One of the symptoms of "Lying for Jesus" (or possibly some other bloke) seems to be a lack of engagement past parroting from the authorized script. There's a limited amount of squinting for gotchas like typos and "evasive action" goal shifting. But when I try to actually engage intellectually there is nothing there. This is evidence of the vacuity and the sterility of their "skepticism" (denialism).
In science, the best defense against bad ideas is a good offense with better ideas. Better ideas in science are communicable, useful, precise predictive descriptions of phenomena. In astronomy and geology, evidence for the consistency of physical law for billions of years would require new extraordinary, unevidenced phenomena to make the Earth less than 10,000 years old. ...
What do you think?
Where is imagination a phenomenon being studied by scientific methods? Or did you mean that science itself was only imagination in your opinion? (Such an opinion would be wrong. Science deals with phenomena and not imagination abstracted from reality.) Or did you mean the practice of science requires some justification not inherent in its automatic increase in human knowledge?I think the only way to justify the scientific exploration of imagination
Does "it" refer to scientific exploration which already includes the grossly materialistic steps of observing reality and confronting predictions of reality with actual real events? Or does "it" refer to imagination itself? How would scientific explorations of the imaginations of H.P. Lovecraft be "justified" by bringing his imagined apocalyptic horrors into reality?is to create it materialistically.
This sentence and post seems to have no connection with the topic of this thread or my post.
That's why communication is a skill. But dreams and hallucinations are not science -- at best they are part of the mechanism of human inspiration -- a fount of creativity that must be distilled to obtain value. "Better ideas in science are communicable, useful, precise predictive descriptions of phenomena." So if you can't communicate it, then it isn't science. If you lack the ability to articulate it, it has no value to humanity other than by what it inspires you to do.Words can only go so far to express the visualizations we gain when dreaming, daydreaming, planning our own reality, or even beginning to communicate properly with another's true visions.