Darwinism is a Pseudo-Science

[HitchSlap]

Is it knowledge if no one stumbles onto the island?

Still is.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Still is.

Still is what?

 

[HitchSlap]

Still is what?

Knowledge...

 

[Oncedeceived]

Knowledge...

I agree.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes, I agree. Yet, there are those elements that are unable to be falsified that still could be true, do you not agree?

Sure, that is where faith beliefs come in, because it isn't objective.

 

[HitchSlap]

I agree.

Then you would also agree that faith is not required to believe it exists.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Then you would also agree that faith is not required to believe it exists.

Knowledge? I am not trying to be obtuse but I am not sure if that is what you meant.

 

[Smidlee]

Then you would also agree that faith is not required to believe it exists.

Hmmmm...

 

[Loudmouth]

Is it knowledge if no one stumbles onto the island?

Of course it is, because the knowledge can be demonstrated to other people.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Of course it is, because the knowledge can be demonstrated to other people.

There are millions of other people besides me that have the knowledge that God exists. So the knowledge of God is demonstrated to people the only difference is that it is God who does the demonstrating.

 

[Loudmouth]

There are millions of other people besides me that have the knowledge that God exists.

Then they should be able to demonstrate that God exists. Where is that demonstration?

 

[bhsmte]

There are millions of other people besides me that have the knowledge that God exists. So the knowledge of God is demonstrated to people the only difference is that it is God who does the demonstrating.

That's cool, in those people's minds, God is demonstrating to them personally. I can understand that.

Now, if this knowledge, can not be verified and or demonstrated in an objective way to others, it goes back to how that individual perceives what they call knowledge.

It would be like Einstein stating; I understand relativity and how the theory works, but sorry, I can't really demonstrate it in a way where others can see the theory is objective or the theory works in reality. But, believe me, it works.

 

[Oncedeceived]

That's cool, in those people's minds, God is demonstrating to them personally. I can understand that.

Now, if this knowledge, can not be verified and or demonstrated in an objective way to others, it goes back to how that individual perceives what they call knowledge.

It would be like Einstein stating; I understand relativity and how the theory works, but sorry, I can't really demonstrate it in a way where others can see the theory is objective or the theory works in reality. But, believe me, it works.

You are equating knowledge with Science. Not everything we know is through scientific exploration or methodology. The knowledge that each of us hold is not due in a major way to Scientific methodology. We have things we believe and we have things we know and there is a difference between the two and we "know" the difference.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Then they should be able to demonstrate that God exists. Where is that demonstration?

Read my post to bhsmte.

 

[bhsmte]

You are equating knowledge with Science. Not everything we know is through scientific exploration or methodology. The knowledge that each of us hold is not due in a major way to Scientific methodology. We have things we believe and we have things we know and there is a difference between the two and we "know" the difference.

No, I am equating what some claim to be personal knowledge, with whether it coincides with what can be demonstrated as reality, in an objective way to others.

If it can't be demonstrated in an objective way and verified, that it remains personal experience, personal knowledge, whatever you want to call it.

 

[Loudmouth]

You are equating knowledge with Science.

We are equating knowledge with objective and verifiable facts.

Not everything we know is through scientific exploration or methodology.

Then show us an objective and verifiable fact that was not discovered by the scientific method.

The knowledge that each of us hold is not due in a major way to Scientific methodology. We have things we believe and we have things we know and there is a difference between the two and we "know" the difference.

Beliefs are not knowledge.

 

[HitchSlap]

There are millions of other people besides me that have the knowledge that God exists. So the knowledge of God is demonstrated to people the only difference is that it is God who does the demonstrating.

Incorrect. There are "millions of other people besides" you, that believe god/s exist. You shouldn't conflate belief with knowledge, as knowledge is something that can be demonstrated.

I hope you are able to recognize the fallacy in your statement.

 

[Oncedeceived]

No, I am equating what some claim to be personal knowledge, with whether it coincides with what can be demonstrated as reality, in an objective way to others.

If it can't be demonstrated in an objective way and verified, that it remains personal experience, personal knowledge, whatever you want to call it.

I can live with that, as long as you do understand that people hold knowledge that others may well not have but it is knowledge and not just belief.

 

[Loudmouth]

I can live with that, as long as you do understand that people hold knowledge that others may well not have but it is knowledge and not just belief.

If it was knowledge, they could demonstrate it to be true.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Incorrect. There are "millions of other people besides" you, that believe god/s exist. You shouldn't conflate belief with knowledge, as knowledge is something that can be demonstrated.

I hope you are able to recognize the fallacy in your statement.

You shouldn't reduce knowledge to belief.

There are those who believe but do not know that God exists and there are those that know that God exists. There is a difference.

Tell me what is a food item that you really love and one that you really hate and wouldn't eat unless you were dying of starvation?