RE: Testimony is Evidence
August 29, 2017 at 9:57 am
(This post was last modified: August 29, 2017 at 10:00 am by Astonished.)
(August 29, 2017 at 8:49 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:
Another example... out of curiosity.
A number of astronomers from various locations in the world observe a phenomenon which shows that the universe is eternal. Hugh Ross (Christian astronomer and apologist was one of the ones who observed this event, and begins to drastically change his views) This phenomena had a limited time window, which it could be observed, and we are unable to observe it at will.
Assuming that the testimony of this event is good (as well as the reasoning for the conclusion)i s there evidence for an eternal universe in this scenario?
You really...truly...absolutely...irrevocably...have no fucking clue what the hell you're talking about. This is a situation in which there would be no testimony without the evidence in the first place. It's not really even testimony, these are hypotheses that need to be supported by the evidence to make accurate predictions to even have a glimmer of credibility. If they're claiming X or Y then without being able to demonstrate it (they are scientists after all, and understand deeply how this process works unlike some) then it's not testimony, it's a claim or assertion.
You also seem to be overstating the importance of a person's individual witnessing and recall of events (your own, in particular). After all we've done to demonstrate how memory is faulty, how one's biases or superstitious beliefs or ignorance of facts or attitude or emotional state can have major adverse effects upon one's ability to perceive adequately what they are witnessing, and their ability to recall it when giving testimony. Your inability to absorb these concepts, your tendency to repeat yourself to the nth degree without learning anything, and after being called out, constantly blaming the rest of us for your lack of ability in a pathetically transparent effort to project your own inadequacy onto the rest of us, is painfully obvious proof that your perception of how this 'debate' is progressing is at the level of an elementary school child.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.