Replies

Anyone that posts bible passages when discussing science is too far gone to continue to talk science with.

Limiting ones self to only one method of discovering what is true [experimentalism] is limiting your ability to only discover truth found inside a limited sphere of knowledge, and ignoring truth that is outside the sphere, even if the truth inside and outside the sphere are related. This was part of what I meant when I wrote "One reason a conversation is difficult with an evolutionist is there is usually not an agreement on epistemology."

Why is it exactly that any other historical text (Egyptian hieroglyphics, stone carvings, Babylonian writings etc) are in the realm of 'forensic' science, but the bible is off limits? Why is it that when people swear that they swear by the name of Jesus Christ and not Darwin or Dread Scott, or anyone else?

I know that you are attempting to witness, not discuss science.

I am unapologetic about "attempting to witness". When someone argues for evolution, they are "attempting to witness" for their evolutionary religion as well. Claiming that "witnessing" is off limits is demonstrating a desire for bias instead of intellectual objectively or curiousity about the subject.

It should be noted that there are a fair number of interesting scientific concepts from many different scientific fields of study which directly relate to the question of origins in post #260, many of which I personally find particularly interesting.

As I said, we are done.

You mix religion with science, which makes science useless, your idea of plato and socrates is ancient, and is of little use to modern science, (unless you are speaking of logic of course,) the rest of the platonic stuff is useless for science. Great philosophy, useless science.

You just keep going on your little dreamworld, and science will just continue on it's real world.

Evolution is not religion, has never been a religion, and never will be a religion. It is a scientific theory, nothing more. It may scare you, it may even weaken your faith, but that just makes it a threat to your beliefs, it doesn't threaten mine. It is a scientific theory, it is incapable of impinging on my religious beliefs.

I am unapologetic about "attempting to witness". When someone argues for evolution, they are "attempting to witness" for their evolutionary religion as well. Claiming that "witnessing" is off limits is demonstrating a desire for bias instead of intellectual objectively or curiousity about the subject.

That's well said.