I'm thinking science..there's a lot of reasons for this in-fact. And it's not the 'big bang' theroy or anything of the such. Well, maybe a little of the such but not so much. I dunno, I just have a weird opinion on it.

Science itself did not create life. Life was created on this planet by a series of events that all fell into place just right. Science tells us how, but science is not what created life.

Science...I just science there's to much fact behind it...with religion they draw alot of blanks not really knowing if it's true...Though I do love the bilble and all I have nothing wrong with it but I believe in science as well...There's just more to it then to religion, and I mean all from budist to gods and godesses.

I'm wanting to say both because there have been supernatural events that have occured with either dumb science logic or no science logic at all. So why not for a super natural event taking place in a time that none of us existed? It could have existed before Science was even science. But what I think is, we're like...created by variables because remember, data is created by tiny infinit numbers. I.E. Video Games, computers, etc. So if we really look at our other organisms and shit that makes us have skin and muscles and all the facts, What if we're basically made up of variables, and what I mean is by series of numbers that have grouped together to create a seperate being. For skin, a group of numbers would gather and equation themselves out to one variable which would be skin and those varaibles is what makes up that part of our bodies. It's hard to explain...sorry....I'll do mybest to explain it much better.

And what do you mean Science is not what created life? As far as I know it did, and you're not exactly convincing me otherwise. Try doing so and i'll consider Science not to be the answer.

And what do you mean Science is not what created life? As far as I know it did, and you're not exactly convincing me otherwise. Try doing so and i'll consider Science not to be the answer.

Science didn't create life. Science is a TOOL to figure out how life was made. A lot of people get that misconception quite often, so it's not all that surprising that you may have gotten confused by it. It's very similar to how scientists get accused of wanting to disprove the existence of God and other things supernatural. They're merely attempting to figure out HOW it happened, not prove anyone right or wrong or to flex their ego.

But, yeah, like I said. Science is a tool to figure out something, just like how you use a ruler to measure distance, or the scale in your bathroom to see how much you weigh.

Actually, I don't think I was clear enough on that.

Science seeks to discover how things work, and how they operate.

For instance: Biology is a science that seeks to DISCOVER how life works, and how its pieced together: all the skni pigments, little bacteria that exists inside you, brain-cells, DNA, all that shit. Mathematics and variables as you said before are just a way of keeping track of the vast amount of those variables that are involved in studying the subject.

Understand now?

I get it Alucroas. I just don't understand the last paragraph.

For instance: Biology is a science that seeks to DISCOVER how life works, and how its pieced together: all the skni pigments, little bacteria that exists inside you, brain-cells, DNA, all that shit. Mathematics and variables as you said before are just a way of keeping track of the vast amount of those variables that are involved in studying the subject.

You sort of lost me there. I think it' sgreat that we don't know how we've come to be, well what's funny is we all came out of a womb but what we're trying to figure out is how WE came to be. What the real question is, how did the first HUMANS come to be. I guess everyone knows that except me, but what I mean is..well there's a lot of ideas. Maybe animals, I mean we do have the bone structure and what not of Monkeys correct? What if we came from monkeys, animals were he first ones here after all. Well, technically the ice age then dino stage and then etc. But, the ice age had mammoths and saber tooths and even ice men. I believe in Ice Men at least...there's a lot of ways we couldhave actually come into existence.

But then how was creatures born from the ice age? Well, i'm thinking that when the earth had actually frozen that there must have been some kind of life, tiny tiny organisims that adapted to our ecosystems at the time and evolved. It's sounds really simple yet at the same time it's like kind of complex and all.

So what you really are getting at Kyouko is the whole naturalism vs teleological arguement, right? Or to put the matters simply, you are asking "Did humans come from the slow gradual process of evolution (science explanation), or were humans created by a supernatural Diety(ies) (religious explanation)?"

Is that what you are really trying to ask?

Flawed premise presupposes that these two are opposites and/or cannot coexist. And, as has been pointed out, science is that which attempts to discover how things work, it is a methodology and a body of knowledge. Religion is a set of beliefs linked by common rites and traditions.

However, determining what fundamentally led to the existence of life is a rather silly question, for its discovery inherently seems beyond the scope of human understanding, particularly because confirmation of any such theories is generally impossible. We can, however, make attempts to prove what has lead organisms to their current states of life, but to consider what created it is beyond our capabilities.

Defiently Religion more specifically Christianity. T ome it makes more sense that a large supernatural power created us than science.

Before we argue philosophy, we should address the obvious problems that stem from Kyouko's improper choice of wording.

Science is, like Alucroas said, a tool. And like most human tools, or a least those of the abstract nature, which is not to say that Science is completely abstract, science is an idea created and defined by humans. While that may hold true for all things, I'm implying that Science is a concept and tool, and not a theory or explanation of something that happened. (i.e., the difference between theory and concept, even through both are conceptual. Confusing, eh?)

Science didn't create life, it explained the secular mechanisms believed to create life.

Religion didn't create life, but the beliefs and organizations falling under the umbrella of the term religion have their own ideas about the origins of life. Asking if religion, without any degree of specification, has the right explanation is also a bad idea, since there are thousands of different views on the that issue. And not everyone is going to assume Christianity when you say religion; that in itself is a uniquely European and American thing, IIRC.

Also, "made by" implies that the concepts of science and religion were responsible for life, rather than asking whether the scientific, or the religious, explanation of the origins of life was right (which is what I assumed you actually meant.)

In a nutshell: work on your wording.

SEE: Creationism vs. Evolution, which idea do you support, and why?

You guys should really watch Psyche-geist, or however it's spelled. Man, that'll piss off so many goddamn Religious believers, because it basically completely dismantles how people came to associate certain things like the sun with their Gods, how Jesus was a blatant rip-off of Horus, by looking at the time-line.

Anyway, don't expect me to back up any of the video's theories, because that's not my job, and I probably wouldn't be able to do it anyway.

Science is the explanation of how we came to be here. Religion is the explanation of why we are here. I'm Createvolutionism. As in, I believe God created the universe and such, but evolution is very much real and it's how humans came to be. Maybe God was all like 'Oh. Hey. Congrats, you're sentient.' and he made humans his chosen species. I don't know. None of us can really know. Just as we don't have proof of evolution (Though we have staggering amounts of evidence.) because we weren't THERE. We didn't experience it. Whether it's science or religion, it's still a matter of faith.

Science has been created - science if there only to discover and run various..testing backed by a multitude of facts that are clearly seen if one would only look.

I do not believe science is why life exists, nor do I believe religion had anything to do with the concept because religion is just a mass-gathering of multiple people who have otherwise biased opinions on certain views.

However, I believe there was a series of events that may or may not have been led by some higher power, or force that...allowed these occurances to fall into place accordingly.

Religions such as Christianity explain that there is a God, and prophets and such that created life and humanity in seven days, along with all that is today; born from some biblical garden. Now, isn't that straight out, stupidity?

Neither science NOR religion created that of which is. Whatever there is, or whomever there is that created existance is far beyond human comprehension, no matter the ammount of time and analysis put into discovering such a vast, mysterious topic.

Though...Throughout science there has been what many believe are facts about how we came to be, everything from the Big Bang to evolution from primitive lifeforms. But, in religion people have attempted to back up the story of life differently. That's exactly what it is though - a story!

Now stop trying to discover this, it will get you nowhere.