(July 3, 2018 at 3:49 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I think this would be a good place to introduce Richard Carrier's definition of the supernatural, at least as a starting point. If you disagree with the way Carrier frames it, how would you differ from it and why?
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2007/...tural.html
Quote:...Thus, for example, if Biblical Creationism were true, by now we should have accumulated tons of scientific evidence that the entire universe is less than six light days across and the earth is at the center of it, all fossils and rocks radiologically and stratigraphically date no older than six thousand years, the fossil and DNA records confirm that all species appeared simultaneously six thousand years ago and have not substantially changed since, and much more. For further examples of how the evidence should have turned out if creationism were true,... But alas, the data didn't come out that way. But if it had, supernaturalism would have been as scientifically established as naturalism is now.
What he said.
My bold.
It's amazing 'science' always seems to 'find' whatever it is funded for, and never the oppsite. Drich.
