Back to Home

General Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Misc. Topics | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Although Yanniru Is Not Thanking Mike Pearson....

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Michael W. Pearson on October 2, 2004 21:28:30 UTC

Yanniru wrote:
"Of course, the identification of god with inferences of astronomical data is pure speculation."

True as stated, though no rule has been proven?

"But it is speculation that grings god and science together in a way that is quite meaningful for me. I am reminded of somehing in the Koran. I think it goes like this. We have no further need for prophets because now we have scientists."

Is Yanniru saying he agrees with that statement? Being so broad and general and yet stipulating no clear definition for its major variables, the statement's level of assurance seems quite hasty. It appears you are endorsing it, though based on past experience you are probably up to something else. Are you stating that we should consider that statement to be a universal law of science or can you see that it is just a statement to be considered along with all other statements, through a process of criticism and for its merits, regardless of who said it?
I'm not Harv, by the way. Maybe nobody is.


Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins