The God of Science

[swarm]

...simply because they can't imagine how ...

Why is it theists always boil down to "I can't imagin how, therefore god?"

 

[swarm]

...I was once a truth seeker that only trusted physical evidence too, and until you find new knowledge elsewhere, you will never understand the spirtual side of things.

Complete and utter bullshit.

science is all about the physical.

Science at a bear minimum is about anything which can be observed, measured and analyzed with the results able to be replicated and verified. And if one is inventive enough one can work around defects in those stages by advanced tool use and extended analytics.

Only is your god cannot be observed and has no observable effects would there be a problem.

I don't even use the name God in my spirituality, because there have been too many misinterpretations that I rather just use the word One.

The lie by any other name would smell as sweet.

 

[786]

What do you mean by randomness and how would it be relevant?

Did you read my post.... I said I wanted to go back on the original topic... Do you know what the original topic is.... if not, then why are you demonstrating your stupidity. If yes, then you will realize that is what is relevant and everything else about 'life' is irrelevant.

Peace be unto you

 

[786]

Why is it theists always boil down to "I can't imagin how, therefore god?"

It would be good if you preserve the context because frankly I don't know where you got it from and when I said it.

And secondly the topic is not about god and is about randomness in science so lets cut the crap and go back on topic... Read the OP if you need to know what the original topic is.

Peace be unto you

 

[swarm]

Did you read my post....

Yep, I was left to wonder what would happen if you ever stumbled upon the field of philosophy of science. I notice that for a "student" of science you have a pretty shaky understanding of its principles and generally have difficulty with formulating good questions and basic reasoning.

You seem to have discovered the issue of foundational axioms in formal systems, like logic, but you don't seem to realize science is not a formal system but is empirically based.

"Now, what does this have to do with God?"

Absolutely nothing. God is your personal sick, twisted fantasy and it is wholly unrelated.

Now why do I say you worship ignorance? Because for you "god=untestable."

As for "random" it doesn't mean anything as you present it.

You then go own to expand your worship of ignorance to chaotic ignorance.

Finally you get around to posing a question which shows a profound ignorance of the null hypothesis and parsimony.

Can you justify and prove that there is nothing else that is controlling the outcome?

Science does not address religious questions like this, even if you try to dress them up and slide them under the door.

 

[786]

Yep, I was left to wonder what would happen if you ever stumbled upon the field of philosophy of science. I notice that for a "student" of science you have a pretty shaky understanding of its principles and generally have difficulty with formulating good questions and basic reasoning.

Don't cover up your stupidity.

"Now, what does this have to do with God?"

Absolutely nothing. God is your personal sick, twisted fantasy and it is wholly unrelated.

I must ask, did you really read my post!

As for "random" it doesn't mean anything as you present it.

I've already gone through this, feel free to read through the thread because I'm not going to go to step 1 of the whole discussion because you just happened to show up now.

You then go own to expand your worship of ignorance to chaotic ignorance.

And you can continue worshiping your self-created delusions. Ironic? :shrug:

Finally you get around to posing a question which shows a profound ignorance of the null hypothesis and parsimony.

And you show a profound ignorance of the fact that parsimony is a self-created construct of thinking and does not necessarily reflect scientific data.

Science does not address religious questions like this, even if you try to dress them up and slide them under the door.

The question doesn't have any religious ground it is plainly a logical question with logical assumptions.

Instead of starting from scratch I would rather continue the discussion with James R and GeoffP, or someone who wants to pick up from there.

Peace be unto you