Coyote writes:
And science wins when, through gathering, evaluation, and debate over evidence, we build increasingly accurate explanations of natural phenomena.
Though it is true that evidence usually settles a case, the absence of evidence does NOT automatically equate to evidence of Absence.(No God)
I could care less what Ayn Rand thinks, as well.
There is no battle between science and evidence over Faith and dogma.
It comes down to our individual character and overall critical thought display.
jar represents faith and belief well, though his logic, reason, and reality tend to trash organized religious concepts that are accepted by the mainstream.
For the science crowd, however, he scores a touchdown quite often.
Many believers offer little help to the Faith & Belief side to appear intelligent and convincing. I fear that more harm is done through fundamentalist literalist thinking than it helps us.
I need work also, that much I will admit. It takes some time to put together a well-expressed argument.
Edited by Phat, : No reason given.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler
™ Version 4.2
