Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Do Science and Faith Converge?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Uirgil
May 24, 2012, 7:40:22 PM5/24/12
to
In article
<f78a80cb-05f2-4d05...@v24g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
BroilJAB <Design...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> If you're having any doubts about your beliefs, this web site may be
> for
> you.
Not me!
The only things I have any doubts about are claims made for which there
is no supporting objective physical evidence.
<f78a80cb-05f2-4d05...@v24g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
BroilJAB <Design...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> If you're having any doubts about your beliefs, this web site may be
> for
> you.
Not me!
The only things I have any doubts about are claims made for which there
is no supporting objective physical evidence.
Uirgil
May 24, 2012, 7:44:50 PM5/24/12
to
In article
<3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
BroilJAB <Design...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> The Cambrian
> Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
<3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
BroilJAB <Design...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> The Cambrian
> Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
carole
May 24, 2012, 8:27:04 PM5/24/12
to
On May 25, 9:44 am, Uirgil <uir...@uirgil.ur> wrote:
> In article
> <3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb-bda6-d909ff7ac...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
These days we have consensus science, known also as scientism.
And it covers and includes such concepts as a person tried by media as
well as global warming where the science isn't really there, but the
speculation is that it might be and we can't afford to take the
chance, therefore it is.
--
carole
www.conspiracee.com
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to
Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions
Tuesday, November 9th, 2004
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251
> In article
> <3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb-bda6-d909ff7ac...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> BroilJAB <DesignDen...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> > The Cambrian
> > Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
>
> Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
>
> But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
> prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
But what about consensus science - you didn't cover that one?
> BroilJAB <DesignDen...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> > The Cambrian
> > Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
>
> Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
>
> But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
> prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
These days we have consensus science, known also as scientism.
And it covers and includes such concepts as a person tried by media as
well as global warming where the science isn't really there, but the
speculation is that it might be and we can't afford to take the
chance, therefore it is.
--
carole
www.conspiracee.com
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to
Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions
Tuesday, November 9th, 2004
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251
Ferd Berfle
May 25, 2012, 4:44:52 AM5/25/12
to
"carole" <hubbc...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:a321f840-f246-49d2...@t2g2000pbl.googlegroups.com...
On May 25, 9:44 am, Uirgil <uir...@uirgil.ur> wrote:
> In article
> <3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb-bda6-d909ff7ac...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> BroilJAB <DesignDen...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> > The Cambrian
> > Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
>
> Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
>
> But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
> prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
But what about consensus science - you didn't cover that one?
These days we have consensus science, known also as scientism.
And it covers and includes such concepts as a person tried by media as
well as global warming where the science isn't really there, but the
speculation is that it might be and we can't afford to take the
chance, therefore it is.
**
> In article
> <3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb-bda6-d909ff7ac...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> BroilJAB <DesignDen...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> > The Cambrian
> > Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
>
> Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
>
> But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
> prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
But what about consensus science - you didn't cover that one?
These days we have consensus science, known also as scientism.
And it covers and includes such concepts as a person tried by media as
well as global warming where the science isn't really there, but the
speculation is that it might be and we can't afford to take the
chance, therefore it is.
Don't forget the "settled science."
Eunometic
May 25, 2012, 10:28:01 AM5/25/12
to
> But what about consensus science -
What a joke that is.
Andy Wainwright
May 25, 2012, 11:04:00 AM5/25/12
to
Game Theory, viewing the universe as a multi-user dungeon makes more
sense than either of the previous creation myths.
Evolution Of The Species supplanted Genesis, and The Matrix supplanted that.
plainolamerican
May 25, 2012, 11:48:05 AM5/25/12
to
On May 24, 6:44 pm, Uirgil <uir...@uirgil.ur> wrote:
> In article
> <3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb-bda6-d909ff7ac...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> In article
> <3d19dab0-a4c0-42bb-bda6-d909ff7ac...@m10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> BroilJAB <DesignDen...@wmconnect.com> wrote:
> > The Cambrian
> > Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
>
> Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
>
> But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
> prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
Can Science and Faith Converge?
> > The Cambrian
> > Explosion is absolutely fatal to evolution.
>
> Not according to scientists, who find them quite compatible.
>
> But ever since Evolution undercut creationist mythology, those who
> prefer faith to fact have rejected science.
---
no ... faith is based on old myths and scinece is based on facts
Fred M. McNeill
May 25, 2012, 4:23:17 PM5/25/12
to
brains. Brain based 'virtual reality' (considered as 'reality'), that
supports well practiced stories.
There is enough mystery around for any science and religion.
Joe
May 25, 2012, 5:33:12 PM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:44:52 -0400
"Ferd Berfle" <fa...@farkle.com> wrote:
> **
>
> Don't forget the "settled science."
>
>
'Settled science' is a very useful concept, as is 'consensus science'.
"Ferd Berfle" <fa...@farkle.com> wrote:
> **
>
> Don't forget the "settled science."
>
>
Like 'community', when used without conscious irony, they provide
important information about those who use them.
Heinlein called such words and phrases 'reliable channel markers'.
--
Joe
Kangaroo Court Australia
May 25, 2012, 5:44:49 PM5/25/12
to
man
Zerkon
May 27, 2012, 10:09:18 AM5/27/12
to
In article <44b21341-4b64-4930-a488-4c76ea4071a4
@oy3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, euno...@yahoo.com.au says...
> Can Science and Faith Converge?
"Science" must be grounded with a specific scientist or group all of
which having names, addresses and so forth. "Faith" the same, grounded
by specific people. Otherwise you are sending out your champion
metaphors ('faith' vs 'science') as if in some home team battle for you
all while you simply yell at each other over what, in fact, is void of
substance.
For many of you the better question is "Will Science and Faith Ever
Diverge?".
@oy3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, euno...@yahoo.com.au says...
> Can Science and Faith Converge?
which having names, addresses and so forth. "Faith" the same, grounded
by specific people. Otherwise you are sending out your champion
metaphors ('faith' vs 'science') as if in some home team battle for you
all while you simply yell at each other over what, in fact, is void of
substance.
For many of you the better question is "Will Science and Faith Ever
Diverge?".
0 new messages