Quote:
Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
You are forgetting that little 'evidence' thing...
|
Right, scientific studies demonstrably hinge upon scrupulous peer review and years of crosschecking. The thing about scientific arguments is they are falsifiable, which is the mark of a good argument - religious arguments that point to an all-powerful creator still have yet to square the infinite regression rebuttal which, put simply, asks, "What came before that all-powerful creator?"
An arguments that point to an omnipotent creator at the beginning of everything is simply unfalsifiable, and is a grandiose claim made with very little evidence, and can therefore be dismissed with very little evidence.
And on the point of what religion actually is, I think most of us here are capable of making that distinction. Science is not a religion, and is irreconcilable with religion. As Stephen Gould said, science and religion are non-overlapping magisteria - they both do completely different things and simply can't be conflated. However, I disagree with Gould when he posits that there shouldn't be an argument between the two.