So, in a discussion where the subject matter is science, for
example:the topic of gravity in the field of physics, scientific facts,
and interpretations (opinions) of facts ( for example Einsteins theory of gravity)
should be considered as the only variables in the discussion such as in
solving for one of the variables in the posted equation. But when God is
invoked in any discussion, the realm of evidence is not limited to scientific fact and scientific realism and that is because there exists a difference between science and truth.
there exists a difference between scientific fact (to be distinguished
from pseudo science such as Krausses philosophy of science) and plain
old fact which need not be qualified by scientific, for example, an
event in history, or if a person witnesses something that happened and
is asked to testify in Court about what that person knows is a true or
fact-which is not an opinion, the existence of Jehovah for instance.
in a scientific Court room sort of speak, only scientific facts and
interpretations matter and such continue scientifically valid until
falsified only with verifiable and objective evidence (which is the
definition of scientific fact)
I will point out this flaw: While
there exists an inherent mechanism in living organisms that is
observable, and predictable causing physiological change, such process
is not evidence that humans evolved from simpler life forms although
such scientific opinion considers it to be fact by a majority,
THis thread is not about discussing evolution, that
is what cofty's other related posts are all about. This thread is
about the confusion between scientific fact (verifiable objective
evidence) and opinion (not scientific interpretations- or "explanations" as sheepless puts it- such as evolution)
Scientific laws, Newton's law of Universal gravitation for example are indisputable while scientific explanations such as evolution is. My question to those that equate the theory of gravity with the theory of evolution is how and why are they equal in terms of probability?
Sorry for any error, trying to be open minded, sometimes it is late here 3 am or jsut mentally exxausted, It is evident that I do not cut and paste and I do not emulate the ideas of others. Sometimes by views correspond with existing facts and sometimes I need to be "enlightened" with facts but I try to be opened minded.