Evidence for God from Science

Kurieuo wrote:

Rick wrote:

A wrote:My take, entirely personal, is that such god as there may be would be fully capable of setting things up so that they run fine on their own, with no need for constant tinkering.. something for what I'd see a a lesser god.

I agree. And God would be capable of creating everything in an instant, or in 6 twenty four hour days. Or however He chose. But for me, it's not about what I think God was capable of, but what I believe He actually did. And for that, I lean towards PC. And again, my leaning towards PC, is my way of saying to you that I'm not dogmatic about it.

OMG. Seriously, I just read this after my last post.
Great minds think alike.

Great minds lol. I'd be lucky if I had half your mind.

There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Audie wrote:There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Great minds think alike, but fools never differ? So which are they.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Audie wrote:There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Great minds think alike, but fools never differ? So which are they.

Aww, I wouldn't call you both fools exactly. That's a bit harsh.

Kurieuo wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Audie wrote:There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Great minds think alike, but fools never differ? So which are they.

Aww, I wouldn't call you both fools exactly. That's a bit harsh.

Bazinga?

Kurieuo wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Audie wrote:There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Great minds think alike, but fools never differ? So which are they.

Aww, I wouldn't call you both fools exactly. That's a bit harsh.

Calling me half -man would be a bit weird.

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Audie wrote:There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Great minds think alike, but fools never differ? So which are they.

Aww, I wouldn't call you both fools exactly. That's a bit harsh.

Calling me half -man would be a bit weird.

Man:

a human being of either sex; a person.
"God cares for all races and all men"
synonyms: human being, human, person, mortal, individual, personage, soul


Audie,

At least by this definition, you're ALL man!

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Audie wrote:There is some joke about half man / half wit , but this isnt the place for it.

Great minds think alike, but fools never differ? So which are they.

Aww, I wouldn't call you both fools exactly. That's a bit harsh.

Calling me half -man would be a bit weird.

Man:

a human being of either sex; a person.
"God cares for all races and all men"
synonyms: human being, human, person, mortal, individual, personage, soul


Audie,

At least by this definition, you're ALL man!

Or she could just be the half wit?

Kurieuo wrote: Or she could just be the half wit?

Hey, don't you be talkin about who I'm wit and who I'm half wit.

You Aussies sure are a strange lot!

RickD wrote:You Aussies sure are a strange lot!

We must be strange if that's coming from a clown.

Kurieuo wrote:

RickD wrote:You Aussies sure are a strange lot!

We must be strange if that's coming from a clown.

Yes, it takes one to know one...or something like that.

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Science does not do truth.

Really?
All the laws we have are not true?
Water doesn't boil at 100 C or freeze at 0C ?
Gravity doesn't exist?
There are no electrons?
Nuclear energy doesn't exist ?

Science is ALL ABOUT discovering the truth about the world we can observe AND starts from the premise that we CAN discover the truth.

Can you identify which scientific laws are "true"?

How would you determine that any are "true"?

Try this: get your thermometer and see at what temperature water boils.
I guarantee it wont be 100 degrees.

Im not just messing with you. Please try these things, and you will learn more than I've
time to try to discuss.

So Paul you going to try to boil water at 100 C?
Betcha cant do it.

Audie wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Science does not do truth.

Really?
All the laws we have are not true?
Water doesn't boil at 100 C or freeze at 0C ?
Gravity doesn't exist?
There are no electrons?
Nuclear energy doesn't exist ?

Science is ALL ABOUT discovering the truth about the world we can observe AND starts from the premise that we CAN discover the truth.

Can you identify which scientific laws are "true"?

How would you determine that any are "true"?

Try this: get your thermometer and see at what temperature water boils.
I guarantee it wont be 100 degrees.

Im not just messing with you. Please try these things, and you will learn more than I've
time to try to discuss.

So Paul you going to try to boil water at 100 C?
Betcha cant do it.

Ok Audie. Unless Paul tries to boil water in a location below sea level, tell us why can't he boil water at 100 degrees Celsius?

RickD wrote:

Audie wrote:

Audie wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Science does not do truth.

Really?
All the laws we have are not true?
Water doesn't boil at 100 C or freeze at 0C ?
Gravity doesn't exist?
There are no electrons?
Nuclear energy doesn't exist ?

Science is ALL ABOUT discovering the truth about the world we can observe AND starts from the premise that we CAN discover the truth.

Can you identify which scientific laws are "true"?

How would you determine that any are "true"?

Try this: get your thermometer and see at what temperature water boils.
I guarantee it wont be 100 degrees.

Im not just messing with you. Please try these things, and you will learn more than I've
time to try to discuss.

So Paul you going to try to boil water at 100 C?
Betcha cant do it.

Ok Audie. Unless Paul tries to boil water in a location below sea level, tell us why can't he boil water at 100 degrees Celsius?

The challenge was for Paul, you are invited to recuse yourself.
If he is so sure of his facts let him see for himself that he cannot
get that result. He can get a thermometer and a
beaker of water and try for a week. Not 99.5 or 101.3 degrees.
One hundred. AND,if by dint of great exertion he actually did succeed
he will have a datum point, nothing more. He can then say it is true
that the number he wrote is his datum point.

His five questions were a bit of a rhetorical gish and gotcha-attempt so I'd like him to accept the consequences
by dealing forthrightly with them. Paul, go thou forth and boil water at 100C. Have fun trying.

Another was about "laws". Paul, or you, if you like you are invited to say which
scientific laws are "true". Five would be a nice number.