• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    When you talk about science in context of subjects like biology, physics, etc... it's pretty obvious which branch of science one is speaking about.
  2. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    None of which matters to the point being made concerning the natural sciences. It's like talking to a wall..............
  3. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Not what I said. You seem to have this reading comprehension problem frequently. I do. I also understand how people can have really skewed ideas about how science works.
  4. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Yes, and as I said, none of this supports your point. It merely talks about the difference between these. :shrug:
  5. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Well, you did say that you doubt it "just as much". And what distinguishes the natural sciences from things like religion is the empirical standards of testability and independent verification. Since you doubt it "just as much", how else can I interpret that as those empirical standards being...
  6. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Maybe you should post in english on an english forum instead of asking people to run to an online translator. Anyhow... so it's natural science, social science and cultural science. Great. So what? The point remains. It's not saying what you claim it is saying. I gave you the example of the...
  7. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Yawn
  8. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Ha, so independent testability, verification and repeated confirmation through evidence is meaningless to you?
  9. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Maybe you should stop talking in riddles trying to make yourself look smart and just be clearer?
  10. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Which, as I said, talks about the difference between natural science and social science. :shrug:
  11. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Cool story, bro. So what is the practical difference between a "philosophical skeptic" and "scientific skeptic"? :shrug:
  12. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Which is why we develop jargon and symbolic languages like math. The universe = the space-time continuum. It contains, at least, everything we observe (like humans) and likely also additional things we haven't yet observed or don't have the ability to observe. You seem to be the only one...
  13. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    Your link in Danish said no such thing. It talked about the difference between natural science and the social sciences.
  14. TagliatelliMonster

    How do you detect "design"?

    You can say the exact same meaningless negative statement about ANY demonstrable natural process. Plate tectonics, germs, gravity, atomic decay, super novae, volcano eruptions, rain, .... Hey, the natural process explanation of lightning formation doesn't exclude Jupiter and Thor. :shrug...
  15. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    So far for speaking in clear and plain terms.... :shrug: I asked for what the practical difference is. I still have no clue.
  16. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    On paper, in your head, on the computer, wherever. The model is not the thing being modeled. The model is supposed to accurately reflect the thing being modeled. This is why you test the model against the thing being modeled. To see if it's accurate.
  17. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    The scientific method transcends culture. This is the point you seem to be not getting. It matters not in which culture you find yourself. If you wish to do a, say, medical clinical trial, the form and method and "best practice" will be the same, if it is to be conducted according the proper...
  18. TagliatelliMonster

    How do you detect "design"?

    Is it? When have you demonstrated a "designer" to being an actual possibility? Just claiming it is a possibility isn't enough. I could also simply claim that undetectable graviton pixies are a "possibility" for gravity. Does that make it so? Also, since you seem to think that bare claims...
  19. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    What is the practical difference? Try and not to be vague and full of jargon. Speak plainly and clear. What is the practical difference?
  20. TagliatelliMonster

    Evidence, science and religion and that evidence matters.

    If the maps don't match the landscapes, the maps are wrong (that is, if the maps are supposed to model the landscape)
Top