RE: Science and religion
April 2, 2013 at 10:53 pm
(This post was last modified: April 2, 2013 at 10:59 pm by jstrodel.)
"Miracles are magic therefore impossible" is this supposed to be an argument? It is not self evident that magic is impossible. You are using psuedo-logic terminology.
You havn't disproved the existence of miracles and you won't. You assume that everything must be scientifically proven for it to be true, but you don't argue this, you assume it.
Babylonian astronomy is nothing like modern science, which trces back to Christian Europe. You are pulling anything you can to ignore the obvious roots that science has in Europe and America.
There is nothing wrong with using wikipedia as a source the way that I did, and the list of thinkers it mentions are real. You can find their biographies elsewhere.
It is not fallacious to mention the fact that many, probably most scientists in history believed in some form of God, including some of the most important ones. Obviously that does not prove the existence of God, but in your black and white world, everything either gives absolute proof of something, or it is a fallacy. This is how atheists think, everything is black and white.
If you don't think it is significant that there have been millions of scientists who do not believe the scientific method conflicts with miracles, you are just a dishonest, proud person and there is really no reason to reason with you. If you can't see the difference between providing a piece of evidence and making a formal argument, you are brainwashed by psuedo-intellectual atheist propaganda.
You havn't disproved the existence of miracles and you won't. You assume that everything must be scientifically proven for it to be true, but you don't argue this, you assume it.
Babylonian astronomy is nothing like modern science, which trces back to Christian Europe. You are pulling anything you can to ignore the obvious roots that science has in Europe and America.
There is nothing wrong with using wikipedia as a source the way that I did, and the list of thinkers it mentions are real. You can find their biographies elsewhere.
It is not fallacious to mention the fact that many, probably most scientists in history believed in some form of God, including some of the most important ones. Obviously that does not prove the existence of God, but in your black and white world, everything either gives absolute proof of something, or it is a fallacy. This is how atheists think, everything is black and white.
If you don't think it is significant that there have been millions of scientists who do not believe the scientific method conflicts with miracles, you are just a dishonest, proud person and there is really no reason to reason with you. If you can't see the difference between providing a piece of evidence and making a formal argument, you are brainwashed by psuedo-intellectual atheist propaganda.
