BornAgainBrian
The Honourable Schoolboy
- Dec 23, 2014
- 1,134
- 22
- 41
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I guess you didn't learn science in science class.
The accusation I make is adhering to a system which eliminates the possibility that anything supernatural, even if present and existent, cannot be proven, and then require that anyone use that system to prove such.
That is, as i said several times now, entirely about the grounds on which the ideas are proposed.
You can't challenge a scientifïc evidence based theory with relgious faith based assertions. How hard is it to understand?
Consider challenging the scientifc explanation of thunder with religious assertions about a certain viking god and his hammer.
When and if you understand why that will fall on deaf ears, try to understand why the fundi theist 'challenges' to biology are in the exact same boat.
You challenge established science with better science. Not with religious assertions.
Tough? It would be tough to disbelieve something like that, since it means you have absolute assurance that there is zero evidence anywhere in the universe to point to a deity. That's what atheism is. Sound reasonable? Not to me.
How do you differentiate what exists from what doesn't exist, if not through objective evidence?
I would encourage you to engage anyone on this board, how your own posts relate to you understanding how science works.
Straw man.
How so, or is that just something you throw in there sometimes?
A straw man is a common type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument.[1] To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument.
I asked you to engage anyone on the board as to how your posts relate to you understanding how science works.
You changed my original statement = straw man
If there are holes in an established scientific theory, how come nobody is willing to publish anything for peer review?I'm fully aware that proponents think there is enough evidence. That goes without saying. There are countless objections, holes in the theory, which go ignored by the scientific community constantly, and those who raise objections are soon ousted from ever doing anything in the realm of science again. This sounds decisively cultish to me.
If there are holes in an established scientific theory, how come nobody is willing to publish anything for peer review?
Ken
Anybody can publish something for peer review! If you found flaws in (for example) evolution; you could publish it and if nobody is able to find flaws in your findings, you would become rich and famous as the man who dispelled Evolution! How do you think abiogenesis got discredited?I imagine nobody is able to make it that far in the process for the incredible bias.
Anybody can publish something for peer review! If you found flaws in (for example) evolution; you could publish it and if nobody is able to find flaws in your findings, you would become rich and famous as the man who dispelled Evolution! How do you think abiogenesis got discredited?
Ken
People in the West now no longer believe the Bible. This is true of the general public and also true of modern Christianity where there seems to be a great loss of faith in regards to the trustworthiness of the Scriptures. Why do you believe this is the case?
Tough? It would be tough to disbelieve something like that, since it means you have absolute assurance that there is zero evidence anywhere in the universe to point to a deity. That's what atheism is. Sound reasonable? Not to me.
So what if someone brought that up. If science is really as open minded as it claims, it would give the Thor theorist a chance to test, to research.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?