Well crap, I thought you hated me because I was beautiful. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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:308415 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
