-
Science still is not a religion – and no amount of specious logic will make it into a religion.
by: JT You know Rob, if you bothered even to look into this site, you would have found out I already addressed this issue nearly… -
Your’s is also a religious view
by: Rob Lockett I admitted in my long form article that mine is a religious view. What you seem unable to grasp, but are able… -
I am not advocating belief in anything other than ‘fully systematized understanding’.
by: Rob Lockett Hi Will, you raise some honest questions there… I ask you to read the new version in order to see that I… -
Words and Meanings
by: Jorge JT: I see your justifiable frustration in dealing with Mr. Lockett’s articles. You have written in your responses that many of the issues… -
There is a critical difference
by: Will Petillo There is a critical difference between assuming that everything in the universe operates through material means and only studying material things. Although… -
You do know and you do care
by: Rob Lockett John, I was immediately struck by the contrast between your creed and your vociferous reply since I ‘did not’ get the impression… -
Very little of science today is empirical.
by: Rob Lockett Very little of science today is empirical. There’s a whole lot of theory going on, and that theorizing (such as evolution) which… -
Intelligent design offers a meaningful prediction
by: Rob Lockett ID predicts that so called ‘junk DNA’ will be found meaningful as the quaternary genetic code is better understood. http://www.detectingdesign.com/pseudogenes.html