Worlds most retarded state senator (of today)

Watermark said:
Yes, that was my argument. Thanks for summarizing. All you had to do was take out everything I said and insert some fallacy which had absolutely nothing to do with my argument... excellent summarizing skills.

If science were wrong about something, that new thing would become science. That's how science works. Hypothesis, testing, evidence, theory, rinse, wash, repeat... no belief is to sacred to be violated. That's why science is that best theory of knowledge.
Click to expand...

so....asking a question.....is a fallacy...

and if science is wrong about something, then that wrong "thing" or "new thing" becomes science....

interesting
 
Yurt said:
and if science is wrong about something, then that wrong "thing" or "new thing" becomes science....
Click to expand...

Yes, if evidence contradicts a religious theory, the evidence doesn't exist.

If evidence contradicts a scientific theory, people come up with hypothesis to explain why it did, and test it, and modify the theory accordingly. If no hypothesis and testing is adequate to explain it, science attempts to find a new theory. That's how it works. Science cannot be wrong because science is wise enough to realize that it can always be wrong. Religion is always foolish because it thinks it can never be wrong.
 
Watermark said:
Yes, if evidence contradicts a religious theory, the evidence doesn't exist.

If evidence contradicts a scientific theory, people come up with hypothesis to explain why it did, and test it, and modify the theory accordingly. If no hypothesis and testing is adequate to explain it, science attempts to find a new theory. That's how it works. Science cannot be wrong because science is wise enough to realize that it can always be wrong. Religion is always foolish because it thinks it can never be wrong.
Click to expand...

seemingly logical, you are forgetting that religion, in most cases, believes in a deity. someone or some being that cannot be wrong, regardless of any human logic or science. you tout science's strong point as being able to be wrong....there in lies the rub....

if that is so, why trash people who believe in 6000 years? science has and will be wrong regarding the age of the earth....what purpose does it serve to ridicule someone, an elected someone who believes X number of years? you and ib1 et al....voted for obama....he allegedly believes in a divine being...

why are you and your friends wasting your time mocking this senator when you could be crashing obama's party about his religious beliefs?
 
Yurt said:
seemingly logical, you are forgetting that religion, in most cases, believes in a deity. someone or some being that cannot be wrong, regardless of any human logic or science. you tout science's strong point as being able to be wrong....there in lies the rub....

if that is so, why trash people who believe in 6000 years? science has and will be wrong regarding the age of the earth....what purpose does it serve to ridicule someone, an elected someone who believes X number of years? you and ib1 et al....voted for obama....he allegedly believes in a divine being...

why are you and your friends wasting your time mocking this senator when you could be crashing obama's party about his religious beliefs?
Click to expand...


Great point. :clink: :cheer: :hand:

And on a similar note, no one has ever proven for a 100% fact the existence of atoms, electrons, and sub atomic particles.

I personally don’t believe our bodies are made up of atoms. Not until someone can prove it beyond every possible shadow of a doubt.

I think our bodies might be made of pixie dust. And how dare anyone ridicule me!!! My pixie dust theory is just as valid as atomic theory.
 
I have faith that 72.9937% of all Republicans are perverts.

Prove that untrue?

also:

The universe exists, therefore Zardnark created it 7 weeks ago.

You are going to say....

Aha, but Zardnark gave you those false memories.

bush was never president and the universe was created with a war going on in Iraq.
 
Last edited:
mock all you want....no point has been made, other than, science is not 100% accurate in this area....

if you really need pom poms to agree to that...

ok

i mean, you guys say it is a fact....yet, you won't give a 100%.....
 
Science is not 100% on anything.
Religion is not .001% scientific on anything.

Guess which one I believe more?
 
Yurt said:
mock all you want....no point has been made, other than, science is not 100% accurate in this area....

if you really need pom poms to agree to that...

ok

i mean, you guys say it is a fact....yet, you won't give a 100%.....
Click to expand...


Get a DVD of the movie "Inherit the Wind" with Spencer Tracy. :rolleyes:
 
Watermark said:
Do you believe my magic dragon could be tested in a scientific setting?
Click to expand...
Yes. One could make a theory, look for bones, search for him in the area he is believed to reside. Much like "Nessie" in Loch Ness.

Now, can you figure out a way to test for the existence of a Supreme Being that is everywhere but cannot be seen, is all-powerful and specifically does not follow any of the rules of physics?
 
Consider this.

People who said the earth was not the center of the universe were killed for heresy by Christians.
 
Watermark said:
But he's invisible.
Click to expand...
Foot prints, prey bones, etc. You are getting tired. A physical being will leave evidence. See if when you walk around its "lair" if you walk into huge piles of invisible poop.

One can also test, like they do with psychic powers the hypothesis of "magic", to see if you can replicate it or cause it to repeat consistently. See whether or not nearby stock animals disappear to a roar from a creature they can't see. Does it find virgins particularly tasty? Yeah, somebody could test for such a thing if there were any physical evidence at all.

If the creature existed, and evidence could be collected, like Sasquatch, you might even get a group of people to believe that it existed.

Now again, how do you test for a Supreme All Powerful, all knowing, being that doesn't follow any of the laws of physics and isn't tangible in any way, one that doesn't want to be proven?

God is outside of science because it is untestable. If you cannot devise a reliable test of any sort, it is outside of any ability for the scientific method to prove or disprove. It is impossible even to collect evidence other than that of anecdotal nature and because of this no Hypothesis could be devised so that it can be tested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top