Gh0st_Note- Gh0st_Note-

Science and God (One and the same?)

▼

Science and God (One and the same?)

from Stardock Forums

Has it ever occured to anyone that, over the course of history, humans often come to the conclusion that anything that cannot be explained at the moment is automatically considered to be supernatural? For example, the Greeks. They had a god for just about anything that they could not explain with their means of science or technology at the time. How else could they explain the torrent of fire and molten lava that spwes out of a volcano? By claiming that Hephasteus is simply working in his forge of course.

But fast forward to today. And we know that isn't the case. The advent of computers, automobiles, airplanes, etc etc etc, would simply astound the Ancient Greeks. They would consider us gods. They would be unable to speak out of pure awe.

And since science is never ending in the sense that, with each question answered, more questions are formed... we still do not have a logical explanation for God. That being that supposedly judges us from afar, and moves through us all.

Think about it though... what if we just haven't reached the technological threshold to explain it yet?

It could be possible, that "God" is nothing more than a wave that interacts with our matter. Influencing our decisions with maybe electrical impulses or something similar. Religion is making "god" more important than it really is. With the advent of more powerful technology, we may be able to see what it is that moves through us all. More than likely, it is just another force of nature. It justs exists. It is there, always has been. But it is not a being, it is not something to worship... it is just not something we can understand. YET.

Basically, what I am trying to say is, we humans have proven over time that with the advent of better technology we can understand the ways of nature around us. So what's to stop us from unlocking the secrets of the universe? As well as explaining what "god" really is? We just can't comprehend it yet... but we will in time I think. Just like we did with volcanoes, oceans, telephones, airplanes, etc etc etc.

Religion is powerful in many ways no doubt. It helps certain people get through rough times, and to them, it explains the way things are as well giving them a code of ethics that they can follow. But religion is also on a way ticket to being obsolete. If science can bridge the gap between the two, what now?

Now just so everyone knows, I am not trying to attack anyones beliefs, I am merely wondering outloud if the above could be the case. I would also like to hear what other people have to say. Please be open-minded, and rational.

I will explain in better detail some ideas that I have heard as well some of my own if a great dialogue can be established.

off-topic
3,847,563 views 1,151 replies
Reply #526 from WinCustomize Forums Top

aargh....looks like the end of this thread....;p

Reply #527 from Sins Forums Top

It's the will of Landru...

+1 Loading…
Start11 - Customize the Start Menu and Taskbar in Windows 10/11.
Reply #528 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Please do not use any form of word processor.

Just the Forum thread Reply text entry ONLY.

Reply #529 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

I blame the accursed Browser Wars. HTML was supposed to be a STANDARD. I'm no fundamentalist when it comes to cosmology, but network standards are another thing entirely.

Reply #530 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting RiddleKing, reply 498
No matter how advanced human civilization becomes or no matter how evolved it will be a million years from now we will still be unable to explain or prove the existence of god let alone explain why we exist in the first place and the existence of the universe. 

 

The current state of religions is as follows:


God created man and everything else..
Some religions say us westerners made up dinosaurs and they never existed..
We are the center of the universe...
All none believers- even if they do good deeds in any religion either remain on earth or go to hell when they die..
We are the only living sentient beings in the universe..
Both major religions have killed each other in the name of god..
God sanctions violence if its for the greater good they say and they'll go to heaven after committing it..
The good and the bad exist in today's religions. 

 
The problem starts with the human brain trying to explain things it couldn't possibly comprehend. It twists religion back and forth to do its own bidding. A more highly intelligent species of human would still face the same problems as today: murder, chaos, negative emotions. We are both intelligent and emotional and that will remain true 500 years from now.

Its because of these pros and weaknesses that we create a cultural and religious drive to try perfect ourselves. We strive for a peaceful existance but some of us use religion to create violence and war. This is why people question the existence of god. Its because we are not perfect- so how can we be sure that we have the perfect formula to explain gods existence... 

 
 
End of RiddleKing's quote

Well, you can say whatever you want to say that Religion is bad. But I tell you, that religion influence most of our morale value, ethic, tradition, and law. It help to shape the world we know today, whatever it good or bad. The problem of most religion we have is that it was created by people who lived more than 1000 years ago. So, because it was created before 1000 AD, it's paradigm is the paradigm of that era. That's why, today religion tend to avoid some of their holy book contents. (like what we witness in old testament where the prophet Elia told the king of Israel to kill all their enemy, and not spare their life).

The problem of some religion men / women today is that they stuck to the paradigm of ancient era. Like, they don't eat pork, can have 4 wives,  believe that earth is flat, and the non existence of dinosaurs.

But to tell you, that religion is not God. The existence of God is different to the teaching of religion. Yes, Religion tell us about God, and make us to believe in God's existence. But, IF God is an entity, and not a concept, then you can't blame God for the fault of religion believers in the world. I think, because even if all the people in the world become Atheist, God is still exist. So, I believe that religion is a science, or teaching, not the God itself.

The problem is... Atheist people believe that God is a concept. So if the Religion people believe that God is an entity and not a concept, why should defend the existence of God? You are trapped in a thinking that God is a concept, and not an entity.

Reply #531 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Fuzzy, reply 525
Needs a Mod to fix it.
End of Fuzzy's quote

 

People who copy texts to explain themselves and their religion are the most dangerous of sorts to encounter because they can't explain themselves with their own words. Their slaves to something they cant question.

Reply #532 from Elemental Forums Top

But it's such a nice story. It's got an angel in it, and he hates commies too!

Reply #533 from WinCustomize Forums Top

God did not create Man, Man created God.

It is easy to look around and ask 'where did all this come from?', and because you don't have an answer, you say some all powerful being created it. God is a convenience to explain away all the things you do not understand.

Man is such an arrogant species he cannot admit he doesn't know things.

So, what about the creation of the universe? The most enlightened and intelligent thing to do is to admit you don't know. We as a species do not yet possess the knowledge or intelligence to be able to understand the simplest concepts about the origin of the universe.

If we do not accept this 'revelation', we will remain forever in the dark ages.

Reply #534 from JoeUser Forums Top

Nice to see things looking normal again. 

Quoting lulapilgrim, reply 514
Experimental science cannot prove the existence of God anymore than it can analyse faith, hope or charity! 

You mention the atom, molecule, mitochondria or bacteria, and I'm thinking of the new found complexites of the cell  that the discoveries of natural scientists lead more and more to the realization of the existence of a Creative Power. Scientific research and development keep continually adding to the number of mysteries in creation that can only be accounted for by belief in an Intelligent Designer, whom we call God.

 
End of lulapilgrim's quote

Quoting Satrhan, reply 521
First of all, you are contradicting yourself here. At first you say that experimental science cannot prove the existence of god, and then you say that the discovered complexity of things we find is proof there is a god.
End of Satrhan's quote

There is no contradiction. 

I said experimental science for a reason. 

God as He is in Himself is pure Spirit, immaterial, if you will, and experimental science deals with material things, Right? Experimental science abstracts from the spiritual field altogether is what I meant.  

Science is concerned with man's understanding of matter and the behavior of matter. God exists beyond the scope of scientific experimentation, however.....

Quoting Satrhan, reply 521
And second, to say that scientist are finding things that point toward the existence of a creator is just not true.
End of Satrhan's quote

It’s true. 

The irreducible complexity of the cell implies some higher power (God) designed it. Empirical science can, by deduction, shed light on the existence of an Intelligent Design. The existence of coded information impressed upon matter provides a clue to the presence of an Intelligent Designer, God. The fantastic complexity and orderliness of the DNA code condensed into an incredibly tiny size suggests the work of a brilliant Intellect, rather than random chance processes.

 

Quoting Satrhan, reply 521

Calling theology a science is a giant misnomer. Just look at the first line in the wikipedia page about science: "Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe." Note the underlined 'testable explanations' something which you yourself have said is not possible. At best it is a historical study, with some philosophical influences. It mainly comes down to a lot of 'he said...', 'she said...', 'yes but he meant...', etc... It is just the study of how someone in the past explained the parts of the world he didn't understand, building on how someone before him explained the more numerous parts of the world he didn't understand, in turn building on how someone before him who.. et cetera, all the way back to the dawn of humanity.
End of Satrhan's quote

We can agree to disagree on whether or not Theology is a branch of science. 

Theology is certainly a branch of learning that involves a methodical investigation, presupposes Christian Faith. All the other sciences integrate into theology, the science of the mysteries of God and his relations with man and the universe revealed in and through history. 

One of the hallmarks of Catholic theology  is that God’s existence can be known with certainty apart from the influence of Divine Revelation, oral or written. This is the science part. 


Quoting Satrhan, reply 521
Science like religion begins with mysteries, truths that are not and never will be fully understood. Electricity is an example.
End of Satrhan's quote

Quoting Satrhan, reply 521
Are you claiming we don't understand how electricity works?
End of Satrhan's quote

No, not at all. 

From science we understand how electricity works and we go ahead developing the uses for it for sure.  I’m claiming we don’t understand what electricity is in substance. That is still a mystery. Same thing with energy. While we know and understand and use many forms of energy, we still don’t know what energy is.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply #535 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting ChungasRevenge, reply 481
oh please drop the philosophy 101 - who made the watchmaker? Why should there be a watchmaker? It is futile proving or disproving gods. All you can conclude is that given the evidence it highly unlikely that there is a god or gods. Afterall you don't presumably believe in Thor, Loki and Zeus why not take it one step further?
End of ChungasRevenge's quote

Are you really asking, "Who made God?"

We must begin to answer by separating the Creator from the created creature. If God were made, then He would be a contingent, a dependent creature. He would be a composite being, made up of parts subject to decomposition, death and therefore not a pure Spirit as is God.

God told us Hmself that He is the "I AM WHO AM". In other words, God has no past or future, He is Eternal Being and therfore without a beginning or an end.

I've just discussed that God's existence can be proved in many ways, but the simplest is known as the argument from design. Not only must a watch come from a watchmaker, but every part of it must have had a designer who knew how to make it. The cosmos  and all that's in it, including life, is full of design, infinitely more wonderful than the watch. That is undeniable.

Obviously, then, the cosmos and all that's in it, including life must have had a designer with tremendous intelligence. Matter itself is designed. Not only the cosmos but the matter of which the cosmos is made must have had a Designer, Another word for designer of matter, is Creator God. 

Catholics look at God to be the First Cause. The first is first, and we cannot logically and rationally ask, if the first is first, who made the first?

If there were such an impossible thing as the casue of the First Cause, it would not be the First Cause. Asking Who made God is as far fetched as asking who made water wet or what makes a circle round, how high is up.

God is a Self-Existent, Spiritual Being, the "I AM WHO AM," the Causeless Cause, the Maker of the made.

.......................

Here's another story. 

The whole universe can be compared to a giant Erector set in which the atoms are various parts. They can be fitted together to make all the countless substances useful to man. Matter didn't exist forever; it was created and the Creator is called God.

The story is told of a famous astronomer who was being visited by an evolutionist scientist friend who claimed to be an atheist. The latter was admiring the working model of the solar-system that stood upon a table; by turning the handle the planets could be made to revolve in their respective orbits around the sun.

"Very ingenious indeed," he remarked. "Who made it?" 

"Oh, nobody particular."

"Tell me, I want to know--who made it?"

"Nobody made it...it just happened--it made itself."

The scientist realized he was being taught a lesson and became annoyed.

"You're trying to be funny," he said.

"How silly you are" exclaimed the astronomer. "you can't believe that this little model made itself, and yet, you believe that the real sun, and moon and earth, planets, and stars, and everything else, in the vast universe just came into existence without any Maker!" 

 

 

 

  

 

Reply #537 from JoeUser Forums Top

Lula, better hit the science books again, you seem to be falling behind. While there, you might want to review “evolution” too.You may not know what electricity or energy is (hahaha) but that is only because it isn’t described in minute detail in your book of books like the rest of our world history hehehe, is all. You like to use the term “fully understood” as if it means anything … it doesn’t in the context you are trying to use it in. Maybe you could explain why there are over a thousand different sects of Christianity … is that a result of the bible being “fully understood”, I think not. “We can agree to disagree on whether or not Theology is a branch of science.” No we can’t, sorry. Theology has nothing at all to do with science (yikes, enemies) and it doesn’t matter one iota how you feel about it, hahaha. “Irreducible complexity” is a term used by “Intelligent Design” aficionados who are trying to revive “Creationism” after the Christians bungled that one too much to salvage. Lula, if you are trying to prove something is true … all you have to do is tell the truth. Continued use of words like “implies” (suggests), “by deduction” (assumption), “a clue” (hint) and “tiny size” (small) are not very useful to your cause. Obviously the school board agrees with me too … so I am not the problem. Name just one scientific conclusion that even suggests that any of your mystical nonsense is real … just ONE?

Reply #538 from JoeUser Forums Top

DrJBHL … I liked that definition! “How to create a whole bunch of cool stuff out of nothing” without the use of magic or mysticism … all in one sentence, hahaha. I had to cross out a couple of words though, sorry.

Atheism defined: The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing  and the nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense, hahaha

Reply #539 from Stardock Forums Top

Lula, better hit the science books again, you seem to be falling behind.
End of quote

While there, you might want to review “evolution” too.
End of quote

Thanks for your advice however, no need...

I think Dr. JBHL did a good job.

http://wallbase.cc/wallpaper/1191017
End of quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Satrhan reply 521 Are you claiming we don't understand how electricity works?
End of quote

No, not at all. From science we understand how electricity works and we go ahead developing the uses for it for sure. I’m claiming we don’t understand what electricity is in substance. That is still a mystery. Same thing with energy. While we know and understand and use many forms of energy, we still don’t know what energy is.
End of quote

Lula, better hit the science books again, you seem to be falling behind. ....You may not know what electricity or energy is (hahaha) but that is only because it isn’t described in minute detail in your book of books like the rest of our world history hehehe, is all. You like to use the term “fully understood” as if it means anything … it doesn’t in the context you are trying to use it in.
End of quote

I admit I (we) don't know what electricity or energy is, period.....but, apparently you think you (we) do! So, here's your chance...What exactly is electricity and energy?

 

-------------------------

Maybe you could explain why there are over a thousand different sects of Christianity … is that a result of the bible being “fully understood”, I think not.
End of quote

First, there is but one Christianity.

There was/is but one Church and one holy religion (Christianity) up until 1517 when the Protestant religion and sects were established. Those thousands of Protestant sects were established not because they "fully understood" the Holy Bible, but rather because they misunderstood the true meaning of the Holy Bible.

-------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply #540 from Elemental Forums Top

I can see there's no arguing with you lulapilgrim. You believe in a god, you want to see god in everything, and surprise surprise, you do. Even while trying to convince us you're right, you just show how wrong you are. Like your definition of theology:

Theology is certainly a branch of learning that involves a methodical investigation, presupposes Christian Faith. All the other sciences integrate into theology, the science of the mysteries of God and his relations with man and the universe revealed in and through history.
End of quote

Like you say, it presupposes christian faith. Your whole argument is circular; you start with belief in god, then you integrate science with that belief, and then use that 'science' to prove what you started with; there is a god.

And you don't only need to take a lesson in science, history isn't your strong suit either. There where lots of christian sects, at least until the first council of Nicaea, where they decided on what the 'official' bible should be, and made sure it fit with the belief that Christ was the son of god. Something that was not believed by all christians at the time.

Also, you might want to take a look at Gnosticism, a large branch of christianity that survived untill somewhere in the middle ages. Your beloved catholic church brutally suppressed this branch, killing thousands.

Reply #541 from JoeUser Forums Top

Electricity: Well if you really want to discuss this (hahaha), you should prepare yourself by learning some terminology and concepts that are probably not in the Bible, sorry. Try these for starters: Electrical phenomena in nature, Basic electric circuits, basic electromagnetism, electric potentials, electric fields, electric currents, and electric charges. You also might want to brush up on your nuclear science as in atomic structure, molecules, electrons, protons, neutrons for starters there. Then we can talk electricity after all you said “I admit I (we) don't know what electricity or energy is, period”. So what are we going to talk about here until you read up some??? This is a good starting place foe energy too but it is complicated if for no other reason there are quite a lot of varieties of it. Chemical energy, cellular energy, nuclear energy, electrical energy, stellar energy with a wide variety of types, thermal energy, and if one is religious, there is also instant energy. Where do you want to start without the foggiest idea huh? If you want to discuss this topic further … take it to one of my posts please.

“First, there is but one Christianity.” Another side step I see: Half the Christians in the world are of the RCC … the other half of the Christians are not Catholics. I think the other half (exceptions) preaches God’s love (FTMP) and the RCC teaches God’s hate (FTMP) … polar opposites, your logic is frightening.  Protestants and their sects are your problem and not mine because I don’t care about it. It is amazing though that everyone ELSE (and I do mean EVERYONE) is only capable of misunderstanding the Bible except for Lula or the RCC, go figure. Maybe it is something they put in their bread offerings hahaha. I was wrong (benefit to you) … there are 38,000 Christian denominations around the world … and you avoided this issue in the usual manor, hehehe.

Reply #542 from Sins Forums Top

I know this is a waste of breath--but it really irks me to see the intellectual dog pile with name calling, insults to intelligence and the like all attacking and self-congratulating one another while agreeing with each other's points.

There is religion--it's usually anthropomorphized and full of errors or strictures that originate as much in human psychology as anything.  No disagreement there.

A large number of people take the "simplest path"--do what you're told, believe what's said, keep your head down and don't ask questions.  Yeah--happens everywhere.

A lot of sincere (and even many insincere) people have taken up public battles in areas off science and nature that they aren't really qualified to argue in and often are completely unconcerned with any facts that disagree with them.  Human nature--happens everywhere.

I can't speak for other "religions".  I don't practice them though I have studied some and spent time speaking with members of them.  There's everything from simple people like the Quakers to UFO cults.  I don't lump them all together because I'm not stupid and intellectually dishonest enough to dismiss the thousands of ideas and philosophies as all being "stupid if they aren't mine" nor do I think all their followers and adherents are dangerous, ignorant people who are a blight on humanity.  They are humanity.

I had experiences with what I can only describe as God.  If he turns out to be a quantum-transcendent expression of the collective human id--it beats anything I have seen any individual come up with.  If it turns out to be an advanced alien race from another dimension (or this one) interacting in man's history--fine by me.

I know the character and nature of what I have dealt with and it reflects everything I have read in the Bible--human influence and inaccuracies allowed for--that is positive and praiseworthy and transcendent.  In my case, this influence and presence has been unequivocally identified in my mind as Jesus.  Don't expect a skeptic to agree with that and understand you have to rationalize my views so they don't trouble yours.

It can still be done respectively.

The bottom line is this--you can argue religion until the cows come home, you can spout internet collected pseudoscience and quite your favorite Christophobic scientific lecturer and you can find the stupidest and most offensive representatives of people claiming to have a faith and use them as a "proof" of your arguments but in the end if you can't discuss and address the experiences that led people to believe they have had an encounter with Christ, you can't really measure them.

Nothing new here--it's exactly where Jesus said the disagreement would be--those who hate and revile, mock and ridicule and see such belief as foolish stupidity...and those who have had the experience and have no choice but to accept it.

Don't believe?  Fine.  It just means you haven't had the experience and have no idea what it actually is.  Nothing more than that.

 

+1 Loading…
Reply #543 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sinperium, hello again! As you didn’t single out anyone I thought I would chime in. What are likeminded people supposed to chat about … what ails them or what doesn’t? In either case, it will disparage the believers. I don’t know of any requirement to give someone the benefit of the doubt (to anyone) … just because they believe in something and especially when they admit they cannot prove any of it at all. As I said before, I could care less what Christians, Muslims, Jews or whatever else, believes in or practices. I just don’t believe in them … no more than I do Thor, Odin, the Easter bunny, the flying purple people eater or the devil. My main issue with all religions is just keeping them away from our children in the public schools.

Quoting Sinperium, reply 542
The bottom line is this--you can argue religion until the cows come home, you can spout internet collected pseudoscience and quite your favorite Christo-phobic scientific lecturer and you can find the stupidest and most offensive representatives of people claiming to have a faith and use them as a "proof" of your arguments but in the end if you can't discuss and address the experiences that led people to believe they have had an encounter with Christ, you can't really measure them.
End of Sinperium's quote
My-oh –my, hit a sore spot did we, hehehe. If you honestly believe science is pseudo-science and the bible contains nothing but the truth … God help you but more power to you ... whatever. What’s wrong with the this part of the internet anyway? How many lies have you uncovered therein I wonder? You try to make this sound one sided as usual. We don’t believe in your mysticism and are therefore the bad guys … and you don’t believe in our science and we are still the bad guys. This just sounds like more of your circular logic to me is all. What possible need is there to seek out a faithful idiot when any devout Christian will do nicely? I don’t know of one Christian who expressed this view at all on their miraculous revelations as most seem to have inherited their Christianity from their parent’s insistence. No reason not to discuss it … but if it concerns mysticism, why bother and if it doesn’t then it isn’t a religious experience at all. What’s there to chat about?
Nothing new here--it's exactly where Jesus said the disagreement would be--those who hate and revile, mock and ridicule and see such belief as foolish stupidity...and those who have had the experience and have no choice but to accept it.
End of quote
Is there any other place this argument could take place?  At least try to be reasonable. But I will note it is normally the (maleficent) Christian folk who interject most of the hate … just look at your sentence above. Inquiring minds want to know and hate is usually all you guys talk about. That and how you haven’t been given an honest chance to present your case … how many more thousand years do you need might I ask to get a fair shake?

Reply #544 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Speaking for myself I find that I can not answer one really important question.   That question is with each day that passes, and it's been well over thousands of years, are we moving further away from or closer to reality?  It even seems at times that we just are stuck in place making no headway at all.  :S

Reply #545 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Nothing began.

Nothing will end.

Nothing.

Reply #546 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Satrhan, reply 540
Also, you might want to take a look at Gnosticism, a large branch of Christianity that survived until somewhere in the Middle Ages. Your beloved catholic church brutally suppressed this branch, killing thousands.
End of Satrhan's quote
You can get away with teasing Lula ... but you better be careful if you try slamming the RCC, hahaha. Lula is not looking for anything because she believes she knows well ... everything there is to know. Most normal people have little problems expressing their limitations based on their education, experience, fields of expertise and the prevailing scientific accomplishments. But devout Christians can rip off the complete history of the cosmos down to a grain of sand ... without cracking a science book. They can also give you the complete history of all living things from the dawn of (both) times (another hard point)... without cracking a biology or chemistry book, hahaha. And as far as Lula's RCC is concerned, they are the only ones capable of understanding God, intuitively only they know God's true meanings and purpose, they think they are the only ones who can know God's will and they have self-empowered themselves to convert the world to Catholicism (only) no matter other views and beliefs ... how are you going to fight that, besides laugh at the silliness like I do, hahaha.

Philly0381, except for religion … we are making giant leaps and bounds in the sciences and other rational things.

Reply #547 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting BoobzTwo, reply 546
Philly0381, except for religion … we are making giant leaps and bounds in the sciences and other rational things.
End of BoobzTwo's quote

Really, and would that be closer to or farther away from reality?   *_*

Reply #548 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Sinperium, reply 542
I know this is a waste of breath--but it really irks me to see the intellectual dog pile with name calling, insults to intelligence and the like all attacking and self-congratulating one another while agreeing with each other's points.
End of Sinperium's quote

Just a reminder to all....

WHEN a thread devolves into name-calling, etc. it closes.

One certainty in life [after death and taxes] is that ALL 'religion' threads close.

Reply #549 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 548



Quoting Sinperium,
reply 542
I know this is a waste of breath--but it really irks me to see the intellectual dog pile with name calling, insults to intelligence and the like all attacking and self-congratulating one another while agreeing with each other's points.


Just a reminder to all....

WHEN a thread devolves into name-calling, etc. it closes.

One certainty in life [after death and taxes] is that ALL 'religion' threads close.
End of Jafo's quote
word

Reply #550 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting neone6, reply 549
word
End of neone6's quote

From the Book of Dictionary....

"In the beginning was the Word,

And the word was Aardvark".