Re: What is SCIENCE?

On 3 Dec 2003 15:02:54 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Still) wrote:

>Steve Mading wrote...
>>  
>> : You don't believe in evolution until someone tells you about it.  You
>> : don't believe in astronomy until someone tells you about that, too. 
>> : You don't believe in history until someone tells you about that, too. 
>> : You don't believe in lots of things until you hear of them...  What's
>> : the point?
>> 
>> Just beyond your grasp, apparently.
>
>Not really.  I just posted this twice.  Here's the third time...

The ex-atheist you lie about being would not use "believe" this way
because of the way theists like you turn everything into beliefs so
you can pretend that your god-belief, Washington-"belief",
astronomy-"belief" and evolution-"belief" are all equivalent.

The ex-atheist you lie about being would spot the fallacy of
equivocation, and not insult the intelligence of other atheists by
using it.

The ex-atheist you lie about being would use the correct words which
carry the differences in meaning that you lose when you turn them all
into "belief".

>For history it's like this...
>A = George Washington was the first president of the US.
>B = George Washington was not the first president of the US.
>I believe in A.  I do not believe in B.
>Or it could be like this...
>A = The person named Jesus as described in the Bible was an actual
>person who actually did those things in the Bible.
>B = Jesus as described in the Bible is fiction.
>I believe in A.  Someone else might believe B.  How are we to know
>which is true?  They can't both be true.  We'd have to look at
>evidence, etc...

The ex-atheist you lie about being would know just how stupid it is to
cite the bible to other atheists because he would understand that the
only people who treat it as a reliable source are Christians, and he
would know that atheists aren't closet Christians.

>Believing in astronomy and evolution work the same way.  For
>example...
>A = Humans evolved according to the theory of evolution.
>B = Humans did not evolve that way.
>An evolutionist would believe in A.  It's similar to saying the

The ex-atheist you lie about being would know that "evolutionist" is
the creationists' dishonest attempt to turn something that isn't an
-ism into one in an attempt to put their own -ism at the same level as
acceptance of reality because it works.

>following...
>I adhere to A.
>I think A is true rather than B.
>I know A is true.
>On and on...  What do you think?

Don't ask because you won't like the answer.

>Dan