Albatrossity2
Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007
|
| Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 16 2007,23:15) | Science simply cannot be done - believers or no - on that basis for quite pragmatic reasons, independent of one's feelings about the existence of a "designer." Questions about the supernatural, on one hand, are simply beyond the reach of science, and, on the other, simply cannot contribute constructively to the actual conduct of science.
I don't know why this notion is so hard for you and yours to grasp. But there it is. |
Which was, in fact, Keith Miller's first point in his talk.
The fact that FtK disagrees with this is irrelevant. She doesn't have to do science. She can just enjoy the fruits of science and snipe from the sidelines. It is just another instance of her inability to understand how science works. Yawn.
And the fact that she posted this blather at YoungCosmos, where only Sal can comment, is also telling. She has dropped all pretenses of believing in the more "sciencey" born-again creationism known as ID; posting at a YEC site that allows comments only from a single dishonest YEC is striking evidence that ID is dead.
All science so far!
--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
- Pattiann Rogers
|
