basis) based on anecdotal evidence. I know that God exists due to the
evidence, but I could not prove it to others as the evidence is mainly
personal and has no meaning to others.
2. You can never 100% prove a scientific theory. You can only test it
successfully and say that in all tests, it works out. Science writes 'wiggle
room' into their methodology to accept that a theory, even one considered a
fact, may not be the final answer and there may be places/times where it
does not apply.
3. There is no way to test for God's existence. Any test would require God's
interaction with the caveat that it is God interacting. Nature, the physical
structure of the universe, the pattern of creation can all be seen as
evidence of God, but would have to be discounted by any test of God's
existence. Bottom line is you can't test for God without knowing that God
exists and getting his word that he will interact. It's like testing a
catatonic for cola preferences, they're just not co-operating. God has not
overtly stated his existence to a mass of people since biblical times
(according to those who believe) and his covert interactions can always be
explained away.
_____
The most fundamental point to me seems that if a person put the mind
to it and had the time, they could research, test, and prove the
scientific theories. On the other hand, no matter how much time,
work, or research you put into it, you'd not be able to prove there
is/isn't a god. That's where the difference remains.
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 14:32:40 -0400, Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 14:21 9/29/2004 -0400, you wrote:
> >If the data adequately supported the conclusions, and were considered
> >to do so by the relevant scientific community, then I would
> >tentatively accept the conclusions. The watchword is tentatively.
> >Otherwise I freely admit it would be beyond me and goes into the realm
> >of Don't Know.
>
> OK so you have made a decision to tentatively accept the conclusion of one
> scientist based on the recommendation of another group of scientist.
> That sure sounds like you have FAITH in that group of scientist. Or maybe
> you have FAITH in the verification process the scientist's ideas go
through.
>
>
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
