- Jun 23, 2011
- 18,910
- 3,646
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Constitution
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...thy-and-bigfoot-less-mammograms-and-war-more/
Please feel free to discuss!
Please feel free to discuss!
Seeing as this is a Christian Apologetics forum, can you cite something from the article that you feel is topical?http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...thy-and-bigfoot-less-mammograms-and-war-more/
Please feel free to discuss!
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...thy-and-bigfoot-less-mammograms-and-war-more/
Please feel free to discuss!
Seeing as this is a Christian Apologetics forum, can you cite something from the article that you feel is topical?
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...thy-and-bigfoot-less-mammograms-and-war-more/
Please feel free to discuss!
In my recent exchanges with MoJ, he was struggling with the concept of falsifiability. I can only hypothesis that he came across an article that alluded to a "problem" with theories that aren’t falsifiable, and posted it here to see if it gained any traction.I honestly just see a lot of whining in this article. Skeptics don't cover the journalist's pet issues to his satisfaction, therefore problem! I don't get the impression that he has really proven anything about skeptic movements other than that he's unhappy with them.
eudaimonia,
Mark
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...thy-and-bigfoot-less-mammograms-and-war-more/
Please feel free to discuss!
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...thy-and-bigfoot-less-mammograms-and-war-more/
Please feel free to discuss!