[knox]

Originally Posted by Glice

Why don't you just leave and we'll get Hayden to forward the answer at a later date?

Or: the objective proof for muons or quarks or the big bang all lie in their effects rather than observing the items themselves directly. The objective proof of God - namely the personal experience of some 2 thirds of the global population - is structually identical to the objective proofs of 2 of the most important theories of modern science. Which, I should note, only need to be observed by a very small community of people to be taken (rightly, it seems) as 'fact'.

This is a weak argument (for several reasons) because it's absolute fucking madness to assume that science can provide not just the answers to everything but also the methodology; I'm sure I don't need to remind you of, say, phlogiston, Copernican Astronomy or the contemporary debate around homeopathic remedies which, in spite of not fitting with much of contemporary sciences' methodology, still work as 'prooved' by statistical effect.

so now you like statistics? cunt.