RE: Pranking Christian call show
September 12, 2013 at 11:17 am
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2013 at 11:21 am by Doubting Thomas.)
(September 11, 2013 at 7:43 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: There is nothing in the definition of science requiring that the explanation itself must be natural,
Um, wrong. The definition of science is learning about the natural world through observation and experiment. Therefore, you can't go making supernatural claims without proof. Science has a set of rules for all evidence to follow, and if you start claiming miracles or making up explanations that fall outside the realm of the natural world, that is, a supernatural explanation, it's not science. You're just making shit up and expecting people to accept your explanation without evidence.
Read that again. It's not science, it's making shit up. You want biblical creationism to be science? Fine. First prove God exists, then prove that the only way the universe could have come about is because he made it. And trying to poke holes in the Big Bang theory is not proof that your idea is correct.
That's how science is done. It's not saying, "Well this was written in an old book that a lot of people believe is true today" and claiming that is proof.
![[Image: then-a-miracle-occurs-cartoon.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=blog.stackoverflow.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fthen-a-miracle-occurs-cartoon.png)
Quote:Science- the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
Please cite the observations and experiments which show that God speaking the universe into existence is the only rational explanation for how the universe came about.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.