Judah, I really hate when you so succinctly make a point in 4 sentences what I could not get across in 4000.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: > > The general answer to this question is: Science doesn't prove the > supernatural. But it does continually redefine what is supernatural. > As I initially stated, a lot of things we take for granted as science > subjects now were universally thought to be supernatural. That process > is likely to continue. > > Judah > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Mary Jo Sminkey <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>>Will anyone ever prove a supernatural basis for specific events? Of course >>>not....as I've already said, science is not capable of doing that. >> >> That is based more on your belief than actual facts. Can science do it >> now? I would say 'no'. But does that mean there will never be a time >> when science could. >> >> I love that when someone asks for 'proof' God exists and their reply >> is 'Well prove he doesn't'. How do you prove something does not >> exist? >> -- >> Scott Stroz >> --------------- >> The DOM is retarded. >> >> http://xkcd.com/386/ >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:308414 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
