Page 36 of 44 FirstFirst ... 26353637 ... LastLast
Results 1,226 to 1,260 of 1532

Thread: Scientific knowledge

  1. #1226
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Wales
    Posts
    18,314

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Well there we go - a couple of thousand words burned in defence of a non position!

    At this point I usually quote Kelvin but today - noting the nature of the "discussion" - we can have his illustious fellow countryman:

    The result therefore, of our present enquiry, is that we find - no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end
    Linky
    Someday, I'm going to settle down and be a grumpy old man.

  2. #1227
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK. Cornwall, Suffolk.
    Posts
    3,308

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Wow.

  3. #1228
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post

    "Myth" is pejorative. A fairer and more honest assessment, based on analysis of literary and historical factors would give it a higher status than that of a mere myth, I suggest.

    .......is a literally true account of the origins of life and the universe, .......



    frank
    As are all of these:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths
    Unless you can prove otherwise

    At least in that you have declared your hand and carved out your querencia.
    Last edited by Peerie Maa; 10-11-2017 at 02:55 PM.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  4. #1229
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    14,852

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by P.I. Stazzer-Newt View Post
    Well there we go - a couple of thousand words burned in defence of a non position!

    At this point I usually quote Kelvin but today - noting the nature of the "discussion" - we can have his illustious fellow countryman:



    Linky


    Ideas like this have to penetrate many thicknesses. We observe that the process is very slow, so I guess we'll have to wait a really long time.

    Combined with the observation that such geological processes are very slow in the present day, such thicknesses of rock imply enormous stretches of time.
    He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
    America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
    It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
    This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

  5. #1230
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge


    Grrrr. - the computer ate my draft response - and now - here it is back again!


    "Combined with the observation that such geological processes are very slow in the present day, such thicknesses of rock imply enormous stretches of time."


    Whoa up! Where on the planet is such a formation as the Great Artesian Basin being formed? Indeed, when in all of recorded history has such a massive sedimentary formation occurred? Not just "slow", mate - not happening at all!
    Under what conditions could such pristinely even layers be laid down over such an extensive area? Note they are several miles deep and hundreds of miles across - and they make up most of the continents.


    "As are all of these:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths
    Unless you can prove otherwise "

    A couple of "otherwise" proofs occur to me:
    Firstly, flood stories are found all over the world - as if some deep racial memory is involved. However, the most complete and verifiable account would be that found in the first book of the Torah. to give one example of what I mean, the Gilgamesh story has the Ark being a cube (or sphere?) 60 cubits in Length, Beam and Depth. Genesis has it as 300 x 60 x 50 - a bit more boat-like.... (actually this strikes me as a weak argument - why wouldn't a cube be as good a vessel for surviving a planetary catastrophe?)
    Secondly, this story comes from a document that exhibits supernatural properties.
    take its extraordinary accuracy preserved through the ages. We can trace a continuous history of the document and yet we now find that the contemporary copies are identical to the original to within 9 parts in 300,000. This sort of accuracy invites computer analysis. One thing that has emerged is the Bible Codes eg. In Isaiah's account of the crucifixion (written well before the event!) the names of all the people who attended are coded in the text. (just sayin')

  6. #1231
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    16,946

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    Secondly, this story comes from a document that exhibits supernatural properties.
    "Fact is that which enough people believe. Truth is determined by how fervently they believe it."
    --- Charles Pierce







  7. #1232
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia
    Posts
    3,256

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Skip

    ---This post is delivered with righteous passion and with a solemn southern directness --
    ...........fighting against the deliberate polarization of politics...

  8. #1233
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    You have heard of fat free yoghurt and gluten free bread?
    Well here is deity free creation.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  9. #1234
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    21,610

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Frank is trying to reinvent the wheel, assuming that there Must be a better shape, and assuming God will reveal the better shape to him if he(Frank)only maintains his faith.

  10. #1235
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    46,074

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Secondly, this story comes from a document that exhibits supernatural properties.


    Frank, I'm going to bow out here. We are simply not operating from the same data set. I don't wish to be rude, but I don't think further discussion about the purported supernatural origin of the Hebrew creation stories will be helpful for either of us. Enjoy your ancient tales; the rest of will look at the real world to figure out what's going on.
    Last edited by Keith Wilson; 10-12-2017 at 11:12 AM.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  11. #1236
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    10,030

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    You have heard of fat free yoghurt and gluten free bread?
    Well here is deity free creation.
    Dang, Nick.

    I really do hope we can meet face to face one day. I bet we’d have a great time! We’d be like these two, eh?
    This video has started well. I need to do stuff, so I’ll finish later. Thanks for this.

    Peace,
    Robert

    P.S. this thread is the funniest thing I’ve read in the bilge. Hilarious.

  12. #1237
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by amish rob View Post
    Dang, Nick.

    I really do hope we can meet face to face one day. I bet we’d have a great time! We’d be like these two, eh?
    This video has started well. I need to do stuff, so I’ll finish later. Thanks for this.

    Peace,
    Robert

    P.S. this thread is the funniest thing I’ve read in the bilge. Hilarious.
    It is available in book form too.
    https://pdfchieftsrz.files.wordpress...g-book-pdf.pdf

    It is old, the science might have moved on by now.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  13. #1238
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    https://evolutionnews.org/2017/10/wi...gunter-bechly/

    WikiP... gets thrown around a lot here on this thread as an "authoritive" source - does this highlight a significant limitation ?

  14. #1239
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    46,074

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    "Evolution News" is a Discovery Institute website; more creationism.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  15. #1240
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Well joining the Discovery Institute is a form of scientific suicide as far as credibility goes. Wikki values its credibility, even though it is sometimes a tad flakey.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  16. #1241
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    10,030

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    It is available in book form too.
    https://pdfchieftsrz.files.wordpress...g-book-pdf.pdf

    It is old, the science might have moved on by now.
    Thanks again, eh.

    I like to learn new stuff I didn’t know before.

    I figure if I learn as much as possible and suss out which lots gel with one another, I might get anvague notion of what happened, and what’s happening.

    I just wish I could observe something without wrecking it.

    Peace,
    Robert

  17. #1242
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by amish rob View Post
    Thanks again, eh.

    I like to learn new stuff I didn’t know before.

    I figure if I learn as much as possible and suss out which lots gel with one another, I might get anvague notion of what happened, and what’s happening.

    I just wish I could observe something without wrecking it.

    Peace,
    Robert
    That Heisenberg is a real PITA, yes?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  18. #1243
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    central cal
    Posts
    10,030

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    That Heisenberg is a real PITA, yes?
    I’m uncertain.

    Peace,

  19. #1244
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post


    Frank, I'm going to bow out here. We are simply not operating from the same data set. I don't wish to be rude, but I don't think further discussion about the purported supernatural origin of the Hebrew creation stories will be helpful for either of us. Enjoy your ancient tales; the rest of will look at the real world to figure out what's going on.

    Before you go Keith I wonder if you could give us your understanding of what you mean by "data set".

    May I make the observation that science cannot rule out the supernatural . I accept that , within the operations of scientific endeavour, no "supernatural" steps can be allowed - or the whole chain of logic would break down.

    But I would contend that science can properly address the question, "Has a supernatural event occurred in this particular instance?"

    I used the example of a hypothetical UFO event where it was (hypothetically) observed and recorded by multiple witnesses across several technologies - and the "UFO" was found to have violated the ordinary laws of Physics. In the hypothetical example I cited of a "UFO" being seen to collide with an airliner on landing approach then performing infinite G. maneuvers and appearing and disappearing - and ALL these events being seen by many people some very credible ,Pilots , ATC staff in the air and on the ground and recorded on phones , airport radar etc etc - (elaborate as you wish.....)

    The point being science would not properly just deny that anything happened just because it did not fit into our understanding of the "real world". No?

    So (if you grant me that point - that "science" can make a determination that a supernatural event has clearly happened) I pose the question, "What sort of evidence would it take to support the contention that the Bible exhibits supernatural properties?"

    I presented two strands of evidence 1. an example of "bible codes" (which property no other book possesses beyond the level of coincidence) and 2. a case of unknowing prophecy in that the people mentioned in the new Testament were hidden in the Old.

    If you have good grounds for rejecting this - might you please set them forth so that I may understand where we differ in our datasets? - at least for my own edification - if you may

    thankyou,

    frank

  20. #1245
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    20,847

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    That Heisenberg is a real PITA, yes?
    I know his son - nice guy! He has worked most of his adult life to overturn the negative view of his father after the war.

  21. #1246
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    46,074

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    OK, I'll bite: How do you tell the difference between a supernatural event - which by definition is not understandable by human beings using ordinary scientific methods of observation and experiment - and something we just haven't figured out yet?
    Last edited by Keith Wilson; 10-12-2017 at 02:36 PM.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  22. #1247
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    18,448

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Sucker!
    There's a lot of things they didn't tell me when I signed on with this outfit....

  23. #1248
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    OK, I'll bite: How do you tell the difference between a supernatural event - which by definition is not understandable by human beings using ordinary scientific methods of observation and experiment - and something we just haven't figured out yet?
    I'd apply the "What is more likely" test.
    What is more likely - a little green man travelled for thousands of years to get here just to appear to some back country redneck and then disappear without trace?
    Or the redneck suffered a serious brain fart?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  24. #1249
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    16,946

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    May I make the observation that science cannot rule out the supernatural.
    Anything not understood cannot be ruled out... but simply because it cant presently be ruled out, does NOT make it true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    I accept that , within the operations of scientific endeavour, no "supernatural" steps can be allowed - or the whole chain of logic would break down.
    Sorry, you've got that wrong. If it were understood and explained, it would no longer be 'supernatural'.... it would, instead, be natural. 'Supernatural' , in this context, means 'not understood'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    I used the example of a hypothetical UFO event where it was (hypothetically) observed and recorded by multiple witnesses across several technologies - and the "UFO" was found to have violated the ordinary laws of Physics. In the hypothetical example I cited of a "UFO" being seen to collide with an airliner on landing approach then performing infinite G. maneuvers and appearing and disappearing - and ALL these events being seen by many people some very credible ,Pilots , ATC staff in the air and on the ground and recorded on phones , airport radar etc etc - (elaborate as you wish.....)
    You are confusing eyewitness testimony with science. They are not related.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    The point being science would not properly just deny that anything happened just because it did not fit into our understanding of the "real world". No?
    It's the converse. Science cannot AFFIRM anything unless it can be investigated and understood. 'UFO', in particular, means 'unidentified flying object'.... it does NOT mean 'something that proves the supernatural'. 'Unidentified' means just that: we don't know what it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    So (if you grant me that point - that "science" can make a determination that a supernatural event has clearly happened)
    I don't believe anyone here is willing to 'grant' you any such point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    I pose the question, "What sort of evidence would it take to support the contention that the Bible exhibits supernatural properties?"
    Something a great deal more than religiously biased interpretations of words which could mean a great many things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    I presented two strands of evidence 1. an example of "bible codes" (which property no other book possesses beyond the level of coincidence) and 2. a case of unknowing prophecy in that the people mentioned in the new Testament were hidden in the Old.
    This isn't 'evidence'... it's 'interpretation'. You're more than welcome to believe it, if you like... but it's NOT 'evidence'.

    .
    "Fact is that which enough people believe. Truth is determined by how fervently they believe it."
    --- Charles Pierce







  25. #1250
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    20,847

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    It's not widely known, but squirrels evolved from very small bears:


  26. #1251
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    21,240

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Bernstein View Post
    Anything not understood cannot be ruled out... but simply because it cant presently be ruled out, does NOT make it true

    .
    Nor does it make it supernatural.
    Rattling the teacups.

  27. #1252
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    OK, I'll bite: How do you tell the difference between a supernatural event - which by definition is not understandable by human beings using ordinary scientific methods of observation and experiment - and something we just haven't figured out yet?
    got a few thoughts on this one
    - if something happens that we can prove happened (ie Radar, cockpit voice recorder, videos, credible witnesses etcetc) but did things outside the envelope of our ordinary space-time reality (inertialess turns at a million miles an hour by an "object" that had just left a big dent in our wingtip) then , I submit, the committee of enquiry would be justified in its conclusion that 'Scientific analysis of the evidence has shown definitively that a supernatural event has been recorded'.

    I will concede here that, by that definition, (outside 3D reality) , much of Quantum Science could perhaps be classified as S/N eg. two particles 'knowing' the state of the other quicker than the speed of light.
    - and then there are all those 'Dark' things - Matter, Energy, etc........
    - and Krauss' mathematical magic of turning nothing into something.....

    Science "understands" them - but I think we would be forgive for thinking these things "Supernatural"

    OTOH things like virgin birth, water into wine, resurrection, Paul's epiphany - would be understood scientifically as impossibly supernatural - but, for the witnesses of the time, so impossible to un-see that they were prepared to suffer being sawn in two (that is one of those thoughts I wish I could un-see - a person being sawn in two by , apparently, a wooden saw......)

    Scripturally the violation of the half-dimension of time is to me one of the most compelling evidences of its supernaturality (to coin a word). Just all too often, in too many ways, it demonstrates the property of describing a future event.

    regards,

    frank

  28. #1253
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    16,946

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    got a few thoughts on this one
    - if something happens that we can prove happened (ie Radar, cockpit voice recorder, videos, credible witnesses etcetc) but did things outside the envelope of our ordinary space-time reality (inertialess turns at a million miles an hour by an "object" that had just left a big dent in our wingtip) then , I submit, the committee of enquiry would be justified in its conclusion that 'Scientific analysis of the evidence has shown definitively that a supernatural event has been recorded'.
    A few millennia ago, some people observed a solar eclipse... and, based on their 'scientific' knowledge of the time, came to the 'undeniable' (in their comprehension) conclusion that God was demonstrating His anger, by blotting out the sun. In their mind, it was indeed a 'supernatural' event... was it not?

    A few hundred years ago, the science of celestial mechanics were able to demonstrate that the solar eclipse was due to the moon interposing between the earth and the sun.. or do you disagree?

    Tell me what 'supernatural' events that some people observe today will NOT be discovered to have physical scientific explanations.... at some point in the future. Can you categorize them? The ones which 'prove' the supernatural, to you, versus the ones which science might someday de-bunk?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    OTOH things like virgin birth, water into wine, resurrection, Paul's epiphany - would be understood scientifically as impossibly supernatural...
    The people of the era of these observations didn't have a scientific context to rely upon, so they had little or no basis to doubt what they believed they saw or knew. The 'truth' of these things is a basis for faith, not science.

    .
    "Fact is that which enough people believe. Truth is determined by how fervently they believe it."
    --- Charles Pierce







  29. #1254
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Helensburgh NSW
    Posts
    444

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    OTOH things like virgin birth, water into wine, resurrection, Paul's epiphany
    demonstrable?
    repeatable?
    Misinterpreted by overtly superstitious people and reinforced by an overtly superstitious culture?
    “Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge” - Charles Darwin (1809–1882)

    Nutshell Pram Build pictures ; https://photos.app.goo.gl/1GdBcckcgBAWsbVg1

  30. #1255
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    34,717

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Apply the "What is more likely" test:

    Virgin Birth:
    The Hebrew word for the woman who gets pregnant in Isaiah 7:14 is alma, and we know from elsewhere that the word doesn’t mean “virgin,” but rather “young woman.”
    Resurrection: Is it not possible that Jesus siblings stole the body away to bury him in their own family crypt?
    A new piece of evidence is reigniting controversy over the potential bones of Jesus of Nazareth.
    A bone box inscribed with the phrase "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" is potentially linked to a tomb in Talpiot, Israel, where the bones of people with the names of Jesus' family members are buried, according to a new chemical analysis. Aryeh Shimron, the geologist who conducted the study, claims that because it is so unlikely that this group of biblical names would be found together by chance, the new results suggest the tomb once held the bones of Jesus. Historians place Jesus' birth at some time before 4 B.C. in Nazareth, a small village in Galilee.
    "If this is correct, that strengthens the case for the Talpiot or Jesus Family Tomb being indeed the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth," said Shimron, a retired geologist who has studied several archaeological sites in Israel.
    Paul's epiphany: We have only his word for that. Magic mushrooms, a nervous breakdown?

    How about the credibility of:
    Smith dictated the text of the Book of Mormon over the next several years, claiming that it was a translation of the plates. He did this by using a seer stone, which he placed in the bottom of a hat and then placed the hat over his face to view the words written within the stone.[5] Smith published the translation in 1830 as the Book of Mormon. Smith eventually obtained testimonies from eleven men, known as the Book of Mormon witnesses, who said they had seen the plates.[6] After the translation was complete, Smith said he returned the plates to the angel Moroni. Therefore the plates cannot now be examined. Latter Day Saints believe the account of the golden plates as a matter of faith,
    Bible literalists can't have it both ways, If their miracles happened, so did the Angel Moron.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  31. #1256
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    OK, I'll bite: How do you tell the difference between a supernatural event - which by definition is not understandable by human beings using ordinary scientific methods of observation and experiment - and something we just haven't figured out yet?
    Simply - If, upon scientific investigation, we determine that the event clearly manifested supernatural properties like the UFO - then that is different to an event like say the laying down the Great Artesian Basin. There are a number of theories and mechanisms proposed for the G.A.B. - but there is no general consensus about all the mechanisms and timings involved to get such a vast and consistent formation.
    In the animal (insect?) kingdom I understand there are cases of virgin birth. perhaps there is a 'simple' genetic switch that can be turned on or off.


    I think we are a long way from being able to declare that the supernatural absolutely does not exist - in fact I suspect it may by more common that anyone imagines.

    I am not a philosopher of science either so I probably have earned a 'fail' here.

    best regards,

    frank

  32. #1257
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    265

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Bernstein View Post
    A few millennia ago, some people observed a solar eclipse... and, based on their 'scientific' knowledge of the time, came to the 'undeniable' (in their comprehension) conclusion that God was demonstrating His anger, by blotting out the sun. In their mind, it was indeed a 'supernatural' event... was it not?
    Well they must have been a bit stupid - moon blotting out the sun / priest walking in front of the campfire blotting it out....... wassa diff?

    A few hundred years ago, the science of celestial mechanics were able to demonstrate that the solar eclipse was due to the moon interposing between the earth and the sun.. or do you disagree?
    only in that I think they probly figured it out a lot earlier than a mere few hundred years

    Tell me what 'supernatural' events that some people observe today will NOT be discovered to have physical scientific explanations.... at some point in the future.
    (this'l cause a stir) well how about evolution itself? 'Everybody' believes it and believes it "is as proved as gravity" - But what do we really have? - a hypothesis, a few theories, and a lot of speculation and a lot of 'Just So' stories. The "mountain of evidence" for natural selection, I suggest, is also claimed by the Creationists as part of their theory too - so can't count towards validating the remaining areas where the evolutionist and the creationist differ.
    Can you categorize them? The ones which 'prove' the supernatural, to you, versus the ones which science might someday de-bunk?
    not sure what you mean here - or has it already been covered?

    The people of the era of these observations didn't have a scientific context to rely upon, so they had little or no basis to doubt what they believed they saw or knew. The 'truth' of these things is a basis for faith, not science.

    yeah, except I don't believe they were stupid either so I reckon they could figure out things just as well as the non-scientists amongst us
    .
    ok Norman I don't know it this is a reasonable answer to your post or not but perhaps I missed what you were driving at?

    best regards,

    frank

  33. #1258
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Wales
    Posts
    18,314

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Desperation.....
    Someday, I'm going to settle down and be a grumpy old man.

  34. #1259
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    21,610

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Yeppers!

  35. #1260
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    16,946

    Default Re: Scientific knowledge

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    Simply - If, upon scientific investigation, we determine that the event clearly manifested supernatural properties like the UFO -
    Try again. 'UFO' means 'unidentified flying object'. Since when, does 'unidentified' mean 'supernatural'? Or shall we categorize all phenomena we observe, but can't explain, as 'supernatural'? Scientific investigation CANNOT, by definition, determine any event to be 'supernatural'.... at best, it can define an event as 'of unknown origin'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    In the animal (insect?) kingdom I understand there are cases of virgin birth. perhaps there is a 'simple' genetic switch that can be turned on or off.
    Maybe it isn't simple, but complex. nonetheless, the belief in the virgin birth, being un-provable, is an issue of faith, not science. There's not a thing wrong with faith.....

    ...until someone starts confusing it with science.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank! View Post
    I think we are a long way from being able to declare that the supernatural absolutely does not exist - in fact I suspect it may by more common that anyone imagines.
    It cannot be proven, either... which makes it an issue of faith, not science.

    .
    "Fact is that which enough people believe. Truth is determined by how fervently they believe it."
    --- Charles Pierce







Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •