< No, it also means something that cannot be measured or observed independently.>
totally wrong. History is replete with examples of things and events that were considered supernatural that science and logic has since cleared up. For example much of subatomic behavior cannot be (by definition) observed independently but is most definitely NOT supernatural. < What condescending crap: "what science tells you". As if we are passive consumers of some questionable source called "science".> a great deal believe only that which they or science can prove. < If you cannot accept that others can enjoy their lives without believing in the things that you believe in, I would suggest that your beliefs may not be as strong as you'd like to think.> now THAT is condescending crap. My faith exists outside of what science can prove. It doesn't not however mean I cannot be intelligent and inventive and formulate scientific theories and models that describe the universe in a way which does not preclude God. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Leafe Sent: Saturday, 31 January 2009 8:31 AM To: ProFox Email List Subject: Re: [OT] Chaves warms to Obama after character reference from Castro On Jan 30, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Geoff Flight wrote: > What total rubbish! Right back at you! > Even the term 'supernatural' is a primitive one. 'super > natural' means that someone behaves outside the laws of the universe > which > actually means the KNOWN laws of the universe. No, it also means something that cannot be measured or observed independently. > The subatomic behaves in a > way contrary to many of the established laws of Newtonian physics. > We don't > call it supernatural, we assume our 'laws' are inadequate - which > they are. > 4+ dimensional theory (which clearly you have no idea of) formulates > a model > of the universe that makes much of the 'supernatural' part of the > base > model. And yes, it does provide a theoretical construct for both > heaven and > God although that is not its intent. You are confusing current limits of knowledge with things that never able to be known, only believed. > If you faith and belief extends only as far as science tells you and > that > which you can prove you will live a limited existence. What condescending crap: "what science tells you". As if we are passive consumers of some questionable source called "science". If you cannot accept that others can enjoy their lives without believing in the things that you believe in, I would suggest that your beliefs may not be as strong as you'd like to think. -- Ed Leafe [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
