Originally Posted by
IBDaMann
Awesome! ... but wait ... why haven't you explained how those religions are not isomorphic? I mean, shouldn't you be able to prove that I cannot have a one-to-one and onto mapping of Christianity to Global Warming?
(guess what I have in my hip pocket)
As they all should be. Fortunately, I haven't made any. Meanwhile, everything of yours that isn't answering my question is being summarily dismissed, which is everything thus far.
It's not. Your religion, which you are calling "thettled thienth" is based purely on a very WACKY faith.
Your style of EVASION involves injecting some totally irrelevant point into the discussion and then stealthily shifting the discussion away from the main topic to your irrelevant point. Consciousness not being needed to not express anything has no bearing on whether living humans should be killed for someone's convenience. Similarly, it not mattering that science isn't "based on" anything does nothing to somehow transmute your WACKY religion into science.
All science theories are falsifiable. All religions are unfalsifiable. Let me pull out my pocket one-to-one and onto mapping here and ... yes, it shows quite clearly that Global Warming and Climate Change are completely unfalsifiable, just like their isomorphism Christianity.
A much better question is how you claim to know on what a science model is based. Let's take a look at it:
g = [m1 * m2] / d^2
It looks like math is the only basis you can claim with certainty. I notice that you are attempting to derail the discussion with this irrelevant and inconsequential philosophical point about a model's "basis." If we are going to go down this road, would you mind explaining to me the following:
1. Why should anyone care what constitute's a model's basis?
2. How do you assert that the "basis" for any model can be known?
3. How does knowing this "basis" somehow affect the science in question?
4. What human activity does not involve "observation" somehow?
5. Why do you believe that science is somehow a human activity rather than a falsifiable model? (models don't need any observations)
Bookmarks