Evidence for God from Science

With all due respect, and as one trying to see this as objectively as possible, at least the last two quotes of Audie's are true or possibly true.

Science doesnt do "dogma", tho those with dogmatosis may.

Scientists, or those with dogmatosis, as Audie called them, may "do" dogma. But science itself doesn't.

Having been around scientidts pretty much all my life, how many times have I personally heard
scientists say some version of "incontrovertibly true"?
Probably never.

This is a personal observation. How can anyone except Audie know if it's true? I certainly don't see any way one could call it false.

PaulSacramento wrote:All of those were the quotes I posted when I showed that those comments that I have bolded and underlined are incorrect.
The use of dogma was NOT ironic.
Scientists DO make dogmatic claims.


No apology will be forthcoming, but something else might.

You know, I have been around condescension and bullying all my life. Pint size female, a good target. "Young lady" you call me. I wouldnt have much expected it here, but, there is is. More threats, more bullying, more condescension. A whiff of sexism.


I find the use of the word "dogma" coming from the religious and applied to science to be ironic. You dont; fine. That doesnt make you right and me wrong, or vice versa. Why are you even bringing that in now?

The original response from me to you was about your double standards of who can pick out a word and who cant. You are dodging that, still.

I at no time made any claim that scientists do not make dogmatic statements.
You have not risen to the challenge to provide even one example.

But sure, it can happen. Why on earth are you claiming that we are even disagreeing on that point?

You decided to make two statements ( that science isn't dogmatic and that scientists don't make dogmatic ( incontrovertibly true) statements

I nowhere claimed that scientist dont make dogmatic statements. You made that up.

Science is not dogmatic. People often are. If you want to say I stated science is not dogmatic, then there is is. I said it again. Civilized people could discuss that without falsehoods and threats.

In the words below, I twice accept that some people may do more or less anything, so sure, some scientists may be dogmatic.

Nowhere is there a denial of that;; you simply made that up.

Sure you can cut and paste quotes, there are lots of quotes. Just none that say what you claim. They say the opposite.


Science doesnt do "dogma", tho those with dogmatosis may.

how many times have I personally heard
scientists say some version of "incontrovertibly true"?
Probably never.


I didnt dispute that there are people who will do most anything, no doubt including scientists who are morally weak, communist, or simply insane; some may even have dogmatosis. As noted.

It sure isnt the way I am accustomed to them talking, and it is so contrary
the discipline of scientific thinking, I am disinclined to think you can name an exception.

Of course, as in all things, you find some individuals who've
lost a wheel along the way.

RickD wrote:With all due respect, and as one trying to see this as objectively as possible, at least the last two quotes of Audie's are true or possibly true.

Science doesnt do "dogma", tho those with dogmatosis may.

Scientists, or those with dogmatosis, as Audie called them, may "do" dogma. But science itself doesn't.

Having been around scientidts pretty much all my life, how many times have I personally heard
scientists say some version of "incontrovertibly true"?
Probably never.

This is a personal observation. How can anyone except Audie know if it's true? I certainly don't see any way one could call it false.

Um yeah. Seriously.

I personally have seen nothing but dogma come out of the mouths of popular scientists .
Neil degrassi Tyson is a perfect example of this .

Paul Davies on the other hand is a scientist that is more fair and less dogmatic then Tyson , but scientists just like every other person in a position of power tend to think of themselves as high authority kings whose words can't be usurped . Not all it most .

Having had scientists as teachers in college I remember I was the supreme teachers pet for a few biology teachers who applauded my former stance on evolution .

Like it or not we live in a dogmatically materialistic paradigm and anything that doesn't fit into this paradigm is put under a sceptic so microscop and thrown out atbthevfirst opportunity out they have .

Ndes are one such scientific subject and when these materialist scientists do come out on occasion to debated it they get absolutely clobbered on science alone .

Oxford educated dr patricia churchland is a prime example . She had a position of power at one of the most prestigious medical schools on earth and when she faced a layman on the science of ndes alone she looked like an ignorant child

I love sheldrakes psychic dog experiment which atlas the been debunked yet , yet you w t hear about it n science classes . Let me guess , it's because of the unbiased way materialists treat it

As Rick pointed out, I read into something that was not there.
I made a mistake and I apologise to Audie for that.
Audi, I am truly sorry for what I said.

There have been a few occasion of the last little while that have made it clear to me that, perhaps, the time has come for me to step down as a moderator.
Truly I have think it is time for me to take a break from this.

I guess when you start seeing things that aren't there, it is time to get "your eyes checked".

Again Audie, I truly am sorry.

PaulSacramento wrote:As Rick pointed out, I read into something that was not there.
I made a mistake and I apologise to Audie for that.
Audi, I am truly sorry for what I said.

There have been a few occasion of the last little while that have made it clear to me that, perhaps, the time has come for me to step down as a moderator.
Truly I have think it is time for me to take a break from this.

I guess when you start seeing things that aren't there, it is time to get "your eyes checked".

Again Audie, I truly am sorry.

Oh... tough audie is crying now. Im sorry I got so excited, please dont do something like that, we all make mistakes like the mistake I made going after you like that.

It is past time for me to get my attitude checked.

For whoever read this exchange, I am embarrassed about how I acted.

Sorry.

XM

I appreciate your understanding Audie and thank you for accepting my apology.
I will strive to do better.

I think you guys are both very special people.

Heartwarming to see you make peace

Storyteller wrote:I think you guys are both very special people.

Heartwarming to see you make peace

Thanks S, i'm glad we worked it out. I was not feeling
very good about it.

Will you guys please shut up, and stop derailing the thread?

RickD wrote:Will you guys please shut up, and stop derailing the thread

Points 9 and 10 are seriously dumb.