They can't find a lot of the supposed antimatter in the universe that should exist either. Does that then mean that it does not exist for ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES? |
Bad example. We know that there was once lots of anti-matter and we know why there isn't so much anymore. And since we can make it in our labs we know it does exist regardless of intent or purpose.
One difference between believers and the rest of you in general seems to be that believers presuppose that God should exist. |
Why? Because you were told this as an innocent trusting non-critical child?
Later, at around age 30, I became "born again" and felt subjective evidence of His reality |
You got emotional. You know how emotion affects judgement.
I'm beginning to think that there is a reason for all of this disconnect in our culture, and I'm not sure how to explain it |
How about this: Religion is bad for the culture, the society, the species.
It would be nothing more than my subjective belief anyway, but I am convinced that the scientific method has not neatly tied this argument up yet. |
Well, actually science has already decided. Anything that can be asserted without evidence is just as easily dismissed without any concern at all.
look at how often we were wrong before about many things. |
You're being a good straight man, Phat.
Having been wrong about so many things in the past is exactly why the scientific methods, all of them, were devised and are so strongly and highly regarded.
And yes, we "limit yourselves by sticking to evidence" and the other things you mention so to avoid the egregious errors of the past and their disastrous consequences.
They all sound like you guys! |
Proper analysis of an issue will lead to consensus. Good for us.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.