Science is best supported by?

@kellyjay said
If you did not believe that the universe was understandable what would be the point of trying to explain or understand it?

I read this. And then I read it again, twice.

@fmf said
I read this. And then I read it again, twice.

Lol.

@kellyjay said
You only singled out one from the others, so you either intended to do that, or you didn’t mean to, but you did!

You asked a question in your thread title, then gave four options.

And now you’re moaning because someone has made a choice?

@bigdogg said
D

Science is about how the natural world works.

It is entirely possible to be a, b or c and still be a good scientist. The theistic stance is not relevant.

"@bigdogg said
D

Science is about how the natural world works.

It is entirely possible to be a, b or c and still be a good scientist. The theistic stance is not relevant."

Singling out the "theistic stance" you did here, admit or not, you did it.

@kellyjay said
"@bigdogg said
D

Science is about how the natural world works.

It is entirely possible to be a, b or c and still be a good scientist. The theistic stance is not relevant."

Singling out the "theistic stance" you did here, admit or not, you did it.

You asked a question and he answered it. So what’s your problem?

@kellyjay said
"@bigdogg said
D

Science is about how the natural world works.

It is entirely possible to be a, b or c and still be a good scientist. The theistic stance is not relevant."

Singling out the "theistic stance" you did here, admit or not, you did it.

Your reading comprehension is poor. "Stance" means it can be any position on theism: mono-, poly, a-, etc.

@bigdogg said
Your reading comprehension is poor. "Stance" means it can be any position on theism: mono-, poly, a-, etc.

And Atheism was a part of that?

@kellyjay said
And Atheism was a part of that?

Yes.

@bigdogg said
Yes.

Well, you are right reading what you wrote, and gathering your meaning, was and is loss on me. The way you merge things, taking one setting it aside, and claim you meant they are all the same.

@kellyjay said
Well, you are right reading what you wrote, and gathering your meaning, was and is loss on me. The way you merge things, taking one setting it aside, and claim you meant they are all the same.

You've spent 4 pages dancing around. Now you've gone through all the theatre of pretending that you simply couldn't understand or accept what BigDogg said on page 1, are you going to deal with what he said head on? You know, like have a discussion about the thread topic? The one you started?

@fmf said
You've spent 4 pages dancing around. Now you've gone through all the theatre of pretending that you simply couldn't understand or accept what BigDogg said on page 1, are you going to deal with what he said head on? You know, like have a discussion about the thread topic? The one you started?

And maybe start replying to you and I instead of behaving like a child.

@divegeester said
And maybe start replying to you and I instead of behaving like a child.

Does that mean you are going to start replying to Rusty?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Does that mean you are going to start replying to Rusty?

I'm not.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Does that mean you are going to start replying to Rusty?

Certainly not; the man is a cretinous retard who has nothing to say about anything and I have nothing to say to him.

@divegeester said
Certainly not; the man is a cretinous retard who has nothing to say about anything and I have nothing to say to him.

We don't know of course what Kelly thinks of you guys...