> Are you accepting them as phenomena?
I accept that some people seem to believe that they exist. But the convincing, objective evidence is wholly lacking.<<<<
So you do not accept they are phenomena. Make a decision, don't waffle. You are arguing people's beliefs. If they are not a phenomena, science is an inappropriate tool.
> You dismissed them as supernatural without any such exploration.
Well, except for the past several hundred years worth...<<<<
Your words dismissed them as beliefs. If someone does actually try to examine them as phenomena, they are usually labelled crackpots. And some clearly are.
> Calling a phenomena supernatural is just a way of saying I don't want to look at it, but I want to shut down the discussion anyway.
You're describign the ID/Creationism camp. "God did it, end of discussion."<<<<
And yours says "God does not exist and has no impact in the world as a phenomenon."
You dismissed out of hand elves and fairies. But they generated billion dollars of activity with only the LOTR and HP. People have a strong need for these things.
But I don't believe they are phenomena.
Do you?
DK
> So you do not accept they are phenomena. Make a decision, don't waffle.
"Phenomena" are "things that happen." Gods, elves fairies, whatever are notions.
> And yours says "God does not exist and has no impact in the world as a phenomenon."
Incorrect. The god hypothesis has failed all scientific tests to date. It can be safely set aside. That's not to say God doesn't exist; it's jsut that there's no evidence for any relevance.
> You dismissed out of hand elves and fairies.
Yep. As I would phrenology. Hypotheses tested and found lacking.