"Of what relevance is that? how is that evidence of anything?"
Of what relevance is that?
"The god hypothesis works with any output. Therefore it isn't science.
"
Of what relevance is that?
"It has nothing to do with whether the science we now have is correct.
"
Of what relevance is that?
"That is irrelevant. "
Of what relevance is that?
"Argument from ignorance is invalid."
Of what relevance is that?
"Nobody claims that scientists made the universe."
no scientist just think that they know how everything works and that their thoughts are the only ones that count and everything in opposition is wrong.
"Science doesn't know and may never know. That doesn't mean we throw up our hands and put an end to questioning."
you dont throw up your hands you close your minds if something seems out of the known science envelope and that it what our problems arose from
, your instant conclusions that you and you alone are right.
if I make a computer program to perform a task , then run that program , it will perform that task and only that task.
if I ask a scientist to think of something out of his programing envelope he cannot perform this task due to his programming.
when I think of a scientist I consider him as a programed object that cannot think by himself he must rely on his programming , and will not perform anything other than what he is programmed to do.
until some not so well programmed scientist finds something outside the envelope and then the programmers change the scientist programming to reflect the new findings.
