Replies

So what your philosopher-friends above are telling you is just that there is a realm of understanding outside & higher than the realm of science, and from the heights of that philosophical realm they feel entitled to pass judgment on lowly science. And of course, they are correct. So lowly science will continue to humbly do what it's intended to do -- keep our lights on, keep our homes warm, put food on our tables, clothes on our backs, move us from point A to point B, keep us healthy, solve our natural mysteries, and let us communicate at light speeds, etc..

I get this every time.

The bottom line is that theories like Evolution and the Big Bang are historical sciences, trying to determine what happened milllions of years ago.

And then you will say science is science and all disciplines need to be created equally.

But Biology and Physics scientists that need to test their hypothesis can do it daily and forever because their testable theorems exist in real life.

Historial sciences like Evolution and the Big Bang Theory operate in a totally different realm. You cannot pickyback historical science theorems on the amazing acheivements of science that can directly demonstrate their theories on a daily basis in all our lives.

Outside of Physics and Biology, the rest of the sciences operate in a different level of believability.

microgood: "The bottom line is that theories like Evolution and the Big Bang are historical sciences, trying to determine what happened milllions of years ago."

So far as I know, nobody but traditionalist Christians use that term "historical sciences" in any argumentative sense -- as if "historical science" is somehow less "scientific" than what you call "operational science".
By using that term, you reveal your pose as "philosopher" is false, and in reality, you are here to promote your own religious ideas of Creationism.

microgood: "Outside of Physics and Biology, the rest of the sciences operate in a different level of believability."

Actually, if you think about it, your so-called "historical sciences" are the same type of science as forensic science, which is used in courtrooms every day as proof of innocence or guilt, to convict or set free defendants, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Of course, science itself never uses such terms as "proof" or "conviction", but juries of ordinary human beings do, and they do it based on those same "historical sciences" which you are here to proclaim as "junk science."

So, let me say this yet again: you are absolutely entitled to believe whatsoever you wish to believe about the past -- whatever your scriptures tell you, howsoever your faith interprets them, you can believe it... provided, provided you do not call those beliefs "science".

They are not, and you should not pretend they are.
By definition, your faith is outside, above and beyond all science -- always was, is now and always will be.