SCIENCE & RELIGION

• Religion and Science:

  What most people tend to forget without religion we would not have science. The first literature humanity read were the Book of Gods. And the main foundation of science, which people tend to forget, is Islam. With Islam you start to learn about the Cosmo's, we get medical improvements and we learn more about our purpose. For example, Why does Allah (God) talk about the bee and emphasis the importance of the bees in the Quran? Later in the 20th century we find out that we need Bees to pollen ate our flowers and plants in order for the world to work, without the Bees how would the natural world work.     http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-science-and-religion-coexist http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-science-and-religion-coexist    

• Science without Religion is lame; Religion without Science is blind"

  The key to GROWTH, which is the goal (or should be the goal) of both, Science and Religion, is OPENNESS. To discount either Faith or Science is closing the door on a possibility...And answers can not be found unless doors are unlocked, and opened.
  However, it is difficult to receive information without a bias. There is so much, including how we communicate, that distorts the truth behind the "clues" we are presented with.
  Those who advocate science and shun religion, communicate a strong message to discount other possibilities, and vice versa for those who advocate religion and shun science.
  
  Those on the "No" side, argue that Science is always questioning and Religion/Faith claims certainty, which is a completely invalid argument as not everyone who practices either Science or Faith practices it the same exact way. If Religion claims ultimate certainty while Science does not, then those who are Religious/Believers would not practice Science...And yet a lot do. The issue is the way in which Faiths are communicated to others and how they are received by others.
  
  In addition, there are just as many "Scientists" as there are Religious folk who claim something to be "impossible".
  
  The issue is EGO, not the subjects themselves. I don't see much of a difference between the two, besides the way that our society portrays each. When it comes down to it, both focus on that there is a bigger picture...Much bigger than us, and that, BOTH take FAITH to practice and learn from/about. Scientific discoveries most certainly can NOT be done without some sort of blind faith (in an idea).
•  http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-science-and-religion-coexi