RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 12, 2017 at 8:41 pm
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2017 at 8:47 pm by Simon Moon.)
(September 12, 2017 at 8:32 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(September 12, 2017 at 8:24 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Lol, Huggy. Tell us, which part of the scientific method did you use to determine that the light in your picture is the Holy Spirit?
You didn't see the report of the scientific testing that was done to the negative?
It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.
What you guys have is SPECULATION based on nothing other than the opinion that the supernatural cannot exist...
So, scientific reports demonstrate that the photo is legit. So what?
All that shows is that the photo wasn't tampered with.
As LadyOfCamus said, which part of the scientific method gets from an untampered photo, to "my god is responsible"?
Quote:It was the examiners own personal opinion that the light was supernatural, in other words THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE.
Seriously?!
Since when does, "THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE FOR WHY THE LIGHT WAS THERE" lead to an explanation?
You are actually saying, "there is no explanation, therefore, there is an explanation. And the only possible explanation is magic".
This is classic argument from ignorance.
Why not just stop at, "there is no explanation"? Then continue with, "I wonder how we can find out the actual explanation?". That is actually the scientific method.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
