Posts by KateWild

113

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

by KateWild in

i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

KateWild

How can a scientist use a silly word like "scientism"?-cofty

hahahahahaha! you have a PM. It will reaveal much.

Kate xx

113

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

by KateWild in

i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

KateWild

Yes I just said it was unguided-cofty

Well spotted. I am getting tired. Fixed it now xx

113

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

by KateWild in

i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

Also Cofty to be fair, you have already ditched two world views in as many decades, so how can you be so confident about the third, that you won't need to ditch that too? Belief that scientism tells us everything we need to know about life is a world limiting perspective as much as religious fundamentalism. They are varieties of fundamentalism. Different perspectives as I have said.

Only joking with an element of serious

Love you to bits cofty

Kate xx

113

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

by KateWild in

i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

KateWild

unguided natural processes.-cofty

Lol this reminds me of a conversation you had with slimboyfat.

It's all about perspective. The autocatalyst is a guided process. "Naturally" in the lab, a racemic mixture is formed, in the lab we have to apply the catalyst. In nature the catalyst is automatically there. Can you see why I view this as guided?

BTW, the earth is round, SBF was just entertaining us all.

Kate xx

42

Lawrence Krauss

by KateWild in

krauss is an atheist activist and self-described antitheist.

hence his science is biased.

being an antitheist means he's anti god.. anyone disagree?.

KateWild

Are you withdrawing that accusation now?- cofty

I will rephrase, his conclusions based on his science are biased. He admits to being anti-God. Science is only biased when scientists fudge results to meet their agenda, if a scientist has no agenda the results are not going to get fudged.

I don't think Krauss has ever been caught falsifying results. I am not making this accusation. If you want me to read "A universe from Nothing" I might try and read it with an open mind. I will see if the library have a copy.

Kate xx

113

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

by KateWild in

i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

KateWild

If she (God) exists then existing is all she does.-cofty

I agree, that's why there are so many prolems with evolution, there was no need for wisdom teeth to be formed was there? Kate xx

113

Matthew Powner- Advanced research on the Origin of life. How credible is he?

by KateWild in

i have come to the conclusion that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

however the scientific evidence available is compelling enough for me to believe that a creator is responsible for life on earth.. i have read much about powner and understand the work he is doing.

i am interested in your views as to his credibility.

KateWild

Okay cofty, I get what you're sayong now. You don't think it's magic. Thats your perspective, and it's okay to have that perspective. But I think it's all magic, and some of it I know how the magic works and other stuff, like the origin of life, is magic that is yet to me figured out.

A rainbow is magic too.

By magic I don't mean supernatural, I mean wonderful and exciting.

I also think the complexity suggests higher intelligence than me.

Kate xx

42

Lawrence Krauss

by KateWild in

krauss is an atheist activist and self-described antitheist.

hence his science is biased.

being an antitheist means he's anti god.. anyone disagree?.

KateWild

Any examples you can provide of his science being wrong because of his bias?-LG

Ohh some took the bait

I don't think his science would be wrong, but I question his credibility as an author and role model. I have never read any of his books, but I would only read them to critisise his conclusions about God, so in all fairness I am bias too.

We are all bias to some degree aren't we?

Kate xx

42