Posted on 12/30/2008 3:42:31 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Information scientist, author and evangelist, Dr Werner Gitt, a close friend of CMI, told us that on 23 October 2008 he was subjected to the most strident opposition he had ever encountered...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationontheweb.com ...
How does one go about testing for assumed philosophical naturalism in a scientific way?
You first.
You quoted text that clearly said 'philosophical naturalism' and referred to 'methodological naturalism'. If you didn't commit the fallacy of equating the existence of natural physical laws with philosophical naturalism, you must have made a reading comprehension error.
Good luck finding those arguments against natural physical laws.
I can not verify that Einstein theory twist though....
“What Einstein realized was that this picture was wrong. Gravity, just as inertia, was not a pulling action but a pushing action because all matter warps the fabric of space and curves it. The analogy often used is that of a piece of fabric stretched tightly across a wooden frame and laid flat like a table top. Imagine what happens to the fabric when a bowling ball is placed on it. The bowling ball warps the fabric. Now imagine placing a marble on the fabric. It rolls toward the bowling ball. Its movement is not because the bowling ball in any way pulls the marble to it,. it moves because the bowling ball has created a slope in the fabric and the marble rolls down the slope. In effect the fabric is pushing on the marble. “
http://www.unmuseum.org/einstein2.htm
Space and time can be warped (or twisted), but matter is still pushed by the bending of space. I can see how matter could either be pushed or pulled towards another item, but I can not see how matter could be twisted towards another item.
Maybe you can help me out here?
Do you really not understand that the questions are simply equivalent and opposite?
So you are refusing to answer the question?
So you are refusing to acknowledge my response?
That I responded to your response is an acknowledgment.
So you understand that the questions are simply equivalent and opposite?
Don't you have your answer then?
I have an answer. I am just not sure what your answer is given your divergence from reality.
Then your divergence from reality didn't allow you to understand that the questions are simply equal and opposite.
And I will say this:
until there is proof linking man to apes, evolution works on faith. Faith without hope.
I am happy to have my faith and hope too. I am comfortable with it. I am also comfortable with others believing what they want. I will defend my faith against others faith, but I will not force my will upon them (unless they start forcing me). When they start forcing me, the irresistible force will meet the immovable object. I hope it doesn't come to that, because I am not real sure if there will be a winner and/or a loser left to tell just what happened.
What product is that?
Mountains of evidence keep piling up.....
That research is being used to develop nextgen antibiotics.
Still waiting for you to retract your false statements against me.
How would you know how which side behaved if you hadn't read the thread?
Because I read this thread.
So you ass-u-me-d....
No. I observed the behavior of posters on this thread then commented on the behavior of those posters on this thread.
You are the one who assumed that I was talking about the other thread.
Still waiting on your retraction.
I'll just keep pointing out the difference between philosophical and methodological naturalism that you're so careful to avoid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.