Why are evolutionists such hypocrites?

That doesn't have any bearing on the example. The example
stated a possible answer to the question 'What is the
scientific evidence for evolution?'The proposed answer was valid, scientific evidence -- of
descent with modification. I think the scientific jury is still out on the Bible codes,
so they cannot be used as evidence for anything until they
themselves are 'prooved' beyond reasonable doubt.Theomatics -- even if there IS a code/correllation with the
number system, why does that mean God put it there, and how
is it evidence in favour of demons?Prayer experiments -- in what way are they repeatable, what are the
controls -- and what about the results is an indication of
demons?

I was being polite and trying to not get into an
argument over the 'codes' themselves

But even if the codes are actually there, and it is not some
odd stochastic coincidence, that does not mean that God (any god)
put it there. There are other possibilities.Suppose the Bible were simply a work of man, but the authors
required a means of vailidating copies so they carefully
constructed the language of the verses to contain a kind
of checksum.One has to bear in mind that some codes are much harder to crack
or duplicate without knowledge of the underlying principle
than they are to construct when one knows the principle.In short, there appears to be nothing in the existence of
a code within the bible (or any text) that is suggestive,
necessarily, of a god or that the mythology contained
in the main text is correct. Again, interesting result, but not the only possible explanation.Have you tried getting individuals to pray to gods other
than the Judeo-Christian god for example. Get a group of
Wickens, or those who attmept to ressurect the Druidic belief
system to do the same.It doesn't discount the possibility that something else is happening
apart from divine intervention.

quote:

---

I grant you, by the rules of H-D science, that God is not proved by the Bible Codes results, only confirmed.

---

Bible codes can/do say nothing about the veracity of the
main text. Only that the main text is the intended text.
It does not mean that the Bible stories are in any way true.Likewise, the only thing that the bible codes could confirm
is that there are verifiable versions or verses of the bible.
For example, a chapter/verse which does not have the correct
code should be discarded as inaccurate.Prayer Studies:Yes, it encourages an individual to explore the utility of
prayer -- but it doesn't say anything about the 'power'
that responds to prayers (if any is suggested by the results).Some people believe that the human mind is capable of influencing
the material world. This would be an alternate explanation for
any positive outcomes resulting from prayer -- groups of individuals
might even be expected to achieve better results. Prayer
could then be a means of harnessing those mental powers.Even if the results of a prayer study irrefutably showed that
prayer could influence the material world, it does NOT prove
or even suggest the existence of any god(s). It certainly
doesn't suggest the existence of the judeo-christian God.If there are alternate explanations for data, then the one that
best fits ALL the data is more likely to be correct. If there
us nothing to choose from between alternate explanations,
then we can make no conclusion.If multiple explanations seem to fit equally well -- we need
more data/experimentation aimed at verifying predictions made
by the opposing explanations.

Thanks.

I'm not sure I agree 100% with either side of this argument
at the moment.If one discounts a whole area of possible causation, then
one introduces the possibility of assigning the wrong
cause to the witnessed effect.If, on the other hand, one suggests possible causation that
cannot even be investigated one can impede the progression
of knowledge.Take demons as an example of a possible causation. Whether you
find the idea plausable or not is irrelevant.IFF one could provide specific predictions that could ONLY
be the result of demonic activity, and then test those
predictions -- would that be scientific or not?If the opinion is that a demon could do anything, then that
is definitely non-refutable and so no further progress
can be made.