3 ms·
I would prefer if you spelled it out for us. Are you trying to say that if someone is religious, that they do not value the Scientific Method, and that they lac
by dosgonlogs 10y ago
I would prefer if you spelled it out for us. Are you trying to say that if someone is religious, that they do not value the Scientific Method, and that they lack humility? Or are you saying it is the other way around? If I interpret it either way, I could not agree with you. Your statement comes off as presumptuous and ignorant, and therefore it is ironic and hypocritical, since you have drawn such a tremendous conclusion that is a sweeping generalization based on what exactly? Please correct me if I did not interpret your words the way you intended them to be interpreted.
As far as the study is concerned, here it is: http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2016/04/05/1522200113.DCSupplemental/pnas.201522200SI.pdf http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2016/04/05/1522200113.DCSu... It looks like they had to develop new techniques because of the condition of the writing, for the purpose of processing the images, and analyzing them. I will have to read more before I can form an adequate to my own taste, but my preliminary opinion is, that they are filling in too many blanks in order to form a meaningful conclusion.
- exabrial 10y agoNeither, so no offense implied or taken, I'm a regular churchgoer mysel. All I was saying is when confronted by new science, weak or overstreched churches will deny obvious truths (example:evolution) while churches that are actually focused on the orignal mission of Christ will simply say 'thats cool'.
- dosgonlogs 10y agoMy apologies then. Looks like I was the one jumping to conclusions and being insulting to top it off.
- exabrial 10y agoNo worries, I went back and read what I wrote and realized it could have been perceived that way.