XPost: alt.philosophy, talk.philosophy.misc, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
   From: sbalneav@alburg.net   
      
   In alt.atheism TheInquirer  wrote:   
   > On 27/12/2012 10:01 PM, sbalneav wrote:   
   >> In alt.atheism TheInquirer  wrote:   
   >>> On 27/12/2012 8:56 AM, sbalneav wrote:   
   >>>> In alt.atheism TheInquirer   wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> it says that we see no evidence for the supernatural,   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> what is supernatural?   
   >>   
   >> Ask a theist.  They seem to have a good idea.   
   >   
   >   
   > if one uses the same terms as them, will you have fallen into the same   
   > trap?   
      
   No, why would I?  I evaluate their claim.  If it does not have any evidence   
   supporting it, I have no reason to accept their claim as true.   
      
   >>> Arthur C. Clarke: "any sufficiently advanced technology is   
   >>> indistinguishable from magic,"   
   >>>   
   >>> agree or disagree?  [just asking]   
   >>   
   >> It's one of my .sig quotes.  As a soundbite, it's pithy and funny.  As a   
   >> scientific principle?  No, I disagree.   
   >   
   >   
   > why?   
      
   Because there's no evidence that magic exists.   
      
   --   
    __ _  | Nature uses as little as possible of anything.   
   (_ |_) |   -- Johannes Keppler   
   __)|_) |   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)