Karma reasons for concrete message




    Posts: 12209
  • Darwins +658/-28

Quote from: jdawg70
Before the beginning of time, god decided who of his future-creations would be saved and who would not be saved. The actual 'saving' part, the death and resurrection of Jesus, will, in the future, be done.
YES!! You got it!

So life is just a puppet show, a pointless play, to reach a predetermined ending.  harb, that is fucking idiotic.  I cannot think of a more stupid or pointless thing for a god to do.  Your god must be bored and retarded.

To echo boots- how do you know any of this?
Study study study... it's plain to know for anyone who wants to study

This does not answer the question.  Elaborate.  What did you study?  What evidence do you have?

The question is this.

I know what the question is.  Don't talk down to me.  You are not smart enough to pull it off.

Is scientific method the Only valid way to answer a question.

You are avoiding the question I asked.  What is your problem?

To the question of "do you want cheerios for breakfast?", no, SM need not be employed.  I think questions of personal preference fall outside of what SM is intended for.  If you are asking a question that demands an explanation of how things work, then I think the SM is the best way to get an accurate answer. 

I see the SM refusal to answer any question in concrete terms can be a strength, Because ideas can always be reworked.

No, not because it allows ideas to be reworked.  You make it sound like some kind of cheat.  It is because we never have all the information.  It is because our models are never perfect.  It is because we need to take into account the fact that we are talking chimps who, by and large, cannot realize there are no invisible people running the universe, and as such will make flaws.  It is because SM is an iterative process that builds on prior learning.

All of this being true, why is a theory pushed as a fact?

It's not. The link from your quote goes on to say:
As used in science, however, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.

Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists’ explanations and interpretations of the facts. Scientists can have various interpretations of the outcomes of experiments and observations, but the facts, which are the cornerstone of the scientific method, do not change.

I cannot tell if you are just lazy, sloppy and not that well educated, or if you are intentionally deceptive.   For now, I will assume both.
Changed Change Reason Date
Quesi puppet show January 16, 2014, 06:51:05 AM