March, 2009, Posts of the Month

Because it seems real. Because that is all that's left. Not reliable enough for something to be "verified as true" but reliable enough to convince a person to believe something is true. I think we can use it to distiguish truth from falsehood to certain degrees. I'm not the only one who believes they have subjectively experienced god. When many people share experiences and corroborate, we can rule out some things from the experience. I think the IPU can be ruled out because nobody has actually experienced it and it is obviously made-up. I don't think our corroboration can be used to say that the subjective experiece is from Jesus, himself. But I do think we can say that we are on to something. A very general god-like thingy seems to fit in a loose sense with the experiences that people are having so I don't think it has been ruled out like the IPU.

GM writes:As I explained above, you have it backwards. Just to reiterate, science looks for answers. When they find an unknown, they attempt to bring it into the realm of the known. Only the ID lobby look for gaps in knowledge. When they find such a gap, they hold it up for all to see, triumphant at having found a refuge for their little god. They make no attempt to banish the gap in understanding by actually seeking more evidence. That would ruin the game. In truth, they worship these gaps as much as they worship any god.