(November 5, 2021 at 2:43 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:His response is a hoot.(November 5, 2021 at 2:33 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: I am showing you how some popular atheists get trivial things wrong. Do you agree/disagree with Krauss on his equivocation, for example....?
It is not an equivocation.
Physicists have a different definition within the context of physics, than philosophers and theologians have. And they make their definition clear before they use it.
And Krauss is not the first physicist to use the word in the same way, nor the only one.
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
![[Image: Canada_Flag.jpg?v=1646203843]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.shopify.com%2Fs%2Ffiles%2F1%2F0630%2F5310%2F3332%2Fproducts%2FCanada_Flag.jpg%3Fv%3D1646203843)
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
