Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke

Status
Not open for further replies.
Musika said:
Well, we were talking about science, not evidence.
Click to expand...
Are you trying to practice science without evidence? Even philosophy is founded on evidentiary logic, such as mathematically identifiable values and functions. Equations. Stuff we know about!
If not those what is left?
Ah, yes, that's called religion and you speak from a religious perspective. No logic, no scientific (objective) evidence . Wishful thinking......:rolleyes:

I'll admit, it's imaginative.
 
Write4U said:
Are you trying to practice science without evidence? Even philosophy is founded on evidentiary logic, such as mathematically identifiable values and functions. Equations.
If not those what is left?
Ah, yes, that's called religion and you speak from a religious perspective. No logic, no scientific (objective) evidence . Wishful thinking......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Practicing science without evidence is more your forte than mine.
 
Musika said:
Sure.
Any thread you have participated in where others brand you with the title "woo".
Click to expand...
No, no, you don't get to say that without evidence.
People have suggested that some of my impressions of reality are "bordering woo", "approaching woo", "in the vicinity of woo-hood", ..... but never quite "fully woo", (like religion),
...... I'm proud of that..... :)
 
Last edited:
Musika said:
You bring science to a subject where its authority ranges from none to very minimal .... depending on how rigorously one applies the scientific process and the specifics of what one is looking at.
Click to expand...
To whatever degree any aspect of religious doctrine can be shown to be actual is a matter of science. Any other explanation is going to lie on a scale of logical expectation in relation to current scientific knowledge.
Zero.
Either religious accounts or scientific accounts.
There is even mainstream (scientific) contention regarding the degree one can even declare cosmogony a science.
Click to expand...
I agree, science can only go so far, but religion without science can’t go anywhere.
 
Write4U said:
No, no, you don't get to say that without evidence.
People have suggested that some of my impressions of reality are "bordering woo", "approaching woo", "in the vicinity of woo-hood", ..... but never quite "fully woo", (like religion),
...... I'm proud of that..... :)
Click to expand...
Glad that you are comfortable with your levels of transgressions from rudimentary science.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top