I’ve been trying to find out what the straight dope is on this and I’ve not heard anything that makes a whole lot of sense. Is this a hybridization of mainstream religion and science? How much of each is used to ascertain the validity of its conclusions? And who determines those conclusions? If I didn’t know any better, it sounds like mainstream fundamentalism trying a last ditch attempt at pulling the plug on scientific plausibility by throwing in a bunch of conjecture that has no real place in the area in question. (If you can’t blind them with brilliance, baffle them with BS.) It would be like having a scientist tell you that in reality the world is round and then having someone say “yes, but what is reality”? I’m not an atheist but I do see the necessity in keeping religion and science separate, because putting them together is like oil and water, they don’t mix very well.
2006-06-12
05:45:07
·
15 answers
·
asked by
Augustus-Illuminati
3
in
Religion & Spirituality