RE: Evidence God Exists: Part II
June 17, 2010 at 2:20 pm
(This post was last modified: June 17, 2010 at 2:38 pm by AngelThMan.)
(June 17, 2010 at 7:19 am)Caecilian Wrote: So, god is in our collective consciousness is he? [What] is that supposed to mean?It's self explanatory, isn't it? Maybe you're not as smart as you think.
Caecilian Wrote:As Zen Badger says, scientists aren't interested in proving or disproving god. Saying otherwise is (yet again) a display of your appalling ignorance of science.I did make the distinction in my post that there's an "underlying" objective to prove or disprove God. There's a difference between an 'underlying' objective and a main objective. Even 'real' scientists would love to make a finding and throw it at the world with a declaration (whether directly or implicitly) to the effect of "Hey look, I finally proved once and for all that life did not come from a God."
Caecilian Wrote:What scientists are trying to do is to produce a naturalistic explanation of the origins of life- and they're making real progress.There's no real progress in the area of life's origin. Scientists have synthesized a single-cell genome, but that is completely different.
Caecilian Wrote:They're also aiming to synthesize life (an overlapping objective), and again genuine progress is being made.Attempting to create artificial life and conducting experiments to determine the origin of life are two entirely different things. That's like saying that attempting to build a car from scratch in your garage is making progress in discovering who invented cars. Maybe it's you who's clueless.