Last thread for the day, promise!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-03-2011, 10:27 AM
 
RE: Last thread for the day, promise!
How about a simple question: What scientific proof is there that is a God, and if "proof" is offered, how can that be considered proof of God if there is no measuring stick? Scientifically speaking, something that cannot be proven and has not been vetted or subject to peer review falls into the category of "theory" which, circularly, brings us back to the simple fact that the existence of God is a theory.

How can science help a belief in God when science says we have evolved most recently from a common ancestor we share with chimpanzees, and religion says we were created?

I think one thing that can be done is to listen carefully to her words and call her out on any attempt to pass off her personal experiences as evidence.

Any chance you know her beliefs on how the Earth was made? I'm assuming she believes it was all abracadabra but until we know for sure it would be hard to provide questions that are aimed at her specific flavor of creationism.
Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2011, 01:14 AM
RE: Last thread for the day, promise!
(16-03-2011 10:27 AM)SANSD8TY Wrote:  How about a simple question: What scientific proof is there that is a God, and if "proof" is offered, how can that be considered proof of God if there is no measuring stick? Scientifically speaking, something that cannot be proven and has not been vetted or subject to peer review falls into the category of "theory" which, circularly, brings us back to the simple fact that the existence of God is a theory.

The scientific term for theory is that there is evidence to support it and no evidence to contradict it. This is as in the theory of evolution.

A better word would be hypothesis. The existance of god would not be considered a theory in the scientific usage of the word. The best it could do is be a hypothesis.

hy·poth·e·sis /haɪˈpɒθəsɪs, hɪ-/ Show Spelled
[hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi-] Show IPA

–noun, plural -ses /-ˌsiz/ show+spelled">Show Spelled
[-seez] Show IPA
.
1. a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
2. a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument.
3. the antecedent of a conditional proposition.
4. a mere assumption or guess.

When I find myself in times of trouble, Richard Dawkins comes to me, speaking words of reason, now I see, now I see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2011, 01:39 PM
 
RE: Last thread for the day, promise!
(17-03-2011 01:14 AM)No J. Wrote:  
(16-03-2011 10:27 AM)SANSD8TY Wrote:  How about a simple question: What scientific proof is there that is a God, and if "proof" is offered, how can that be considered proof of God if there is no measuring stick? Scientifically speaking, something that cannot be proven and has not been vetted or subject to peer review falls into the category of "theory" which, circularly, brings us back to the simple fact that the existence of God is a theory.

The scientific term for theory is that there is evidence to support it and no evidence to contradict it. This is as in the theory of evolution.

A better word would be hypothesis. The existance of god would not be considered a theory in the scientific usage of the word. The best it could do is be a hypothesis.

hy·poth·e·sis /haɪˈpɒθəsɪs, hɪ-/ Show Spelled
[hahy-poth-uh-sis, hi-] Show IPA

–noun, plural -ses /-ˌsiz/ show+spelled">Show Spelled
[-seez] Show IPA
.
1. a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
2. a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument.
3. the antecedent of a conditional proposition.
4. a mere assumption or guess.

This.

and I realize now, there aren't really any questions I can prepare for her. I have to see what she'll say first.
Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2011, 01:45 PM
 
RE: Last thread for the day, promise!
Thanks for the correction No J. Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: