Science IS religion

[Dan From Smithville]

Funny, i was going to say that you sure post a lot, but none of it is worth reading.

Or really even responding to. I'm just doing it for entertainment.

You know in the alerts where it shows someone has posted and says "There may be more posts after this". In some cases it should say "There will be many more posts exactly like this one to follow"

 

[Darkstorn]

You know in the alerts where it shows someone has posted and says "There may be more posts after this". In some cases it should say "There will be many more posts exactly like this one to follow"

Haha. Yeah. I was typing most of my posts in this thread on my phone, which is really, really slow. At some point i started ignoring that message, since i got about 3 of them every time i typed anything. And surprise, it's just dad repeating the same ****.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Haha. Yeah. I was typing most of my posts in this thread on my phone, which is really, really slow. At some point i started ignoring that message, since i got about 3 of them every time i typed anything. And surprise, it's just dad repeating the same ****.

It might be useful if there were some associated qualification describing the post as well as alerting that one has been made. All like posts could be batch-processed.

 

[dad]

Science does not always come out with naturalistic explanations because it has been hijacked by atheists.

Who says it did? Furthermore who cares why they invent godless bible opposing fables? It is what it is.

It does it, because methodological naturalism is one of its characterizing rules.

God is not physical so they exclude Him.Methodically. Predictably! Repeatedly! Observably! ..Religiously!

So, to whine about that, is like whining that in chess you cannot move the pawn backwards.

? Identifying the enemy is not whining it is preparing for spiritual and intellectual battle.

Whether this rule will always lead to truths is debatable

Not really for a bible believer. The bible says that they are ever learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth! So it CANNOT lead to truth.

. What is not debatable is that it must keep on using the naturalistic rule, because if it did not, it would not be science anymore.

? Naturalistic rule? What is that? Sounds like animalistic rule!
Nature has a place, but that place is not to worship it.

Your problem is that science has become very popular, and more people start respecting that more than stories about talking donkeys, prophets living three days in a tuna and airborne Messiahs or horses. So, i understand why proponents of the latter would like to hijack the name. It is good PR for their weird beliefs.

Weeds become popular, lies become popular etc. The name science has become overgrown with fables and beliefs.

Of course, you have no chance to change that

? You have no shance to stop the change actually. Should I believe bile prophesy or your prophesy?

. So, I suggest you create your own epistemology and paradigm to study the past, with its own name, and you make it compete in the market of free ideas. If that brings good fruits, then you might even be able to replace science.

What did you think I was dong?

Alternatively, you can pray that things change, since I assume you believe prayers are effective, and let scientists do their work.

We all do what we can. I cannot stop the folks working on WOMD and all sorts of other evils (as well as good things) but I can point out what is offered as knowledge is actually belief based in regards to creation issues.

 

[Darkstorn]

It might be useful if there were some associated qualification describing the post as well as alerting that one has been made. All like posts could be batch-processed.

I propose a new filter, with inspiration from the ignore filter. It'd work exactly like it, but would only show the FIRST post of any thread created by the person.

I.E He'd have his argument and i wouldn't have to read it a thousand times over and over again.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I propose a new filter, with inspiration from the ignore filter. It'd work exactly like it, but would only show the FIRST post of any thread created by the person.

I.E He'd have his argument and i wouldn't have to read it a thousand times over and over again.

I can imagine the efficiencies that would generate. With future roll outs covering any repetitive series of posts in the body of a thread.

 

[dad]

Why lie? Is that the only way y our zany religionism can succeed?

If you claim models of the past are not belief based then simply prove it.

-Prove that a same nature and laws existed on earth in the past?

Like evolutuon.

Cool (yet unwitting) admission.

Things adapt and evolve...yes.

Things evolving are what 'created' life on earth...no.

 

[Darkstorn]

-Prove that a same nature and laws existed on earth in the past?

Hahahaha. Back to last thursdayism it is then.

 

[dad]

Hahahaha. Back to last thursdayism it is then.

Not at all, we can prove reasonably what nature was like last week, last year, and even onto thousands of years ago. Don't use strawman as an excuse for your fail to stay on point or address the issue in an intelligent way.

 

[Darkstorn]

Not at all, we can prove reasonably what nature was like last week, last year, and even onto thousands of years ago. Don't use strawman as an excuse for your fail to stay on point or address the issue in an intelligent way.

But what about over 6000 years? Since you're proposing a limit there. I'm talking about last thursday, 6666 years ago, obviously.

So it's not a straw man at all.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Hahahaha. Back to last thursdayism it is then.

The only people that say that evolution claims to be the origin of life are creationists that persist in that straw man rather than the facts.

Filtering just those posts that repeat that straw man would eliminate the need to read almost 45% of the posts on this forum.

 

[Darkstorn]

The only people that say that evolution claims to be the origin of life are creationists that persist in that straw man rather than the facts.

Filtering just those posts that repeat that straw man would eliminate the need to read almost 45% of the posts on this forum.

And 99% of dad's posts.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And 99% of dad's posts.

What a shame.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Saying nothing in ost after post is time wasting for readers. Work on that.

dad, your constant running away means that is the only consistent point that can be made.

A person that really believes what he claims to believe does not run away. When you run away you look like a fraud. At least idiots like Kent Hovind are not afraid of being made to look like idiots.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Address the question. Get on point.

And dad only continues to run away.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please show us then how you have left the solar system and area to observe anything? Your saying it is wrong that light comes here to be observed from there is funny.

Why do you think that one would have to leave the Solar System? You come up with these crazy questions based on crazy ideas.

And yes, light comes here. That should be obvious. Though I do remember debating with someone even loopier that thought we somehow reached out with our eyes. Sigh, I miss Jimbo. @Dan From Smithville knows who I am talking about.

 

[Darkstorn]

At least idiots like Kent Hovind are not afraid of being made to look like idiots.

Destroying his heroes will definitely be outside his ray comfort zone.

I've been dying to use that one forever.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Why do you think that one would have to leave the Solar System? You come up with these crazy questions based on crazy ideas.

And yes, light comes here. That should be obvious. Though I do remember debating with someone even loopier that thought we somehow reached out with our eyes. Sigh, I miss Jimbo. @Dan From Smithville knows who I am talking about.

That is funny. When I first read some of the loopy ideas associated with this thread, Jimbo was the first person that popped into my mind.

 

[stvdv]

Because there is a disciplined beliefs set and methodology adhering to this and practice..etc one can thin of it as religious.

one can think of it as religious
Aha ... one CAN, but that implies that it is not a fact, and definitely not that it applies to all.
One can also think of it as Spirituality. Or do you think that "think of it as Religion" is of a higher order than "think of it as Spirituality"?

 

[Darkstorn]

One can also think of it as Spirituality. Or do you think that "think of it as Religion" is of a higher order than "think of it as Spirituality"?

For descriptor of science, i'd rather take religion to be honest. At least it implies strict regime and rules. Spirituality is just a cop out.