Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: donh
Science has to be taken on faith because there is no prime source for it

You went over the deep end there. Prime source for science is the elements of the universe around us. Observation and experimentation gives us data - the prime source.

By contrast, science is just a bunch of constantly changing gobbeldy-gook the fundamentals of which two scientists describe alike

Yeah - whatever. Science is the sum of knowledge produced by observation and experimentation coherently related by the rigorously worked out mechanisms. Science evolves as data is added to that sum of knowledge - changes aren;t whimsical or random.

BTW - God as prime mover is the handwaving of ID - no mechanism, no support, no proof, no nothing - just wave the hand and sacrifice a goat.

Maybe you should try the decaf.

566 posted on 02/19/2004 7:04:32 PM PST by Ophiucus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies ]


To: Ophiucus
Yeah - whatever. Science is the sum of knowledge produced by observation and experimentation coherently related by the rigorously worked out mechanisms. Science evolves as data is added to that sum of knowledge - changes aren;t whimsical or random.

You mean like when bleeding patients was abandoned? Or do you mean like when the notion of the ether was abandoned? Or do you mean when Peking Man was abandoned? Or do you mean when fixed continents were abandoned in favor of continental drift? In the mean time, how often have christian churches abandoned the notion of God as the source of all blessings, or the Bible as the source of his word?

BTW - God as prime mover is the handwaving of ID - no mechanism, no support, no proof, no nothing - just wave the hand and sacrifice a goat.

The phrase "prime mover" substantially predates the ID movement, and there is every bit as much support for ID, or the notion of a prime mover, as there is for standard evolutionary theory, including all of the evidence that supports standard evolutionary theory, which does not conflict with most of the brands of ID theory floating around.

Maybe you should try the decaf.

Maybe you should try less dismissive, vague BS, and more rebuttals that actually feature enough detail to rebut something.

567 posted on 02/19/2004 7:47:27 PM PST by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 566 | View Replies ]

To: Ophiucus
You went over the deep end there. Prime source for science is the elements of the universe around us. Observation and experimentation gives us data - the prime source.

Gee, that's the exact same place my evidence for a prime mover came from--the rapturous wonder of showflakes, the beauty of the rainbow.......et cetera.

571 posted on 02/19/2004 8:02:15 PM PST by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 566 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson