Ah yes, everyone else, especially me, that points out your “scientific method” of “proof by arrogant condescension” just MUST be “stupid”.
Keep it up, you’re just proving the point. Your question is irrelevant to the point. And that point is that you atheist folks have exactly the attitude that you display.
Now, are you going to post another proof of the concept?
Go ahead.
Ah yes, everyone else, especially me, that points out your “scientific method” of “proof by arrogant condescension” just MUST be “stupid”.Still no definition... what are you afraid of? After you have an "advanced technical degree" don't you snoogums?Keep it up, you’re just proving the point. Your question is irrelevant to the point. And that point is that you atheist folks have exactly the attitude that you display.
Now, are you going to post another proof of the concept? Go ahead.
These arguments always tickle me...”scientists” can’t even agree what “science” or the “scientific method”, or...well you pretty much name it; “IS”.
Two scientists with degrees from the same school can disagree about a topic, a theory, and go about their lives “proving” or “disproving” one another or something or the other and no concensus is reached anyway amongst their own peers!
“Science” is all too often whatever someone or some group wants to define it as, in the moment, to suit their ends.
One week red meat or red wine is bad, then it’s good, then it’s bad...
so stay tuned on the so called scientific method...chances are it’ll change in oh about....3 minutes! ;)