Quote Originally Posted by truthpaste View Post
Here is your god 'science' addressing the issue:-

The biological relationship between the heart and the brain
The heart pumps blood. It is needed for survival. The heart does not have components that manifest as thinking but it does show strong changes to emotions, but it can’t itself feel. The brain/mind allows us to think, feel, and act using many systems of neurons that work together. The brain/mind creates emotions and thoughts. We also know that the brain guides the functioning of every other organ, including the heart. Organs respond to each other and work together. They are in a feedback loop.

The heart has about 40,000 neurites (projections from a neuron’s cell body) of its own – commonly called “the little brain[1],” which is also recently 3-D mapped[2]. They monitor and adjust the heart’s functions and send signals back to the brain[3], which indirectly influences perception and decision-making. There are theories that these neurites also participate in habit-style learning and memory. In comparison to the neurites in the brain (100 billion neurons with 50-60 neurites each), 40,000 is almost zero, but not zero.

Emotions cause changes in heart rate[4], and have a unique “cardiac profile” for common emotions. Sadness increases blood pressure and resistance in the circulatory system but reduces the amount of blood pumped. Fear and joy increase systolic blood pressure. Anger increases blood output and diastolic blood pressure. Generally, emotions change 4 very important properties of the cardiovascular system: Blood pressure, heart rate variability, vascular resistance, and heart output. This is why relaxation exercises work – we can consciously control how the heart works to a small extent using emotions.

Changes in heart rate due to non-psychological reasons[5] like food, diet, organ regulation, disease, etc., affect our emotions too. In fact, the James-Lange theory of emotion (re-interpreted with new findings) states that emotions are labeled in the brain after physiological changes. And those changes then affect our perception, which again changes the body’s response. For example, a sudden change in heart rate might cause a person to worry, and then anxious thoughts coming from detecting worrisome information can further increase heart rate after that.

But the relationship between the 2 is more complicated.[6] The medulla oblongata, a part of the brainstem, is one of the most primitive regions of the brain, and it controls automatic processes like heartbeat and breathing. Damage to this area can slowly degrade breathing and heart function. In neurodegenerative disorders like ALS, Parkinson’s, and Alzheimer’s, neurons in that area can die or malfunction and eventually lead to death by cardiac arrest.

More physiological changes like physical ticking, facial expressions, pupil dilation, sweating, changes in voice, etc., indicate emotional states. That’s why the idea that emotions are physical also seems accurate in everyday scenarios. We have evolved to experience the mental aspect of emotions along with physical changes. Our sympathetic nervous system and parasympathetic nervous system connect emotions and physical changes. This association is so strong that it continuously reinforces the connection between the heart and emotion. We don’t experience one without the other. Physical changes make emotions tangible and observable to others, too. That is why we can gain some insight into other people’s emotional states by observing their physical states – especially, the heart – the speed of pumping, heaviness, and chest movement.

These observations show the heart is closely tied to emotions at a physical level, but the labeling of emotion occurs in the brain. So, using the word “heart” to represent emotions is quite natural and logical.
You have this weird spin about the word 'science'. It's not a belief system like religion. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Religion (yours anyway): Things written by anonymous people millenia ago writing stories (often contradictory) that often appeared in previous religions and by people who were not witnesses to the event.
Science: The most renowned and respected scientists attach their names to papers they write and provide as much evidence as they can for their peers to review.

Religion: Set in stone. God's word and 'he' is the unarguable authority. 100% true. Can't be modified.
Science: A process of trying to ascertain an understanding of the world and the universe by trial and error. Even the best scientists make mistakes and make wrong assumptions but progress seems to be made in the main. Hence the ability to destroy some cancers, enable space travel and vaccinate against diseease that were once more prevalent. No-one is the ultimate authority. Theories modify and change as more information becomes available. Not knowing something is not a problem for most thinking scientists or members of the public.

Religion Scientists throughout history have been vilified, killed and tortured for espousing theories that were contrary to the teachings of the church. Offers a reward for its believers and punishment for those who are non-believers.
Science Punishment and reward are absent.

Religion Describes non-believers as lesser people in that they are heretics, blasphemers, infidels, apostates and not going to the Christian heaven. Hugely divisive and a contributory factor to wars and conflict as a result.
Science N/A

Religion: Comes up with no evidence that seems pass a test that will satisfy the average person with analytical skills and who wasn't brought up in the religion.
Science: Findings are shared, tests can be made by others around the world and there's no monopoly on the findings (whether they stand up to later informationreceived or not)

If you equate science with your religion you are being rather ridiculous. Science, with its shortfalls due to our imperfect knowledge, is the complete antithesis of religion.