You are correct I do assume the word of God when I look at the world. You also assume certain things as all people do. I believe my world view accounts for the real world we live in, seen and unseen while yours does not. God bless you.
I believe that my world view accounts for the real world we live in. I based it on what the evidence shows me to be true. I hope you will consider the fact that you may be wrong and consider that the bible may not be inspired by a god. I wish you well and hope you had a good easter.
Thanks for wishing me well I pray that you would know God's love and forgiveness. My point is that the naturalistic evolutionary world view does not account for the universal immaterial world of things. The scientific method is limited to only those things which can be observed and measured in repeatable experiments. I love science but it is limited. Naturalistic evolution is not science but is a philosophy. Not one experiment has proved molecules to people evolution. It is all speculation.
"My point is that the naturalistic evolutionary world view does not account for the universal immaterial world of things."
Real science doesn't deal with superstitions. It is logically impossible to prove definitively something does not exist, so we just try to let rational though speak for itself.
"...has proved molecules to people evolution. It is all speculation."
That first sentence makes no sense, but honestly, since when has hard evidence been 'speculation'? Only if you're in denial?
You dodge the issues stated and instead state that, "Real science doesn't deal with superstitions." If you are going to make a statement support your words. In your second sentence you do the same thing by simply stating that you have "hard evidence." Again you need to support this what hard evidence.
Prove that logic exists scientifically (The discipline of observing and measuring things in repeatable experiments).
I can't copy and paste due to the character limit, but had you actually done any research, there are many places citing evolution evidence. The Wikipedia entry on "Evolution" currently shows a list of recommended books for introductory reading, books on the history of evolution, and suggested advanced literature on the topic. Since a simple web search is out of the question for you it seems, I recommend you at least go to the library and look into some of the literature the entry mentions.
As for logic in science, again, a simple web search would have pointed you to hundreds of essays on the subject, as well as recommended reading. Start with:
In Google, type "Uses and Misuses of Logic" and hit the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button. The page should explain it in black and white.
Then there's:
"Probability Theory: The Logic Of Science" by E. T. Jaynes.
Oh, man. It's so sad what the girl says from 1:17-1:22.
jiggyjeff 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
jesus is a bastard
mary was a whore
god is nonexistent
the evidence is poor
DrScarystien 3 years ago
you have not given me one shred on scientific proof.
openairevangelism 3 years ago
you just assume that the bible is inspired by a god. why would a all knowing all loving god need a Messiah in the first place??
marjoe77 3 years ago
You are correct I do assume the word of God when I look at the world. You also assume certain things as all people do. I believe my world view accounts for the real world we live in, seen and unseen while yours does not. God bless you.
openairevangelism 3 years ago
I believe that my world view accounts for the real world we live in. I based it on what the evidence shows me to be true. I hope you will consider the fact that you may be wrong and consider that the bible may not be inspired by a god. I wish you well and hope you had a good easter.
best wishes
marjoe77 3 years ago
Thanks for wishing me well I pray that you would know God's love and forgiveness. My point is that the naturalistic evolutionary world view does not account for the universal immaterial world of things. The scientific method is limited to only those things which can be observed and measured in repeatable experiments. I love science but it is limited. Naturalistic evolution is not science but is a philosophy. Not one experiment has proved molecules to people evolution. It is all speculation.
openairevangelism 3 years ago
"My point is that the naturalistic evolutionary world view does not account for the universal immaterial world of things."
Real science doesn't deal with superstitions. It is logically impossible to prove definitively something does not exist, so we just try to let rational though speak for itself.
"...has proved molecules to people evolution. It is all speculation."
That first sentence makes no sense, but honestly, since when has hard evidence been 'speculation'? Only if you're in denial?
binarymage 3 years ago
You dodge the issues stated and instead state that, "Real science doesn't deal with superstitions." If you are going to make a statement support your words. In your second sentence you do the same thing by simply stating that you have "hard evidence." Again you need to support this what hard evidence.
Prove that logic exists scientifically (The discipline of observing and measuring things in repeatable experiments).
openairevangelism 3 years ago
I can't copy and paste due to the character limit, but had you actually done any research, there are many places citing evolution evidence. The Wikipedia entry on "Evolution" currently shows a list of recommended books for introductory reading, books on the history of evolution, and suggested advanced literature on the topic. Since a simple web search is out of the question for you it seems, I recommend you at least go to the library and look into some of the literature the entry mentions.
binarymage 3 years ago
As for logic in science, again, a simple web search would have pointed you to hundreds of essays on the subject, as well as recommended reading. Start with:
In Google, type "Uses and Misuses of Logic" and hit the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button. The page should explain it in black and white.
Then there's:
"Probability Theory: The Logic Of Science" by E. T. Jaynes.
binarymage 3 years ago