(April 14, 2016 at 4:47 pm)RozKek Wrote:(April 14, 2016 at 1:27 pm)Drich Wrote: Love it!
You start off in a philosophical discussion, when you get your teeth kicked in you retreat to a scientific approach. That is the best concession any atheist anywhere could ever offer! That's what happens when atheists loose a logic and reason discussion, they retreat to their blinders science offers them so they do not have to look anywhere science hasn't already been.
Why else drop the message of the OP and cower behind the dress of 'science.'
So then lets make your failure complete, and call your bluff.
What in the meaning of the word 'theory' suggests to you that 'science' is not gap filling with out 'God?'
Are you saying philosophy is more logical than science? It's the other way around, science starts out with logic and reason.
And don't mix up theory with hypothesis. Theories are well supported. Your god claims aren't. You're asking "what if" without elaborating.
No.
I am pointing out the OP started out as philosophical discussion. Once the OP-er got his teeth kick in Philosophically he moved the goalpost by changing the philosophical discussion and made it a scientific one.
All 'nature of God/Proof of God' discussions at one time where philosophical by nature either because their was no 'science' or as late as the 20th century all things in science were attributed to how Hod made things work.
Once the philosophers got tired at loosing all their philosophical arguments they tried and turned the limited viewing lens of 'science' onto God. As the Nature of God (philosophically speaking) Can not lend it self to science, people like you and the OP have created a 'no win' argument. If God can be proven by science then philosophically he can no longer be considered God, or as the OP is trying to say because 'science' can not identify God their can be no God.. Which is a false assumption as science can not account for a 1/3 of the known universe let alone what it does not know.
