Science has revealed Religion for the scam that it is. Finally, we can begin to achieve all the things that conartist Jesus promised the world and never delivered. We can heal the sick with antibiotics, cure the blind with cybernetics, turn water into fuel, feed 5,000 with 3D printed bread, calm a storm with HAARP weather modification, and reach Heaven with rockets. We will do it all on our own and WITHOUT any fake god's help or his braindead followers.
And believe me, every God-believer will RUN to Science to solve all their problems when their prayers inevitably fail and God doesn't show up.
Sick? Better use Science's medicine.
Need to power a drill? Better use Science's electricity.
Need to cook a quick meal? Better use Science's microwave oven.
Need to send a quick letter across the world? Better use Science's computer chips to send an email.
Undeniable proof science is a god to a certain discernment of atheists. You give science, which is just understanding and manipulation of the physical world agency. "Science" heals. "Science" gives us food. "Science" takes us to the heavens. Nevermind that science is a set of actions which has no intelligence or agency of its own.
Our greatest achievement will be the conquering of sin once and for all through genetic engineering. We will attain the free will that God never gave us. We will be more rational, more self-preserving, more life-affirming, more powerful.
>Our greatest achievement will be the conquering of sin once and for all through genetic engineering.
I get where you're coming from and where you're going with, but theologically this is a terrible idea. Angels become irredeemable with just one sin because they have no bodies, and therefore are fully aware and in control of their actions. Humans can be forgiven for sin since our bodies act as filters and affect our choices, meaning that while we have a degree of free will, it is not "absolute" free will. If you attain that free will unprepared, you will turn into a demon.
There is no free will. The only reason we desire free will is to satisfy our desires. Re-wiring our deterministic bodies to better attain our true, rational desires is effectively equivalent to free will. For example, a Christian would have much better control over his temptations, and would never sin, if he truly believes in God.
>There is no free will.
Incorrect.
>The only reason we desire free will is to satisfy our desires.
You're not thinking of desire as desire. There's a difference between what we believe is good for us and what we truly want from the bottom of our hearts. They don't mix together. They constantly fight.
>Re-wiring our deterministic bodies to better attain our true, rational desires is effectively equivalent to free will.
That's the opposite of free will. You're taking away the choice instead of making it yourself. I understand and have wanted to do such a thing myself, but it's not a genuine solution.
This is the problem with your primitive illusions. You think failure equals freedom. You don’t make choices, you simply follow your greatest desires. But sometimes what we desire in the moment is not what we rationally believe to be best for us. But keep this so-called “free will” that you have. I assure you, you will be replaced.
>You think failure equals freedom.
I think freedom from is just as important as freedom of, but by mutilating yourself you're basically taking the easy route, which always has a catch.
>But sometimes what we desire in the moment is not what we rationally believe to be best for us.
That's exactly what I was saying. Maybe you should work on reading comprehension.
>But keep this so-called “free will” that you have. I assure you, you will be replaced.
By whom? Without the ability to sin, you either won't be able to think of replacing me or won't be allowed to.
You will be replaced by the superhumans. It’s inevitable
Superhumans will either be hyperautistic domestic workers whose purpose in life is to be the big dick in office or Nietzche's retarded children who will endlessly kill each other out of their own sociopathy. Pass.
We’ll see
but if they have flaws, then they will be improved or replaced by something better. Simple
See, this is the problem with how science is treated. The excuse is always "well, we'll just improve science and replace what we have with something better". Meanwhile, parts of the earth are polluted beyond fixing, we are in the middle of the biggest extinction since 10.000 years ago, there are microplastics in our bloodstream and we are under constant survailance of computer algorithms. This is what it leads to. You can't just say "oh, we'll fix it later if there's flaws".
How do you objectively reckon what is or isn't a "flaw"
A flaw is subjective, you dunce.
That which does not survive, of course
Survival is not a good enough metric. A post-human needs to function well within society and not be destructive. Consequently, no one in their right mind would design a Nietzchean post-human whose biggest goal will be to destroy old values and bring about his own. Any post-human will either be a normal human with better adaptibility to the environment, or engineered slave that can't even fathom not obeying preset morality.
The breeds will be created on multiple planets until the point where they are virtually aliens compared to each other. Survival of the fittest
Non-sequitor, and you haven't addressed any of the points.
You’re worried that it won’t be designed well. But that’s determined by natural selection. Our monkey ancestors probably dislike several things about us
Anon, this has nothing to do with monkey brains. This has to do with using "science" as an excuse to be completely irresponsible and ignorant of consequences this can cause.
bullshit
most of what you call 'sins' is either innocuous or actually beneficial to the individual
fuck you and fuck your morality for slaves
Anon, no rule is made arbitrarily (well, maybe some are, but those are the minority). Rules of a culture/religion are either passed down from a divine source (making them objective), or made because a thing/behavior caused some sort of chaos or destruction in the past. You can pick either, but no matter what, the concept of sin has its origins in reality.
>no rule is made arbitrarily
false
> Rules of a culture/religion are either passed down from a divine source
they aren't and no "divine source" was ever proven to exist
>because a thing/behavior caused some sort of chaos or destruction in the past
also false and never demonstrated
your god is a lie made up by the elitis to control people and offer explanations for things they didn't understood
Fuck you religion and fuck your "morality"
We’ll see about that. Everything is a competition and genetic engineering will only increase the demand for higher individuals. Every little imperfection will be erased.
Excessive faith in science is wrong too
instead, scienctists are now telling us that there are hundreds of genders
>and reach Heaven with rockets. We will do it all on our own and WITHOUT any fake god's help or his braindead followers.
Lol
>Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun (23 March 1912 – 16 June 1977) was a German-American aerospace engineer[3] and space architect. He was a member of the Nazi Party and Allgemeine SS, as well as the leading figure in the development of rocket technology in Nazi Germany and a pioneer of rocket and space technology in the United States.[4]
>After the surrender, Wernher von Braun spoke to the press:
>We knew that we had created a new means of warfare, and the question as to what nation, to what victorious nation we were willing to entrust this brainchild of ours was a moral decision more than anything else. We wanted to see the world spared another conflict such as Germany had just been through, and we felt that only by surrendering such a weapon to people who are guided not by the laws of materialism but by Christianity and humanity could such an assurance to the world be best secured.[73]
>He publicly spoke and wrote about the complementarity of science and religion, the afterlife of the soul, and his belief in God.[108][109] He stated, "Through science man strives to learn more of the mysteries of creation. Through religion he seeks to know the Creator."[110]
>Before Armstrong and Aldrin stepped out of the lunar module on July 20, 1969, Aldrin unstowed a small plastic container of wine and some bread. He had brought them to the moon from Webster Presbyterian church near Houston, where he was an elder. Aldrin had received permission from the Presbyterian church's general assembly to administer it to himself. In his book Magnificent Desolation he shares the message he then radioed to Nasa: "I would like to request a few moments of silence … and to invite each person listening in, wherever and whomever they may be, to pause for a moment and contemplate the events of the past few hours, and to give thanks in his or her own way."
>He then ate and drank the elements. The surreal ceremony is described in an article by Aldrin in a 1970 copy of Guideposts magazine: "I poured the wine into the chalice our church had given me. In the one-sixth gravity of the moon the wine curled slowly and gracefully up the side of the cup. It was interesting to think that the very first liquid ever poured on the moon, and the first food eaten there, were communion elements."
>Apollo 8 was the first crewed spacecraft to leave low Earth orbit and the first to reach the Moon, orbit it, and return.[1][2][3]
>On Christmas Eve, December 24, 1968, in the most watched television broadcast at the time,[1][2] the crew of Apollo 8 read from the Book of Genesis as they orbited the Moon.
>John Herschel Glenn Jr. (July 18, 1921 – December 8, 2016) was a United States Marine Corps aviator, engineer, astronaut, businessman, and politician. He was the first American to orbit the Earth, circling it three times in 1962.
>Glenn was an ordained elder of the Presbyterian Church.[225] His religious faith began before he became an astronaut, and was reinforced after he traveled in space. "To look out at this kind of creation and not believe in God is to me impossible," said Glenn after his second (and final) space voyage.[226]
>Thomas Joseph O'Malley (October 15, 1915 – November 6, 2009), better known as T. J. O'Malley, was an Irish-American aerospace engineer who, as chief test conductor for the Convair division of General Dynamics, was responsible for pushing the button on February 20, 1962 launching the Mercury-Atlas 6 space flight carrying astronaut John Glenn, the first American in orbit.[1][2
>O'Malley made the Sign of the Cross,[5] and said, "Good Lord ride all the way", just before backup astronaut Scott Carpenter, also seated in the blockhouse, made his iconic remark, "Godspeed, John Glenn!"[7] As the countdown clock reached zero, the Mercury-Atlas rocket lifted off at 9:47 a.m. EST, carrying the first American astronaut into orbit.[6]
It was still accomplished through engineering and physics, not through god or religion
a few religious people involved in the project is meaningless
Again, you're assigning agency to engineering and physics as if it was some idol god with a sentience. Science, engineering and physics just entail understanding of the material world, which does not require some Godless discernment.
>you're assigning agency to engineering and physics
No, I treating them as fields of knowledge and tools that enabled those great feats
>entail understanding of the material world,
the only world we have any evidence for
>which does not require some Godless discernment.
Also don't necessitates any believe in god, because god is irrelevant
The problem with that kind of discernment is 1) the belief that our filters (senses, brain) are objective and 2) science and religion are some sort of dichotomical division of which you can only choose one, rather than different filters.
>The problem with that kind of discernment is 1) the belief that our filters (senses, brain) are objective
Science is literally based on correcting this by using tools and methods to independently verify things people sense and feel to be true to false.
That criticism is absolutely better applied to the religious and superstitious
>things people sense and feel to be true to false.
And that's the problem. Human feels and senses are not enough. Not even close. Our eyes can lie. Our ears can lie. Our skin can lie. And this is well documented as well.
cope
Pathetic
Useful idiots.
lost midwit
You're mistaking me for someone else; I'm not religious.
Yet everybody today is sick, depressed and miserable. How, hooray science.
Daily LULZ scientism post, little does he know that he is just as bad as the religious fags he roasts.
I will never not enjoy watching dumbasses try and demonize deference to a tool of objective measurement.
You might as well be mocking craftsmen for using rulers, measuring tape and lasers.
Terminal peasant brain.
Believing that science can explain everything, and it's all powerful, and that everything can be counted and measured is almost the same as a blind belief in a religion.
There are an awful lot of things about this universe that we are yet to understand. From a totally unbiased point of view saying that X is a fruit of entropy, bilions of years of chaos and chance until it became itself or saying that God created it sounds equally absurd.
You will trust ze science! You will get lobotomized and sterilized! You will sacrifice your children (for science)! You will trans the kids! You will not reproduce! You will import 3rd world Muslims! Bigot!!!