reply to post by resonance
you claim to have been studying science and yet you seem to lack a basic understanding of what pure science is. Science is about observing the natural
world, theorizing why it does what it does and testing your hypothesis in the most thorough manner possible to either verify or falsify your
conjecture. In real science no rational solution can be absolutely ruled out at first. It is only thru rigorous testing and examining that ideas are
either accepted or disgarded. And, in REAL science, there always exists the possibility that new discoveries and observations may either alter or
completely discredit previously held ideas. A good example of this is how the discovery of Quantum physics kicked Newton's laws to the sidelines in a
lot of ways.
The ideal scientist is dispassionate and non-partisan. His mind is open and ready to go to whatever conclusion the verifiable facts may lead him. So,
before moving on, let's sum up the scientific approach in a general flow-chart sort of way.
1. a naturally occuring phenomena is observed.
2. it is studied rigorously.
3. suppositions are formed as to the probable cause of the phenomena.
4. tests are designed to assertain whether or not the theories are consistent with previously established facts.
5. the explanations are either found to be adequate to explain the phenomena or are rejected as erroneous.
Creationism turns this method on it's ear because it presupposes the existence of a creating intelligence, (which we all realize is shorthand for the
Christian JHVH) and then attempts to cull the panorama of scientific theory and data, some of it respectible and some of it bats**t crazy, in order
to substantiate their pre-existing maxim. The flaw in the whole argument is that, in order to prove the fact of Creationism, they ultimately have to
be able to prove the existence of their Creator, and that is something that they patently cannot do. The best they can do is to selectively focus on
experiments which they can spin into positively suggesting that some guiding intelligence is behind everything.
But let's just be completely honest here. The hypothesis that an intelligent thing existed prior to the very beginning of space, time, energy and
matter demands me to ask of what could a structure capable of sustaining that intelligence be comprised of and in what space could he/she/it have
existed prior to the formation of everything? Shall we call it protospace with a big glowing proto-brain, all powerful and all-knowing? Where's your
proof for that supposition? You guys love to talk about souls. But what really is a soul but our own sense of existence and immortality? With a few
snips here and a few snips there in a lobotomy procedure I can pretty much eradicate any knowledge that you exist at all on your part. Your sense of
being is a result of your normal brain activities which cannot function without the very physical and very real structures within your brain. Before
anything existed, what was the creator's brain constructed of? Before there was energy what force drove it?
Maybe your time would be better spent in comparative religion courses. You honestly might find some answers there. Also check out Joseph Cambell. He
can learn you much.