The real religion?
August 18, 2016 at 2:52 pm
(This post was last modified: August 18, 2016 at 2:53 pm by LadyForCamus.)
(August 18, 2016 at 2:49 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Science doesn't just provide observations, but also the step by step methods of the experiment/study that resulted in those observations. Methodology is just as important as the observations. Comparing scientific observation to witness testimony is intellectually dishonest. They are not remotely the same thing. Anyone who actually paid attention in 5th grade science class would know that.
Regarding eyewitness testimony, it's considered the weakest form of evidence because of human psychology. Not only are we prone to misremembering events and details, we also remember things that didn't actually happen (http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/01/p...committed/). That's why every prosecutor in America would much, much rather rely on physical forensic evidence in their cases.
So, when you have a group of devout people 'remembering' things about their leader, with nothing to corroborate the fantastic elements that underpin the faith, there's really no compelling reason to believe that it's true. They're already biased in favor of their messiah, so their recollections will be clouded by their faith.
And now RR is going to say, "well if you're going to just TRUST that scientists use the methods they say they use, that's the same thing as FAITH!"
*face palm*
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.
