Technology-oriented religions are coming

[Newest Reality]

13. Okay,

So, if I present a picture of a notable Nazi scientist would that then equate science with evil? That's what I mean.

What do you think of the science that brought us nuclear weapons that decimated the civilian population of two Japanese cities, i.e., all the men, women, children, babies and animals within the blast zone, and then horribly sickened and killed thousands who died horrible, painful deaths from radiation poisoning?

Just from an ethical perspective, no religion that I know of has ever been able to have the impact on an entire planet at one time. They could not destroy most of civilization with the push of a few buttons. They didn't produce technologies that have managed to severely effect the climate systems of the earth, pollute the air and water and oceans with byproducts of the modern technological advances, (as per engineering and industry, et al).

I value logic reason and science as a method. However, does the gravity of the above make it true that the sciences have brought us to the Anthropocene era in a short period of time, a 6th mass extinction that could end most life on the planet in a geologically short period of time mean that science and reason are evil, bad or wrong?

Do you take that as valid support that science is evil and destructive, when we both know that science is a methodology and who uses it and how is more to the point?

I don't think so. Maybe so more specificity and historical context is due?

This is what I mean. The way you are presenting it is a false equivalence. I don't have to deny atrocities that have occurred in history to refute your assertion. However, "especially" is a bit better, but still not accurate. Religion in the past does not equate with the way it is misused for political and other purposes today. In fact, it was just an aspect of various cultures and, in some cases, the distinctions or categories we use are imputed on them, (the Vedas, for example).

I could go on...