(July 4, 2010 at 8:48 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Because I can't be bothered to chase you around to answer a question you mean? You certainly seem to put a lot of effort into your obfuscation.You are obfuscated? What of the following still is not clear to you:
Quote:1) It says "we can't rule out" in there doesn't it? Any idea why it is in there? Anyway, no assumption there.
2) I have no shred of evidence for the natural, so there is no assumption there. If you have a shred like that please bring it forward any time so we can evaluate it.
3) Because I have no shred on X, I do not make assumptions about X. Not on how X might affect reality. Not on the existence or non-existence of X. This is quite straightforward too. From the principle of parsimony I derive that it would be redundant to make any assumption if I have no shred of evidence of X. Bottom line: no assumption being made there.
Compare this to how science deals with god: there is no single statement about god in science. Not a statement about his non-existence, not a statement about his existence. There is simply no god in the equations. If you have a better proposal on how to not make assumption on something please bring it forward.
4) the natural does not equal the material, the supernatural does not equal the non-material.
Come on, don't be shy now.
"I'm like a rabbit suddenly trapped, in the blinding headlights of vacuous crap" - Tim Minchin in "Storm"
Christianity is perfect bullshit, christians are not - Purple Rabbit, honouring CS Lewis
Faith is illogical - fr0d0
Christianity is perfect bullshit, christians are not - Purple Rabbit, honouring CS Lewis
Faith is illogical - fr0d0