Old naval tactic: when outgunned make much smoke. My post #143 pointed out that your post #137 was the first introduction of your qualifier “scientific methodology.” You haven’t introduced a counter argument, just smoke. Great billowing clouds.
“It was also apparent from allmendream's previous post that he was specifically talking about creationism in that same context”
The assertion does not prove the fact. Repeating the assertion does not change the status of the fact. allmendream’s assertion has been categorical (and uncompromising). Great billowing clouds.
“I had specifically said creationism is useless for COOKING”
I hear just fine, thank you, but I’ll take your remark as an instance of emphasis, not of shouting. Your assertion was in response to my observation that passages in the Torah were important to an observant Jew for food preparation (COOKING). Your response was simply to restate your original assertion. Great billowing clouds.
“*I* haven't brought up philosophy.”
“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.”
Who recently quoted the above? You did (in case you’re gagging on the answer). Not a philosophical observation? Something you found in a science textbook? A peer-reviewed article perhaps? An ancient script found at an archeological site? Or, is it “Existential nonsense”? “Thought meandering”? Then why did you bother to mention it? It couldn’t be because the quote had any value.
I won’t bother with the balance of your post. It’s simply more of the same: an insult and a series of sidetracks down which you hope to send me galloping.
Great billowing clouds.
Except one thing:
I asked you if ethics are to be found in Science. You responded, “Science is a methodology, a tool, and as such, has no intrinsic ethics. Just as with the use of any other tool, the ethics are contained within the practioner.”
OK, so Science has no ethics. You’re on record.
“You can certainly believe that God created the universe without doggedly holding to a literal YEC belief”
Then address yourself to YECs and stop aiding and abetting in the slandering of a whole people.
“Remember, guns don't kill people--people kill people.”
Is that a philosophical remark? Thought meandering? Existential nonsense?
Yes, post #137 *was* the first time I used the qualifier "scientific methodology"--right in the same sentence where I first used the term "creationism is useless". Seeing as how the first time I used either term occurred in the same sentence, you have no basis on which to say I ever made a blanket statement. So quit putting words in my mouth, or claiming that I said things I did not say.
The assertion does not prove the fact. Repeating the assertion does not change the status of the fact. allmendream’s assertion has been categorical (and uncompromising). Great billowing clouds.
In other words, you did not read allmendream's post in its entirety, and you are committing the same dishonest tactic that we can see used among the charlatans selling young earth creationism: using quotes out of context to try to "prove" scientists mean something different than what they actually said.
Your assertion was in response to my observation that passages in the Torah were important to an observant Jew for food preparation (COOKING). Your response was simply to restate your original assertion.
I have to repeat it, since you apparently did not (and still don't) understand the context. Taking things out of context is no different than putting words into people's mouths. The creation story of Genesis =/= the Torah.
OK, so Science has no ethics. You’re on record.
Well... it *almost* seems like we're getting somewhere. Scientists have ethics, science doesn't.
“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.”
Who recently quoted the above? You did (in case you’re gagging on the answer). Not a philosophical observation?
No, that's not philosophy, and neither is the statement "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." Those are sayings--short statements illustrating pieces of wisdom, formulated from people's empirical observations of human behavior. They have nothing in common with non-empirical philosophical questions such as, "If all the contents of awareness are ideas, how can we know that anything exists apart from ideas?" That, according to Wikipedia, was the basis of Descartes' existentialist nonsensical ramblings. GIGO, as they say.
Then address yourself to YECs and stop aiding and abetting in the slandering of a whole people.
I've been addressing YECism all along, and have taken care to indicate that. You *chose* to interpret my criticism of YECism as an indictment of all Christians, which it is not.