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

To: Fester Chugabrew
'If both options have the same explanatory power, then NEITHER can be chosen over the other.' (me)


"You're finally getting somewhere. Congratulations." (you)

Is that a joke? I've been saying since day one that you can't make a choice between there being a God or there not being a God using science. It's strictly a theological/philosophical question. YOU have been the one saying otherwise.

"For whom do you speak, and from what knowledge?"

Now you're going back to science being able to chose again. Please, find a position and stick with it.

"It is hardly a "mockery" of science to posit the idea that organized matter that behaves according to prectable laws is best explained by intelligent design."

You JUST SAID that NEITHER OPTION {explaining everything with a Designer(God), explaining everything without a Designer(God)} could be chosen over the other. How on Earth can one of these options *best explain* things if BOTH have the same epxlanitory power and neither can chosen over the other?? This is completely illogical.
856 posted on 01/05/2006 4:52:03 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 854 | View Replies ]


To: CarolinaGuitarman
epxlanitory= explanatory.
858 posted on 01/05/2006 4:53:35 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies ]

To: CarolinaGuitarman
This is completely illogical.

"You are now entering... the Fester Zone."

859 posted on 01/05/2006 4:58:03 PM PST by dread78645 (Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies ]

To: CarolinaGuitarman; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; puroresu
Is that a joke?

No, it's not a joke. Science from a theistic or atheistic point of view is never entirely testable or falsifiable. To that extent "neither can be chosen over the other" as absolutely determinative of objective reality.

Both, OTH, present the observer with a different way of going at the evidence and explaining it, and thus the observer is left with more than one choice. He can blindly choose one or the other, or he can weigh the evidence from one or the other and then choose. Neither should suffer the federal government to tell them their point of view is not worthy of consideration in a scientific forum. That is why I welcome both atheistic and theistic science in public schools. And yes, the two approaches tend to commingle despite their polar foundations. That's okay. 1s and 0s commingle too, with wonderful results.

861 posted on 01/05/2006 5:11:25 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | 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