The real religion?
August 18, 2016 at 9:12 am
(This post was last modified: August 18, 2016 at 9:19 am by LadyForCamus.)
(August 17, 2016 at 1:19 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: It means that I don't think you are justified in making these arguments against one thing, and then denying them when the same principles can be applied to science, that I rely on other's for knowledge of.
I'm not building an argument against anything, RR. That's not my responsibility. I am simply pointing out the lack of sufficient corroborating evidence to support your truth claims.
Quote:However if you haven't seen for yourself, then you are relying on the same faith and reason, as in other categories for knowledge.
Nope. Equivocating again. Faith is meaningless within the realm of science, RR. Faith is required for religious beliefs precisely because there IS no evidence to foster confidence in the truth of its claims. If you want to say skeptics have developed an..."earned trust" in the scientific method, I might be okay with that. But this is NOT the same thing as faith.
If you hold a pencil up above your head and let it go, what happens? Did you need "faith" to observe the effects of gravity on the pencil? Also, in 2016 there is a robust database of original scientific research on almost every subject imaginable available for you to read with your very own eyes. Tangible, graspable, observable evidence at your fingertips. No "faith" necessary.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.