Bible IS SCIENCE, exposing misnamed 'science' today

[Tone]

Scientific beliefs are evidence based by definition. If your belief is not evidence based it cannot be scientific.

What does a belief that is not evidence based even look like? Hypotheses are based on imagination, and what can be imagined outside of what already exists...who conjures up something completely unheard of. Everything you could imagine has to be a spin off of something existing...so,in this way,there is evidence...especially when we form dogmas around it, that will make it so.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What does a belief that is not evidence based even look like? Hypotheses are based on imagination, and what can be imagined outside of what already exists...who conjures up something completely unheard of. Everything you could imagine has to be a spin off of something existing...so,in this way,there is evidence...especially when we form dogmas around it, that will make it so.

I like to use the term "reliable evidence" and for an example look at your own beliefs.

And no, hypotheses are not "based on imagination". Clearly you do not understand the scientific method. Perhaps we should discuss that first.

Lastly dogma is you sin. That is not a sin of science. The way to "fame and fortune" in the sciences is to show an error in a current theory. That does not happen very often at all these days.

 

[Tone]

I like to use the term "reliable evidence" and for an example look at your own beliefs.

And no, hypotheses are not "based on imagination". Clearly you do not understand the scientific method. Perhaps we should discuss that first.

Lastly dogma is you sin. That is not a sin of science. The way to "fame and fortune" in the sciences is to show an error in a current theory. That does not happen very often at all these days.

Which paradigm?

*Well then I've been doing science my whole life, as I've tested the validity of the Bible, as well as, thousands upon thousands of others, with negative results.

 

[Tone]

The way to "fame and fortune" in the sciences is to show an error in a current theory.

Falsifiability is relatively new to science.


"The concept was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper. He saw falsifiability as the logical part and the cornerstone of his scientific epistemology, which sets the limits of scientific inquiry. He proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable are unscientific. Declaring an unfalsifiable theory to be scientific would then be pseudoscience.[5]"
Falsifiability - Wikipedia

 

[Subduction Zone]

Which paradigm?

*Well then I've been doing science my whole life, as I've tested the validity of the Bible, as well as, thousands upon thousands of others, with negative results.

I seriously doubt your claim about testing the Bible. Christians generally do not know how to run proper tests.

And any accepted paradigm that is overturned would make a scientist famous. The problem is that once a paradigm is well established it is usually correct.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Falsifiability is relatively new to science.


"The concept was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper. He saw falsifiability as the logical part and the cornerstone of his scientific epistemology, which sets the limits of scientific inquiry. He proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable are unscientific. Declaring an unfalsifiable theory to be scientific would then be pseudoscience.[5]"
Falsifiability - Wikipedia

Yes, science not only has a method of self correction. That method has improved over the years.

 

[dad]

Scientific beliefs are evidence based by definition. If your belief is not evidence based it cannot be scientific.

You know you have not been able to show evidence for origin issues.

Scientific beliefs are evidence based by definition. If your belief is not evidence based it cannot be scientific.

My belief is 1000 times more evidenced than your. So there.

 

[dad]

We don't have to "prove" anything ourselves

What religion has to prove anything to it's own believers?

because they have data and make it available for people to check out.

I checked it out and it is belief based.

Also science doesn't prove anything and there's no such thing as scientific proof.

Why would there be proof for a false religion??

 

[Subduction Zone]

You know you have not been able to show evidence for origin issues.

My belief is 1000 times more evidenced than your. So there.

Dad, that is a falsehood.

And if you have evidence then why can't you post any? I seriously that you do not understand the concept.

You appear to have no reliable evidence at all. Would you like to learn what is and what is not evidence?

 

[Subduction Zone]

What religion has to prove anything to it's own believers?
I checked it out and it is belief based.
Why would there be proof for a false religion??

Dad, the fact that you do not understand evidence does not mean that there is not any.

 

[dad]

To the poster who likes yapping endlessly about evidence for his religion without ever providing any, please cease and desist trolling here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

To the poster who likes yapping endlessly about evidence for his religion without ever providing any, please cease and desist trolling here.

Since I offer to help you to understand the nature of evidence and you run away this post could obviously not be about me.

Are you ready to learn yet or do you still have your running shoes on?

To claim that I have not provided evidence would be a lie, and I am sure that you do not want to do that. I have provided evidence. You either did not understand it or you ran away. That is why I realized that to give you any more evidence is pointless until you learn what evidence is. Running away from a reasonable offer indicates that you know that you are wrong.

 

[dad]

Since I offer to help you to understand the nature of evidence and you run away this post could obviously not be about me.

Are you ready to learn yet or do you still have your running shoes on?

To claim that I have not provided evidence would be a lie, and I am sure that you do not want to do that. I have provided evidence. You either did not understand it or you ran away. That is why I realized that to give you any more evidence is pointless until you learn what evidence is. Running away from a reasonable offer indicates that you know that you are wrong.

Anyone reading your post can see what was produced.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Anyone reading your post can see what was produced.

They can see you running away from a reasonable offer. To see the evidence given they would have to go quite a few posts back because you have been running for some time now.

 

[Tone]

Ha. I believe that technology/science would free man of life itself unless Jesus were to return and rescue us.

Very true, thank you "scientific method", for the atom bomb...


*Real science should result in propagation of life...not its destruction.

 

[dad]

Very true, thank you "scientific method", for the atom bomb...


*Real science should result in propagation of life...not it destruction.

True, science has given us death and death potential in many many ways. Funny how disciples of so called science tend to deny all culpability for the bad in the tree of science, but seek glory for the good also. We should realize that the fruits of a tree tell us what sort of tree it is.

 

[dad]

To see the evidence given they would have to go quite a few posts back because you have been running for some time now.

Post #??? Haha

 

[Subduction Zone]

Post #??? Haha

Find it yourself. Until you stop running away from my reasonable offer you will get nothing from me.

Seriously, learning what is and what is not evidence can only make you a better debater. Instead of losing all of the time you might win a debate or two.

 

[Tone]

True, science has given us death and death potential in many many ways. Funny how disciples of so called science tend to deny all culpability for the bad in the tree of science, but seek glory for the good also. We should realize that the fruits of a tree tell us what sort of tree it is.

Whoa...I never thought of it like that tree...

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Very true, thank you "scientific method", for the atom bomb...

*Real science should result in propagation of life...not it destruction.

Science gave us the information. Technology, controlled by business and politics, gave us the implementation.

In theory, we could have safe nuclear power and no atom bombs.