12-10-2012, 04:40 PM #71
12-10-2012, 04:50 PM #72
Inserting god into every unknown is unnecessary.
Unknowns are just that.....Unknowns.
How can you test "magic" when there is no examples of magic.
Last edited by JustAlex; 12-10-2012 at 04:53 PM.Logic and reason is all you need.
12-10-2012, 05:03 PM #73
12-10-2012, 05:20 PM #74
Science doesn't imagine theories out of thin air....they are the conclusion of many tests and observations.
Being a scientific theory is the highest an idea can attain, the only thing higher would be mathematical fact.
BTW, you do know that gravity is still a theory, right?
Do you question this theory?
Also, a theory is not something that is taken lightly.
Someone doesn't just say......"hey, I did some tests and I concluded that "X" is the reason for "Y".....so let's make it into a theory"
No, it doesn't work that way....that conclusion is subject to a lot of scrutiny and it is peer reviewed by many other scientists in the community.
It takes a very long time before an idea becomes a theory.Logic and reason is all you need.
12-10-2012, 05:26 PM #75
I'm certainly open to the belief that there is no God, but unlike you, I believe the Bible stands up quite well as a historical document and provides very strong evidence for God's existence.Buying "Broder" unlicensed sets and singles.
12-10-2012, 05:38 PM #76
I'm not trying to offend, but that's what it sounds to me...."god" is just like any other figure which has no evidence for and thus there is no distinction in my mind for it.
Here is my response:
Logic and reason is all you need.
12-10-2012, 05:40 PM #77
1: I am saying the process involves people admitting they were wrong. Not many people like doing that and will go to great lengths to avoid doing it.
And I swear, if you tell me what a theory is one more time I'm gonna find you and leave dog poop on your lawn.
You do know that repeating yourself 1000x to the same person is unnecessary, useless and, above all, annoying, right?
2: Your rambling about theories did nothing to say you're not speculating. You probably avoided it because you know you are speculating.
12-10-2012, 05:56 PM #78
1. Sure, I'll agree that people don't like to admit they're wrong. However, science eventually discovers bad science.
For example, the flat earth model, the geocentric model, and several false transitional fossils are occasions where science has rectified bad science.
That's the beauty of it.....science is ever changing, if new evidence comes in, it has no option but to change, this is where it differs from the religious dogmatic principle where ideas never change, no matter how much evidence it's up against!
2. Fine, I have no reason to avoid it.....I am speculating or better yet, I'm assuming that alien life would have the same or similar characteristics of life on earth. This assumption is based on evidence I already have.
I can't give god any characteristics because I don't have any examples for magic....it's just that simple.Logic and reason is all you need.
12-10-2012, 06:03 PM #79
12-10-2012, 06:10 PM #80
#1 Do you believe in Bigfoot or Leprechauns? (I"ll assume you don't)
#2 Why don't you believe in Bigfoot or Leprchauns?
#3 So by your original logic, it takes equal amount of faith to not believe in bigfoot than it does TO believe in bigfoot.
You don't see a problem with this?
Does it also take the same amount of faith not to believe Elvis is alive as it is to believe that Elvis IS Alive?
C'mon, this isn't even a hard one.Logic and reason is all you need.