Activity

I know that we aren’t supposed to repost comments, but in this case I ask for a dispensation because it is relevant to the flow of this discussion.

Holmes’ lets try to focus on substance.  I’ve done my best, please a good faith response would be very cool.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

November 10, 2019 at 2:56 pm

If by explanation you mean a purely physical, mechanistic explanation then you have to explain why you are insisting on that limitation, if Y can only be explained in terms of X yet I will only accept an explanation in terms of Z then clearly there’s going to some difficulties.

I get the impression you think science is about what your logical mind can construct.

I believe your utterances are a fail because you refuse to recognize the ultimate reality of physical matter as an independent thing outside of your “Logic” or the wheels turning inside our heads, producing the fog of consciousness, that is our supernatural mind.  You can’t fit complex natural systems into if Y then X then only Z.  We do it that way because it’s the best we have.

That stuff is tools, mathematical tools that help scientists understand aspects of material reality.  But you are using it as an absolute as if it actually was reality – then to top it off you expect absolute proof, or you feel justified dismissing the entire scientific endeavor, if it can’t produce absolute proof of our creation.   You then create those Just-So stories in your head and think that is reality.  Thus you really seem to believe a simplistic logical chain is all you need to justify dismissing the efforts of tens of thousands of keen focused minds, over many generations.

For more on the Map v Territory dilemma,

e) Map v Territory Problem, Statistical Certainty vs Geophysical Realities

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Then you come up with this “supernatural” that of course can’t be defined or understood by science, because it’s hiding outside the domain of our technically enhanced senses.   It’s outside of our dimension, but we’re supposed to pay attention to it.  Is that what you are saying Holmes?

You know, every time I try to give your ideas the benefit of the doubt and follow your trains of logical, they end up in a chaotic mess.

What’s this supernatural you believe in?

If you don’t like that label, how would you describe it?

How were you convinced to recognize it*?

*What “it” you ask?

I don’t know – just trying to make sense of whatever point you are trying to make with this ID and supernatural bandwagon you are on.

What’s wrong with recognizing Intelligent Design within the domain of philosophy and religion and leaving science to the material world that we can measure?

Please show a little good-faith here, try to explain these things.

thank you