|
|
|
|
|
|
by defrost
1018 days ago
|
|
|
Yes it is. Predictable reliable cause and effect is entirely sufficient to cleanly differentiate science from religions that have no such demonstrable experiments. > There's not a practical way to test out every scientific fact They're documented - pick one that ionterests you and lets go on the reproduction. Can we say the same about any "fact" of a religion? - WE can about the bulk facts in science. That's your cleaving differentiation. |
|
|
> They're documented - pick one that ionterests you and lets go on the reproduction.
In all fairness, I made a straightforward statement and you have assumed I said something else - I did not say any single scientific "fact". This is not the point that I was making (trying to disprove a fact).
> Can we say the same about any "fact" of a religion?
You're getting into the weeds here. If I have a religion that's called AlmostScience that includes a fairy tale that teaches morality but otherwise teaches the history and practices of the scientific method. Is it not a religion? I'm making an equivalence claim and you're attacking details of a strawman religion.