I prefer not to even say I am a "believer", there is something called first hand experience, knowing and then of course just good old observation.
Isn't that just anecdotal evidence, which is notoriously unscientific?
Scientific? Like the premise that we originated from a big bang?
Hey, the scientific method is great. But it also sets the rules on what is possible and what is impossible. In a sense, science sets rules and with those rules it
excludes things that don't fit its model. The thing is, science, as great as it is, is still growing. So, until science discovers more, it is dependent on the
variables it sets up to say what is possible and impossible. In a real world example, I would look into certain types of experiences that humans have
that are termed supernatural (or excluded in other ways.) Well, there needs to be instruments to measure some of these subtle energies employed in
the investigation. I do believe that is starting, but we are a long ways off as there is something at stake regarding the current "system".
The miraculous, which many of us have experienced, is generally not reproducible. Guess that means miracles don't happen (according to science).
There are many many flaws in science in these ways. It is valuable but at the same time it is being handcuffed.
There are WAY less flaws in science than there are in your way of thinking. I can guarantee you that.
No need to discuss it because a believer will not or refuses to understand why.
Once again, i don't care what fantasy stories you believe in but as soon as you start talking about them as if they are facts be sure to have some proof ready.
And ofcourse this is exactly where you and the millions of believer clones like you fail. All of them. All the time. Every single time!
And i'm done with the subject.
Wrong forum.
I'll respond when you have proof for your claims though. Which we know will never happen because it's all random nonsense based on wishful thinking.
