--- Carvalho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We are going through the same argument over and over > again. >
Which argument? Please state it clearly. > >Just because something is unproveable at the present >time, does not mean it will be unproveable sometime in >the future. > What will be provable in the future? If you are talking about substance dualism, I have presented most of the already available objective evidence that completely disproves this ancient philosophy as it applies to mental phenomena. If you need more details, I can provide them to you. For example, I can explain to you why it violates one of the most fundamental laws of Physics, the second law of thermodynamics. If you still believe that it is unprovable at the present time, please state your reasons. > >It surprises me that a scientiest should extrapolate >into the future with a limited number of current >variables. > Perhaps, the surprise is because of a misunderstanding. Please explain clearly as to what you are trying to say? What variables? What have I extrapolated into the future? > >I would have thought science itself worked the other >way round, or is it just the other way round when it >works in one's favour? > Again, please explain. I am sorry I do not understand your point at all. Cheers, Santosh