Re: Kevin Myers and Darwin

Féachadóir wrote:
Scríobh "EX_OWM" <allthespamyoulike@xxxxxxxxx>:
Ilas wrote:

I thought Dawkins' working was better

It still directly reminds people that science doesn't actually have a
conclusion on the matter; it just goes to show that Dawkins
understands Marketing even less than he understands theology.

Science does have a conclusion. There's no evidence.

Correction, science has been unable to find any evidence.

As with
everything from phlogiston to ether, science accepts that this doesn't
prove a negative, it simply makes the likelihood of a positive
vanishingly small.

Can you give an example of a single doctrine that the Catholic Church has
had to change in the last 2000 years due to the findings of science.

(Please avoid waving the Galileo flag yet again, that was nothing to do with
doctrine.)

as it avoids the fallacy a lot
of god fans suffer from, that the impossibility of disproving a god
means it's equally likely he does exist as doesn't.

I don't know any religious people who claim to believe in God on a
balance of probabilities basis; it would be a rather strange sort of
faith, that.

Mind you, I suppose there are a few fundies in the States who would
take that approach, the Bible Belt seems to be a haven for all sorts
of weirdos but I hope you're not trying to build your case on them.

Dawkins greatest sin in the eyes of many moderates is to point out
that a mainstream Catholic is just as irrational as the wildest-eyed
southern baptist literalist.

Somewhat more rational than agreeing that the question of God is outside the
realm of science but continuing to try to argue against it on some sort of
pseudo-scientific basis - expressions like "more plausible", "no evidence",
"the likelihood of a positive vanishingly small" come to mind.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: god vs science Time.com article
    ... Can religion stand up to the progress of science? ... God Delusion by Richard Dawkins to see God being thrown through the ... Richard Dawkins ....has just come out with The God Delusion (Houghton ...
    (uk.philosophy.atheism)
  • Re: Hilarious Dawkins Satire Video
    ... your precious U.S of A. with its hang-ups about religion and politics. ... with rifle training) because Dawkins is the boogeyman out to get them? ... modern science. ... Ok, using the scientific method, demonstrate the existence of God ...
    (soc.religion.christian)
  • Re: Why does creationism persist in the USA?
    ... fundementalist churches of the USA and why they support creationism. ... Education, specifially science education, would I expect to be a major ... level scientists and research due to continued funding at the elite ... Whatever "health and vigor" Evolutionism enjoys is also caused by God. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ken Miller interviewed regarding atheism, ID
    ... often his writing gives the impression that he is speaking for science ... And he's not, because, if God is defined as a force outside of ... "Miller: I have long since given up trying to figure out why other ... I think Miller has his finger on the main mistake Dawkins makes, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Would you stop for a moment?!
    ... However neither are *necessary* for existence to exist. ... The Xtians drive a stake in and say;heres' God, and the Bible is the explanation: start from there and it all makes sense'. ... An inference drawn from a a particular worldview, but that worldview is not absolute: A worldview that places a stake in the ground, calls it 'PHYSICAL reality', and makes its existence the most basic thing there is. ... Essentially from this point of Christianity and the Semitic religions are actually the foundation of material realism ans Western science. ...
    (comp.lang.php)