pitabread
Well-Known Member
- Jan 29, 2017
- 12,920
- 13,372
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Private
Then by your own admission, not mine, it really is just something you believe to be, or may have been as in the case of macroevolution, and is based only on your particular testing method (including fallibilities) and personal conclusion, which can differ from others.
We could play a semantics game back and forth about this (this all comes down to what you think a "belief" is). But that's really besides the point.
My original question to you was about how hypotheses related to past events can be scientifically tested. Can you answer that? You said you would attempt it.
Or are you just looking for a reason to reject scientific conclusions you don't like (e.g. labeling conclusions from scientific testing as just a "belief" and then categorically rejecting them)?
Upvote
0