dad
Undefeated
To talk about this "old world nature", you must first put forth evidence that an "old world nature" existed. Without that evidence, without that validation that such a thing existed, we have nothing to discuss.
To talk about this "same past nature", you must first put forth evidence that an "old world nature" existed. Without that evidence, without that validation that such a thing existed, we have nothing to discuss, and all science claims based on that are null and void.
Religiously! That is why it has turned to fables regarding origin issues.Science is limited to the natural world.
No, and it takes no thought where that magic creator hot little singularity speck came from either! Nor does it know what time is, why the forces exist as they do...etc etc etc etc etc. Nor does it know there are or are not spirits or anything spiritual. It merely restricts itself to present nature/physical only possible explanations. What a cult... unlike religions, science takes no thought in "heaven, hell, Hades, Shoel, ghosts, spirits, Nirvana, Happy Hunting Grounds" or any other theology of "life after death'.
All of them. Science waves them all away as well as history and testimonies of miracles etc etc etc. Fanatical, jealous little cult.Which claim? Which religion? Ragnarok and Asatru? The miracles o the Bible? The predictions of Nostradamus? Need to be more specific here.
The only prophesies so called science honors are it's own! Despite the fail rate, and absurdity of them! Cult!Which prophecies?
Yeah and so far you been to the moon! Hilarious. Even man's dying probes are not even a lousy light day away!That's a great question! Here is a quip I took somewhere: "We'll never verify this in every possible place in the universe -- but until we find a place that doesn't behave this way, we keep going."
Yeah keep going. Do not be like Buzz Lightyear though and talk of 'infinity and beyond'! You stick to talking about less than one light day away, and less'!!!!!! To the fishbowl...not beyond!See, if we "stop" and ponder that maybe things are or were different, then we concede that we know nothing about nothing.
That is what your Buzz Lightyear/Fishbowl philosophy cult does.No. Belief is assuming to know what you can't possibly know.
Why, just because your cult can't!!? Ha. Well, the issue is your religion claiming it knows, not anyone else. They have claimed there was the same nature.You can't possibly know that there was a different set of "natural laws".
You've never been out of the fishbowl, and have no clue what time in the far universe, or nature on earth was. Fishbowl revisions do not tell us about origins.Science, on the other hand, revises its conclusions based on new evidence.
No. They must however point out that grandiose statements of fact they make are really religious nutball fantasy when they do not deal in any certainty or fact.You hold a false assumption that science works on certainty.
To quote Neil DeGrasse Tyson, “But you can’t be a scientist if you’re uncomfortable with ignorance, because scientists live at the boundary between what is known and unknown in the cosmos.
Fishbowl boundary! They should not even use the word cosmos when they have been hardly out of earth orbit or gravity influence! They have a Buzz Lightyear complex!
" Science does not feign knowledge where there is no knowledge.
Science IS the feigning of knowledge whenever they speak of things beyond their fishbowl mandate!!
Post a relevant quote/[point and use a link as support.Actually, it is. Please google "Law of Time".
That would be..never then. So make like the energizer bunny and keep going all you like! This present state is not permanent. The energizer bunny goes to the trash when no longer useful. Man is close to the advent of REAL science!Science accepts that. But until there is evidence to suggest that natural forces behave differently under different circumstances, we keep going.
The so called dating of soil or anything else is not different methods! They are all the same belief based family of methods! The geology also uses that same family so your belief system is inbred and circular!But you know it's not that simple. At least you *should* know this. There are various methods by which specimens are dated, including (but not limited to) the depth at which these were recovered, radiometric dating of the specimen, radiometric dating of the soil in which it was uncovered, study of the ecology and geology of the area which may give false readings (in a valiant attempt to remove error), etc.
False. You have one belief that binds them all. If man could not leave remains, by the way, praytell, how do you think you would know man existed or not??Based on multiple criteria, then, we can rest assured that "man and rabbits did not exist in the Cambrian era". To even postulate this as a possibility shows me that you have even less knowledge about paleontology than I do and are simply talking out of your hat.
That would be a hella coincidence if all the different methods we use for dating just happened to coincide and cross-confirm each other.
One Belief to rule them all, One Belief used to find them,
One Belief to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them