So the ole “Argument of authority” huh? The idea that because someone else knows more than you know, you are to accept what they say without question? One of the things that helped drive me away from theism to become an atheist was this Argument of authority; the fact that it is in the bible, I was supposed to accept it no matter how absurd it sounded to me. They used to say “ God said it, I believe it, and that settles it!”Indeed. That is why people quote experts. So they don't have to explain all the details since most people recognize that experts likely have a better understanding of the subject then they do.
No! I left those intellectual chains behind when I left theism; I’ll be darned if I allow scientific claims to stifle my ability to question the way religious claims used to; as an atheist I would think you would know better than this! C’mon bruh get with the program! As Atheists we are allowed to question EVERYTHING! Even scientific experts; otherwise it's just another religion.
They are expected to explain their claims to laymen, other experts, and anyone else who wants to know; why do you think they publish their findings for peer review? And speaking of peer review, do you know how many peer reviewed scientific theories have been published by experts only to be falsified by other experts in the field and are no longer considered theories? It is foolish to blindly take a self proclaimed expert at his word without question; as an atheist I would think you would be better than that!This is a new and interesting definition of "empty claim". Apparently experts are now required to explain their knowledge to laymen in order to be believed. This is going to play hell with quantum physics.
If all light contain photons, logic tells you that red lights possess it as well.How many times do I have to point out the definitions are descriptive, not prescriptive. The definition of red light is
They don't mention photons so obviously red light is not made up of photons.
Since you believe it is, please explain HOW gender (as now defined) is based in biology.No you did not ask me to define it. You stated the biological underpinnings does not mean based on biology.
If he published something for peer review, I can look that up myself! I don’t need to contact him.I'm going to go out on a limb and, using the definition of "underpinnings" , say that he means gender is based on biology.
However you can feel free to ask him when you inform him that he is required to provide you peer reviewed studies and a full explanation of his understanding prior to your accepting that he might know what he is talking about.
Upvote
0