0
In short it's not. The odds of the exact sperm and egg combination that made you 1 in 1e+27. The odds that your parents meeting and making a baby 1 in 3,000,000,000. The odds of all there parents meeting and the exact sperm and egg combinations matching up for 4,000,000,000 years is an estimated 1 in 1e+347. The odds of earth being perfectly capable of supporting live are astronomically small. Pardon the pun. Factor in that you could have been a frog, some fungus or a pineapple. What is consciousness anyway? There more to existence then can be quantified.
Wiki User
∙ 7y ago
Wiki User
∙ 7y agoIt is not. It can offer arguments for or against God's existence, but it cannot conclusively prove them.
For example, many people think that science, and specifically Evolution, have proved that there is no God. They don't comprehend that even if Evolution was an unquestionable fact, it would not automatically follow that God isn't there. They also may be unaware that there are some highly-qualified scientists who do not believe in Evolution.
See also:
Is there evidence against Evolution?
Wiki User
∙ 7y agoScience does not set out to prove religion wrong. When people begin to realise that much of what is taught by religions (such as creation or a worldwide flood) can not be true, it only means that what is taught is wrong. It still remains for the faithful to decide for themselves whether to continue to believe in the tenets of religion.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What are the release dates for Lonelygirl15 - 2006 Proving Science Wrong--- with Lonelybeast and Danielgirl15 1-15?
Lonelygirl15 - 2006 Proving Science Wrong--- with Lonelybeast and Danielgirl15 1-15 was released on: USA: 26 July 2006
What is the dialog between religion and science?
Religion and science, at least in the absolute sense(where it is assumed that having religious believes is a form of non-education) are incompatible. Religion offers certainty where none exists, science finds new ways to prove itself wrong.
What did Einstein mean by science without religion is lame religion without science is blind?
well, why don't you take a minute and think about it. Science is constantly proving religion wrong and it gives science an underlying purpose to keep moving forward with its work in every category while religion is constantly revising its interpretations of an apparently flawless book. While at the same time religion needs science because it does actually explain how some of the "miracles" could have occured if the people in the stories were the thinking kind of people who could predict wind patterns and sun locations. In short, they need each other I have a slightly different take on this subject. With regards to the first half of the statement, "science without religion is lame", I equate the statement to mean that science would be uninspiring and dull without religion. I infer this interpretation because of another of his quotes, "We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality." The second part of of the statement, "religion without science is blind", may be paraphrased as theories or attitudes held by people or organizations can go off in the wrong direction if not subjected to a structured and systematic study. Just my 2 cents.
What created more animosity between science and religion for the church?
Science forms theories, the church lies when they are proven wrong. Pretty simple.
Which is more helpful proving a hypothises wrong or supporting a hypothisis?
Proving a hypothesis wrong is more helpful because then you know what is incorrect for next time or someone else.
Is religion more powerful science?
Religion is not a science.
How are science and religion related?
Science and religion both seek to explain the world around us, but they operate in different ways. Science uses evidence and experimentation to understand the natural world, while religion often involves faith and belief in the supernatural. Some people find that science and religion can complement each other, while others see them as fundamentally incompatible. Ultimately, how they are related depends on individual perspectives and interpretations.
What are the release dates for Lonelygirl15 - 2006 Proving Bree Wrong 1-145?
Lonelygirl15 - 2006 Proving Bree Wrong 1-145 was released on: USA: 4 March 2007
Is science or religion the stronger ideology?
Science is not, and should not be, an ideology, because the purpose of science is to discover and apply provable facts. Since religion really is an idealogy but science is not, religion wins.On the other hand, pseudo-science, which is the use of plausible, scientific-sounding but unprovable claims, often in the service of religion, could be considered an ideology. However, the claims of pseudo-science are readily dismissed, so it is not a strong ideology.supplement. Importantly, science is prepared to be wrong and to incorporate new ideas. And to seriously question concepts that do not fit comfortably with the main body of expert opinion.
What does disprove mean?
Although disproving might be seen to be "not proving" it actually "means proving to be false"
What has the author R C Wallace written?
R. C. Wallace has written: 'Science and religion' -- subject(s): Religion and science 'Religion, science and the modern world' -- subject(s): Religion and science
Are there Scientific proofs in religions?
== == Religion is all about faith, whilst science is a branch of overall knowledge for mankind. Religion is about belief whilst science emphasises more on knowledge-seeking. However religion is something that cannot be proven - right or wrong and true of false. Religion & Science at times may not be compatible or can run parallel to one another. Just as science cannot prove religion, it goes without saying religion cannot empirically prove anything on science. However, for believers science is part of religion, and NOT vice versa. ---- Thus, there is no way to prove the truth of any religion scientifically. All religions are equally based on faith alone, and which one you choose to follow, if you choose to follow a religion at all, is simply a matter of faith. Religion is the source of all knowledge of the world. Religion is for our spiritual ascension while science is for our physical ascension in this world. Both the disciplines are necessary for the successful physical as well as eternal life. Both are distinct in themselves and hence cannot be compared at any instance. Science cannot reach the spiritual zenith of religion and Religion cannot bow down to the levels to justify the theories of Science. "RELIGION BEGINS WHERE OUR INTELLECT ENDS". The things for which we could reason out automatically becomes 'science' for us. And the things which are beyond the reach of our intellect and power of reasoning automatically becomes 'religion' for us. Science is the vast ground and Religion is the unending sky. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
