Belief in God is scientific.

Yup, that's how the fallacy works.
[and very successfully too]

Yip, tomorrow night again. I hope and believe that I'm going to win it; along with 40 million others having the same thoughts for and about themselves.Chances are it won't be won at all.Edited by Pressie, : Changed whole reply

I may trust in what my doctor say, but couldn't say they will always be right, regardless how much they have studied they are still people and have biases and prejudices.Of course experience helps in accuracy, not argument against thisBut when it comes to evolutionary or any issue relating distant past I become very skeptic as many things (like origin of life) cannot be reproduced by experiment an so leave space for biased conclusions of the researcher according to his/her own mindsets. science may be very accurate, but is still practiced by subjective people You are happy to 'believe' what you were taught. You are not the only one who believes things, everybody does, but many don't want to recognize that they consider something to be true as long as they believe in it, rather than have a real evidence to support their theories

That is a conclusion rather based on the biases of the evolutionists, that's all it is Romans 5: 12-15{5:12} Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the
world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men,
for that all have sinned: {5:13} (For until the law sin was in
the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
{5:14} Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses,
even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of
Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to
come. {5:15} But not as the offence, so also [is] the free
gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much
more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by
one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. So, nothing of God in Jesus, was just a human and only a human?The second story in Genesis is not meant to be a sequence of events in the order they happened, like the first. There's not contradiction

Like I said, you reserve your scientific scepticism for evolutionary theory - now be honest, the ONLY reason you do that is because it contradicts a religious belief that you have isn't it? I am happy to 'believe' what I am taught when it is standard and settled science and I'm being told it by someone that I have a reason to trust. If I am in any doubt, what is being taught can be checked by looking at the evidence for myself [which I have done, have you?].That's why it's called science; it's backed by evidence.random quote:

I'm sorry but thee is so much wrong in your post that it is just laughable and simply makes God look stupid and Jesus just a farce, but absolutely none of it is on topic for this thread, but I would be happy to educate you in appropriate threads.But Evolution is not based on biases but honesty.Your quotemine from Romans has nothing to do with either Adam or Eve and no where in it is Adsam of Eve mentioned.And yes, if there was any god to Jesus while he was here on Earth then the whole story is a worthless sham and farce.Start threads and I will gladly teach you.

Of course the belief in a flat earth at the center of the universe did come from religious belief, not science, but the scientific method weeded out those bad hypotheses. The belief in God was never based on the scientific method so there was never any possibility of correcting it through science. Galileo's ghost is eager to hear your list.

Usually from neither. It came from "common sense". The people who persecuted Galileo did not any of them believe that the Earth was flat.

The people don't matter so long as the science is "very accurate". Roses don't smell any the worse for having been grown in manure.

Well, how about we start with the photon?

Nearly mate but a photon has no mass therefore it isn't present in any of the matter within the universe.

Unless it is written by a goathearder from 500 BC who claims to speak for a deity, then you swallow it whole without even looking at the evidence. 29+ evidences for evolution:29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common DescentThere is mountains of evidence supporting the theory of evolution.

Nope, based on the evidence as cited in the post above.

Right.However... we also know that when people use their brains, they generally get things wrong.
As I said in Message 101.You need to program your brain correctly in order to use it correctly to be confident that your results are right.
If you program your brain using other methods... then your brain only gives unreliable results.Science is a strict method of programming our brains in order to confidently lead us to correct results.
Belief is a different method of programming our brains that leads us to unreliable results."Belief in God is scientific" is a Belief (obviously). Therefore, it uses the method of programming our brains that leads us to unreliable results.
Therefore, the statement is unreliable. The idea that belief is a good way to accurately gain knowledge about the supernatural.
That is also wrong.
So is your idea that because 80% of the population believes in God, then God exists.They are wrong ideas because they use belief to lead to the answer. That makes the answer unreliable.
They are wrong ideas because science has been used to test the answers. And science has shown that the answers are unreliable (inconclusive at best, but likely wrong).Nobody cares about unreliable ideas. Why should they?

If there weren't any gauge bosons then the universe would be a lot simpler. But less like the universe.