06 Jan '19 11:15>
@wolfgang59 saidI met Miss Using once. What an ordeal that was. 💃 😬
Miss Using is not here.
@wolfgang59 saidI met Miss Using once. What an ordeal that was. 💃 😬
Miss Using is not here.
@kellyjay saidJust to clarify: "nor" means "also [...] not."
If you say it doesn't rule it out so it is possible I'm in agreement.
@fmf saidYou should be simply looking at he best cause for what we are studying, that may
You are applying it to the "knowledge" you claim you obtain from the faith you have in supernatural causality.
@wolfgang59 saidYou sure I thought I saw her earlier. 🙁 Sorry!
Miss Using is not here.
@wolfgang59 saidI have answered, but maybe not to your liking. Please ask the one question you
Your train of thought is rather fragmented.
Can you please answer questions and then ask one question in response?
Thanks.
@kellyjay saidBut you approach this with the predetermined objective of bolstering your faith-based assertions, even to point of trying to hijack the word "science" when what you are really talking about is what your "superstitions" make you want to believe.
If you go into a study
looking for only what you want to see, odds are that is all you are going to see
truth or not isn't then important as much as finding ways to justify your own views.
@kazetnagorra saidI'm not going to go back and try to parse what you said, if you want to clarify it
Just to clarify: "nor" means "also [...] not."
@kellyjay saidWhy do you feel the need for "science" to bolster your unscientific faith and religious doctrines?
It isn't that God or the possibility of God cannot be explained or found by science
now, it is that those that are in science have redefined science to ignore all there is
about God. Therefore science has rejected the possibility of God, dismisses out of
hand God, and under those conditions it refuses to acknowledge anything that
may point to Him.
Very circular, He is ...[text shortened]... se it is has God attached to it.
Notice truth doesn't matter here only an ideological world view.
@fmf saidYou think science should bolster your beliefs?
Why do you feel the need for "science" to bolster your unscientific faith and religious doctrines?
@kellyjay saidNone of us knows what the origin of the universe was ~ assuming there was an origin. I don't know if there is a creator being.
You think science should bolster your beliefs?
@kellyjay saidOK, you dodged my question by asking me a question. I answered your question. So here is my question again: Why do you feel the need for "science" to bolster your unscientific faith and religious doctrines?
You think science should bolster your beliefs?
@kellyjay saidJudging by your posting here this past decade, I perceive you as going into 'this study' looking only for what you want to see, looking for what fits with your own views, and looking for what you have already decided you see as "truth".
If you go into a study
looking for only what you want to see, odds are that is all you are going to see
truth or not isn't then important as much as finding ways to justify your own views.
@fmf saidUniversal truths are not exclusively there for a specific group of people.
OK, you dodged my question by asking me a question. I answered your question. So here is my question again: Why do you feel the need for "science" to bolster your unscientific faith and religious doctrines?
@kellyjay saidYou alluding to your personal opinions and religious notions as being "universal truths" has no effect on me or our discourse.
Universal truths are not exclusively there for a specific group of people.
@kellyjay saidOnce again: Why do you feel the need for "science" to bolster your unscientific faith and religious doctrines?
Universal truths are not exclusively there for a specific group of people.