Science was once a child of the church.

[mickiel]

Neither, its a result of research, history, education, science, common sense, logic, and academics. From all the combined information I have, god is real. I both can explain it, and not explain it.

So, you still don't understand the difference between evidence and assertions, plus a heaping helping of the Dunning-Kruger effect?

, I had a thread, " Is god real", and I went at it for 4 years explaining how god is real. 4 long years I explained it from every angle I could think of; and in all that time, I have never seen a single shred of evidence that he does not exist.

Oh look, you also don't understand the burden of proof. How surprising.

I saw that your first "evidence" in that thread was the assertion that "creatures reproduce after their own kind," which is horrible for all kinds of reasons. I don't exactly hold out hope for the rest of that little crusade.

I am curious, how did you use that quote tag? I don't understand how to use it.

---

Neither, its a result of research, history, education, science, common sense, logic, and academics. From all the combined information I have, god is real. I both can explain it, and not explain it.

So, you still don't understand the difference between evidence and assertions, plus a heaping helping of the Dunning-Kruger effect?

, I had a thread, " Is god real", and I went at it for 4 years explaining how god is real. 4 long years I explained it from every angle I could think of; and in all that time, I have never seen a single shred of evidence that he does not exist.

Oh look, you also don't understand the burden of proof. How surprising.

I saw that your first "evidence" in that thread was the assertion that "creatures reproduce after their own kind," which is horrible for all kinds of reasons. I don't exactly hold out hope for the rest of that little crusade.

Lets see if I got this quote tag thing right.