(July 12, 2017 at 6:37 am)Dropship Wrote: Brian37 quote- The top scientists dont, and it still would not make magic babies real or zombie gods real.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- That gives rise to the question- how can we tell who the "top" scientists are?
2- The word "gods" is oldfashioned nowadays, so maybe we should start thinking of them as aliens who have visited the earth in one form or another?
For example scientist Frank Drake (dunno if he's a "top") estimates there are thousands of intelligent alien civilisations out there-
"According to Drake, the average of people's best estimates suggests that there are about 10,000 technically advanced civilisations spread across our galaxy"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/unive...e_equation
UGGGGGGGGG!
You still have yet to click on the prior post I made proving to you that every fucking religion in the world when it cant debunk science will try to co opt science to get it to point to their club.
Scientific method is not a religion. It is a process, a tool, not a dogma.
Now again, if you think you are onto something I could give a shit less. A real test would be to debate Muslims who think science proves they are right. A real test would be to debate Jews who think science points to their club. A real test would be to debate Hindus who claim science points to them. A real test would be to debate Buddhists who claim science points to them.
It is called sample rate, pretty standard in neutral scientific method. If all you are doing is trying to retrofit science after the fact, you are merely mentally masturbating to protect a mere desire.