Back to Home

God & Science 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 | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
At Some Point The Line Has Been Crossed One Too Many Times.

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Luis Hamburgh on August 24, 2002 16:10:39 UTC


>>>"Luis finds 100 different rhetorical ways of saying (Dick is wrong)."

Please identify what is rhetorical about my criticism of Stafford's paper.

>>>"Rather than replying point by point..."

Not true. I have specifically quoted Stafford's "Foundations." Maybe not as much as you'd like, but it's important to stress that (IMO) Stafford's premises are incorrect.


(1) God is everywhere.
(2) Wherever we look, we see a fraction of "everywhere."
[a bundle of mathematical equations/formulas based within (1) and (2), and a refutation of time based within the inability to understand it]
(3) Thus, everywhere we look, we see God.

If I saw folks I like 'buying' an argument like this one, I'd be inclined to discuss it.

I think we should focus more on the arguments themselves, and less on the people doing the arguing. Naturally, we're all probably guilty of this, but I think we should do our best to refrain from confusing disagreement of ideas with disagreeable personalities.


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