 | | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
|
This is the same old Creationist dodge: (X) scientific theory isn't PROVEN (nothing is in science - it simply shows you don't understand science when you say such things) so it's just as much an article of faith as religion. Except one is based on (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
|
(...) Perhaps. If either is proven false in some measure, and they likewise refuse to modify their positions, then, yes, they are bed-fellows. (...) Perhaps I did not clearly express my attitude in these comments: I mean that we as humans should (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
|
(...) Here again, the problem is that literalists assert that The Bible *is* beyond reasonable criticism. (...) Agreed. Let us assert for the record that the so-called "Bible Code" is equally nonsensical and without meaningful predictive value. (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
|
(...) IMO, the issue of interpretation and translations and so forth is, at a fundamental level, very simple: Reasonable, well-intentioned, well-informed, open-minded inquiry is a root necessity of any fruitful scholarly, literary, scientific, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Science and beliefs (was Re: Alien races)
|
|
(...) It's been a while since I heard a Highlander reference. Weren't they going to relase yet another redundant sequel? There Should Have Been Only One. Dave! (24 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
