Re: does science have nothing to say even when it cant offer a definite conclusion?

On Jul 7, 12:44 am, snex <x...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 6, 11:36 pm, derdag <der...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Jul 6, 1:48 pm, snex <x...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

from another thread:

Well I'll give you a chance to demonstrate, and I'll pick a subject that
iss far more generally accepted to be alive at the time. Herod Antipas,
on what we would call the 23rd of June, had what for the first meal of
the day? Of course that could be a trick question and he did not eat
that day, but then again you seem to be claiming that sciene can tell me
that anywhay.

ok lets play your game. science cannot determine what he did eat that
day (or if he did eat anything). but does that mean i can say he ate
the lost continent of atlantis, and that is why we no longer see it?
what if i call that my religious faith? does that make it more
plausible?

if 1.5 billion people start going around saying that herod antipas ate
the lost continent of atlantis on the 23rd of june, and some of them
happen to be scientists, does that make the belief about atlantis more
plausible?

the problem you seem to be having is thinking that if science cannot
form a definite conclusion, all logically coherent conclusions are
therefore all equally likely, and anybody can say whatever they want
about the matter. the fact that science cannot form a definite
conclusion does NOT mean that science has absolutely no commentary on
a matter.

Good scientists recognize the limits of what is known, what will be
known and what must be believed and trusted presently to make theories
about beginnings and methods. We know that it is possible to make a
good guess/theory based on what we also know may be incomplete and
*wrong* present knowledge/data.

There is no downside to the alternative belief system presented in the
New Testiment. Recognizing that the big science is about faith and
belief allows the free choice of Christianity and that one should
'believe as a child.' I have ZERO doubt that NO scientific knowledge
will become concrete enough to pull scientific belief into a catagory
of "To Know." It will always change. Better instrumentation and more
in depth understanding will defeat some theoreticals that we may think
to be almost absolute at this point in time. In conclusion, we have
to choose between one belief system which offers no hope perchance
that the Bible is correct about energies/causes which we are not
equipped to observe and test, and one that instructs reverence to that
'Cause.'

There is no downside.

the downside comes when you find out you should have picked islam.
oops!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I like women with a clittoris, shaves, smells good, shows some skin,
takes a bath and hasn't been buggered by her father, brothers,
cousins, grandpappys, and had her labias sliced off and sewn shut. I
would never be a happy Muslim. No wonder they want to blow themselves
up....

.