Our theists of all labels please answer....

[RoadRunner79]

Is your first statement a fact?

Also your comment about the factual observation about the superbowl seems to contradict your first statement (or was the winner of the superbowl determined in a science lab?)
I'm suspecting more and more, that you are not very neutral in this subject!  

But that all facts are only found in a science lab is self refuting, but we can continue or move on to another principle if you like.

Yes and no inconsistency on my part so KNOCK IT OFF.

If you are going to agree with me that a science lab is where you determine SCIENTIFIC FACT, then stop being half assed about it.

You are trying to falsely paint me as being hypocritical which I am not being.

You are trying to confuse the issue of CONTEXT of how the word "fact" is used in determining scientific reality, so you can later go " AH HA, therefore religion is equal to a lab".

NOPE it is not.

A history of recorded claims do not make the claims true, otherwise Ra is a real God because the Egyptians had a history of believing that for 3,000 years. 

You are trying to treat your definition of "fact" as being equal in every context, which allows you to pretend the word is being used the same.

Religion will NEVER replace a telescope, or microscope. One is what people invent and sell and like, and the other are tools that produce objective universal FACT.

Scientific method is why we know gravity affects time, which is why if a Muslim uses a GPS device in Saudi Arabia, and a Christian uses a GPS in Mexico, and a Shinto Buddhist uses a GPS in Japan, the GPS works the same way regardless.

Today is April 24th is reporting, not selling. 

"Jesus turned water into wine" is selling not reporting.

Anthropologist, "We found old claims that people made about a character named Jesus claimed to have turned water into wine" 

Is the same as,

Anthropologist, " We unearthed the Tomb of King Tut, and all the artwork we found on the walls and all the items depict the society and beliefs of that time"...... THAT is neutral. 

"Trump became president" neutral, not selling.

"Trump is a great president" selling not neutral.

"Obama was our prior president" also neutral not selling.

"Obama was a horrible president" selling not neutral.

"Trump farts Lamborghini's out of his ass", selling not neutral.

"Obama is a Kenyan" selling not neutral.

"Mecca is a real place" neutral, not selling.

Muslim, "Mecca is a real place so that proves Allah is real", that is selling, not neutral.

Christian, "My bible has real places in it, so Jesus is the one real God" that is selling, not neutral. 

So don't cherry pick, don't be half assed about it, either you value objectivity, or you merely have a sales pitch.

I only responded to your statement "No, a science lab is the only place to determine facts." If I mis-interpreted this statement; please accept my apology (though I don't think I was wrong to interpret your statement in the way that I did. Would you agree with the following then; that science is not the only or in some instances even the best methodology for justified belief or knowledge?


Also, you keep mentioning my motivations, and what you think I'm doing. You are bad at it. I'm responding to what you say, attempting to discuss what you are selling here. I'm not interested in what your straw men are. I'm looking for the principles, reasons, or evidence behind your claims.