religion is non sense, science is religion

Pro said: "i'm talking about religion, religion is non sense" Not to be offensive, and this will probably take away from my overall behavior during this debate, but your argument is non-sense. Pro said: "you dont know the text on your screen? :)" Just pointing out pro's lack of grammar. Pro said: "religion=to rely on, while self is one" The definition of religion says nothing about relying on something, but rather believing in something. You don't have to rely on something to believe in it, so this makes this statement false. I have no have no idea what "while self is one" Is supposed to mean, so I'll just skip over it. Pro said: "belief is non sense, how do you prove to some one that you believe in them? im talking to the point where they know you are not lying" Belief is non-sense...? Does that mean that your argument is non-sense? Belief is actually not non-sense, because if you believe that belief is nonsense, then that belief is non-sense. Phew, that sounds odd. Pro basically says here that anything you think is true isn't. ","how do you prove to some one that you believe in them?.." How do you prove to someone that you don't believe in them? You tell them! It's that simple. It's their choice to believe you or not. Pro said: "religion=theism+atheism=belief+disbelief=love+hate" (Another one of these statements?) Is it me or does Pro have a tendency to make pseudo algebraic equations with variables that don't mix? If love + hate = disbelief, then why does the definition of disbelief not say that? Wait, did you just make up your own definition of disbelief? This is a fallacy and therefore irrelevant to proving that religion is non-sense. (http://dictionary.reference.com...) Pro said: "do i make sense if i talk about love?" Maybe someone else would, but not you. Pro said: "its possible, but possibilities are false, and absolutes are true, its true that possibilites are false, as possibility has 2 sides, positive and negative for it to exist" Wait, possibilities are false? Ever heard ofSchrödinger's cat? There are two possibilities, and neither of them are false until you open the box. (http://news.nationalgeographic.com...) This means that it's false that possibilities are false. Possibilities also do not need to be positive or negative, as there can be an infinite number of outcomes. I.E. Quantum vacuum. Pro said: "belief is doubt" Funny how every single definition of the word belief has nothing to do with doubt. In fact, doubt is an Antonym for belief. Which means that belief isn't doubt. http://www.thesaurus.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com... Pro said: "equations are either true or false, not about truth, past is impossible" I don't even know what point pro's trying to make. Pro said: "if you dont know wheather i just took a hard drug or not, is it then true that it is a fact?" Last time I checked, this debate was about religion, not "Hard drugs". Again, there are two possibilities that are true until proven wrong. Pro said: "fact=knowledge=truth" Pro said something I agree with! But, according to him it's nonsense, as he believes in this, and belief is non-sense. Also, this has nothing to do with the debate. Explain how science is religion please. Pro said: "science is a religion because it relies on confirmation from machines, science is the religion of mechanical technology" Science has nothing to do with machines, what?! Science has existed before machines, ever heard of fire? Discovering fire was done without the help of machines! Science is the religion of mechanical technology? Unfortunately, machines do not and can not believe in anything at the moment. Science can't rely on machinery, as it is a process, not a procedure. Humans rely on machines to understand science, not the other way around. We don't need machines to do science. We only need our brain. (Someone could claim our brain is a machine, but our brain isn't mechanical technology. Pro said: "the speedometer in my car is only so accurate, i still need my senses to drive or to know the speedometer broke on the way home" .....I don't even have a clue as to what Pro is going for right now. This is irrelevant. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ So, is science a religion? No! It's impossible. Science is a process, not a belief. Can you believe in science, yes. Can you believe in a certain presidential candidate? Yes. Does that mean it's a religion? No.. It doesn't...I wait for next round to refute Con's poorly organised argument yet again.