[armydoc]

They just have to be (generally) testable, repeatable and not break any laws.

In other words, only naturalistic theories allowed. All others will be dismissed outright. I think that was raygunfan's point. Your naturalism is as much of a religious faith as my theism.

[raygunfan]

They just have to be (generally) testable, repeatable and not break any laws.

In other words, only naturalistic theories allowed. All others will be dismissed outright. I think that was raygunfan’s point. Your naturalism is as much of a religious faith as my theism.

ME: yup, my point exactly, the deck is stacked,the ‘game’ is fixed.

rule out anything that dosent point to mindless, purposeless random time chance and mutation....

and say it isnt science....

and voila’, you have evolutionism....

[Coyoteman]

In other words, only naturalistic theories allowed. All others will be dismissed outright. I think that was raygunfan's point. Your naturalism is as much of a religious faith as my theism.

Not quite. Naturalism is a working assumption. If evidence shows up that contradicts that assumption it can easily be changed or modified.

So far there has been no evidence of the supernatural.

If you want to show that the working assumption of naturalism is incorrect just present some evidence to the contrary and its gone. Simple, eh?

(But you need evidence, not religious belief.)