quote:
Just as someone might accuse me of having opinions based on the fact that I believe in the God of the Bible, I would submit that there are quite a few scientists that interperet the 'evidence' of their experiments with the presupposition that science is the final means of truth (evolution, etc.) and it just needs to be proven.
Thats illogical gibberish. You're saying scientists interpert the evidence of their experiments on the presumption that science is a means of truth. Isn't that obvious? Would you expect a scientist who thought that indfependant verificaiton and peer review were sound data-gathering strategies to instead actual perform a ouija board reading when they wanted to study something?
All you are doing is accusing sacientists of having a different opinion from yours, which is self evident. What you have not explained is why your opinion should be taken seriously, that is, why you appear to believe that peer review and independant verification are BAD strategies for finding truth, and why reading some ancient text is a good one.