XPost: alt.philosophy, sci.logic, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: alt.atheism, sci.skeptic   
   From: dale@dalekelly.org   
      
   raven1 wrote:   
      
   > On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 21:31:54 -0400, Dale  wrote:   
   >   
   >>Sylvia Else wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 25/03/2016 11:25 AM, Dale wrote:   
   >>>> Do we abstract or do we just infer around unknowns or something like   
   >>>> that? Blind Faith?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Do only theists utilize blind faith? Since conjecture can proceed   
   >>>> hypothesis should it be recognized as a part of the scientific process?   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> In the scientific process, after both conjecture and hypothesis (if   
   >>> they're really different) there comes testing.   
   >>>   
   >>> Theists don't test their beliefs.   
   >>   
   >>Theists claim observation, that is at least material, not empirical.   
   >   
   > What dressing would you like for that word salad, Dale? Observation of   
   > what? And I'm baffled at how the material can be non-empirical. What   
   > the Sam Hill is it that you're trying to say?   
      
      
   Creamy Italian.   
      
   Angels, etc.   
      
   There is a difference between material and empirical, I think. Material is   
   just physics based things. empirical is the process of testing and results,   
   not necessarily of material things.   
      
      
   >   
   >>Theist claims have existed a very long time, it has passed "some" test of   
   >>time.   
   >   
   > So what?   
      
   Agnostic leaning theist ...   
      
      
   >   
   >> People have applied it and it works. They haven't tested everything,   
   >>but neither have atheists.   
   >   
   > Um, what?   
      
   No tested theory of everything/anything.   
      
      
   --   
   Dale   
   http://www.dalekelly.org   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)