingly hints at something beyond? Is that correct? I’m just wondering why would the natural progression of death exert so much energy into creating, a type of anaesthesia, sky fairy images and feelings of extasy, if all was percieveably lost? Seems rather pointless to me.
@Paul Culligan: Of some sort, yes, but you don’t need to be a scientist to think about thinks scientifically.
@Malachi: Can you explain how you applied the scientific method to the question of God’s existence?
@Malachi: Do you not think that you have to be knowledegable enough about Science to know what scientific disiplines to rule in or out, or is it wise to steadfastly base your assumptions on the Science that is available today. Would it be a truism to state that Science is not ‘finished’ and is continually evolving and that what we discard today, could be proven tomorrow?
God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance. Neil DeGrasse Tyson.
@John Walsh: ‘God is dead’ Neil de Grasse Tyson
‘Neil de Grasse Tyson is dead’ – God
Speaking of CSI, any chance of your so called church telling us where all the bodies are buried, the babies and children you threw into sewers, and while you’re at it what about all the child abuse you covered up, plenty of crime scenes there too you bunch of Hippocrates. Shame on you all.
“As the days go by, we face the increasing
inevitability that we are alone in a godless, uninhabited, hostile and
meaningless universe. Still, you’ve got to laugh, haven’t you?”…
Look into the world of Quantum science and you will understand how stupid and arrogant man truly is, that ultimate negative has to be balanced by ultimate positive – that we are fish in a bowl
@John Tuld: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM1fJF7IIUs Something to ponder?
All I read here is the same mantra…..
Science can’t explain that, so involke the sky fairies.
Or
It’s written in god book (I notice the author didn’t sign it!)
It’s funny that in this age we don’t see any of the miracles, prophets, resserrections, people floating up to the clouds (actually wonder where he was going, space??)
magic burning bushes, booming voices from the sky….and on and on
Yet we still cling to all this nonscience
Name me a gesture a religous person can do that i can not… hitchens
@throw9away: hands folded in prayer
k
I thought God became man as a way to teach Angels humility and as a way to show humanity love and to appease God’s view of humanity. As a way to pay for our sins by himself replacing burned offerings like lamb by himself and to tie in with the way how Abraham was going to offer his son up as a sacrifice to God as a test but instead used a lamb instead. Jesus became the offering to undo God’s anger and the way humanity offends God, Jesus was the offered lamb and with moses he was the snake hung on the poll to cure the Israeli people in the desert as in the bible the snake mightn’t be a snake but mean seraphim instead? The Resurrection was to show humanity that Jesus was Christ by returning from the dead and that death exists because of what happened in Eden and because of that the devil owns the world since then. Christ offers salvation, a second chance for humanity by the resurrection, because he did not just rise from the dead he changed his body from mortal to immortal. The opposite to what happened to Adam and Eve after the fall, Jesus / Yeshua undid origional sin by his sacrifice, that is why when resurrection happens people will be given new bodies like Adam and Eve once had as Jesus is an example. The resurrection is an insight of what will happen to us if we do what Jesus taught, so we can be like him.
So what makes us sin is these bodies we have as those are what Adam and Eve became as a result of eating that fruit, was it the fruit or the will of defying God as it was the Serpent in the Garden which is another reference to a Seraphim again. In the Bible the works of people describes what type of trees that they are and their works and what they do refer to as fruit. So eating the fruit can mean doing the outcome of someone elses work but the Bible is that way inclined but who knows?
If anyone wants to understand the Bible then the Septuagint would help as would the english translation of the Tanakh, Chuck Missler can provide insights as well.
Many call themselves Christian by following everyone but Christ and many have no idea what being a Christian is or what it means?
That a Man reversed the Second Law of Thermodynamics is all we know and all we need to know
@John O’Driscoll: sorry, del ”know” ins ” believe” stet the rest
What happened , . . . Jesus and his mates went
out on the town on Thurs night and got really drunk. On their way
home they gave some ‘lip’to some centurion and they
got thrown in the slammer to sleep it off. The main man
might have been tortured a little but they all sobered up by Saturday
and felt human again . That is the resurrection, that somehow got blowed into
this horseshit that a bunch of charlatans have somehow got away with
Religion is a great idea… but it is scam used to raise money and that river flows one way… all the way to Rome. Compensation has not been paid to the children who survived unspeakable cruelty at the hands of catholic priests and the survivors families also deserve compensation, but as the religious money river flows only one way, away from Ireland this will never be achieved. So the solution is to nationalise all accets of the catholic church in Ireland, a move that will happen over the ten years. But lets talk about ‘the empty tomb’ the empty tomb of catholic responsibility, the empty lives the harming priests left behind, the empty catholic promises made to help the people who survived and the others that killed themselves only to discover there is no heaven but the hell they lived on earth caused by priests, lets talk about the empty tomb… lets talk about ‘Dark personal moments’.
There is no science of the Resurrection. It is not repeatable it is not falsifiable and the sample size is trivial. It is thus a matter of belief but when you consider the odds that we’re here at all believing isn’t that hard if you try. There’s always the impossibility of random cosmological constants occuring and the fact that in an infinity of multiverses in which anything is thus possible there must be a ‘universe’ which has God and thus God being omnipotent and omnipresent (in order to be God) if extant in one ‘universe’ must be extant in all. Bar one. Because in an infinity of multiverses there must also be one in which God does not exist. By definition. And that one must be Hell. A total removal from God.
‘Religion’ in the words of George Carlin…
When it comes to bullshit, big-time, major league bullshit, you have to stand in awe of the all-time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims, religion. No contest. No contest. Religion. Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time!
But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, you talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!
The Church says the resurrection was done by non-natural forces which is why there is no scientific aspect. Science only looks at the natural. Gibbons does not understand the subject. Religion says science should stay out of the supernatural but religion does not take its own advice. Oh the hypocrisy! If something outside of nature brought Jesus back what if it in fact made it look like he came back or caused a miraculous hallucination? And there is only opinion about what the force is and what it is like and if it is really a force for good or neutral or bad. Religion is not faith but opinion and habit masquerading as faith which is why Christians are habitually disobedient to their religion.
Each day we are each and every one whether we know it or not laid upon our own cross the wood the stipes and the patibulum of which are customised to fit us closer than any Recaro ever fitted a driver down the Damascus road.
BRING BACK THE GOOD TIMES, THINK ABOUT THE HAPPIEST TIME IN YOUR RELATIONSHIP, DR OGUDU CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN AGAIN, YOU DESERVE TO BE HAPPY, TODAY BRING BACK LOST LOVE INSTANTLY USING HIS EFFECTIVE SPELLS
Are you looking for ultimate spells that works effectively same time on your problems, ranges from Love spells, marriage spells, and carrier related problems, Gay and lesbian extreme love / attraction spells, women of the night Norton accruing powders and oil for extreme ecstasy and protection with in working ordeals. How to get your ex back permanently? Is this what you are asking yourself? Have you been dumped? Can’t you just move on? Did he/she chose someone else over you? Your lover shows no interest in you anymore? You might have been asking yourself how to get your ex lover back permanently and you have been looking for unanswered questions about it, Well today is the day for your worries to be eliminated for good. Dr Ogudu have assisted me in getting my ex lover back,Are you going through emotional torture contact him now so he can use his birth gift of casting strong love spells and his super natural magical powers that mean no harm but motivated by peace, wellness and love. The fact that you ask how to get your lover back permanently is the reason why you should no longer face sorrow on your own, and that is because you are in a perfect condition to win over your ex lover and make him or her fall in love with you all over again. It is a great pain to be in love with someone who does not show the same affection back to you as you hope for. However, it is never too late to have all that you wish for and deserve in a lover. Love spells by (DR OGUDU) are pure nature of magic, they are inspired by true mystery of the beauty of the planet earth and they will do well for you as well. CONTACT HIM NOW AND BE HAPPY AGAIN”"”"
EMAIL–[OGUDUSPELLTEMPLE@YAHOO.COM]
WHATSAPP NUMBER +2348106058254
Website…http://oguduspelltemple.wixsite.com/drogudu
@Dave Joan: You have got to be shitting me… sell your shit somewhere else.
The priests of the future are scientists. Know me, know my works. Science teaches us how the universe works. When we have all knowledge we will be Gods
It’s an anthrocentric universe it exists because we perceive it and Christ just had more faith than the rest of us which measured in mustard seeds isn’t much anyway
You are Delusional @Thomas McGilly:
Eostre was a pagan goddess who gave her name to the celebration that Newgrange An Bru na Boinne recreates each winter solstice and every 19 years each summer solstice via the moon also. The concept we are in darkness always comforted by the coming of the Light. And what a big dark universe subsisting in mathematically proven infinities of multiverses it is. If that’s not an oxymoron I don’t know what is. But also mathematically each and every particle of which we are made is also a waveform and that extends away from us right into outer space and who knows what great WAN we are connected to in some way or another? Kids say to me how can you die in a plane crash and be atomised and still be hopeful of having a new life and body and the reply i give is your PC is connected to the Cloud by radio and if you take an hammer and smash it you simply have to get another piece of hardware and connect it to the cloud and bingo there’s all your data fuly restored. Keats called this world the Vale of Soul Making probably agree with him.
@John O’Driscoll: just for clarity. There is no ‘Cloud’ where you backed up information is stored. It’s stored on another device in a warehouse of information storage.
No sky fairies here……
have your say