"Nature is just far more inventive in making planets than we were imagining,"
Harvard professor of astronomy - David Charbonneau,
I wonder what kind of comments it would have generated if I had said something that inaccurate from an evolutionary point of view.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
*sigh*
I imagine that years of having embarrassing Bible verses quoted at you is what drives you to quote scientists as if the nuance of the language they use will shake the underlying facts they present.
Just as your faith isn't shaken by the presence of ridiculous Bible verses, science is unaffected by the semantics of what scientists are quoted as saying.
Well, semantics has played a pretty large role in this last series that I'm doing. Gorth especially with his, "But what do you MEAN by information."
If atheists didn't make such a big deal out of how they are so scientifically accurate in all they do and think, I probably would have let it slide.
You needed to get your definition of information straight to stop you making huge errors of equivocation.
Illustration:
A dry crust of bread is better than nothing
Nothing is better than a big, juicy steak.
Therefore, a dry crust of bread is better than a big, juicy steak.
This uses two different meanings of the word "nothing": the first line uses "nothing" to mean "a lack of food", while the second line uses "nothing" as "no such thing exists"
Illustration 2:
Everything that runs has feet. The river runs swiftly. Therefore,
the river has feet.
Forget information, define "scientist" and "atheist" for me, and show you know how to use the two terms correctly.
Post a Comment