Slevin said:
It is less evidenced than my claim, because it has no evidence. It fits nothing, and makes no sense. Science doesn't deal with the spiritual because it's unfalsifiable. It can deal with it, and it has shown a number of times that spiritual things are in fact not spiritual.
What is? Take for example, distant light. That is far away. If we assume a same past, it is long ages away as well. If we assume a different past, it is not long ages away. Nothing differentiates the two, but the assumption. You are wrong.
So? Who cares if it's important to millions, that doesn't mean it's true. The rest of your paragraph is completely incoherent.
The rest of the paragraph means that this present natural is not the past or future natural. The bible is important. Very important. But if all you want is natural man's wisdom, fine. You cannot claim that this natural universe is going to be here in the future. Yoy cannot observe the state of the universe, outside of the present. The stars we observe far away, we observe right now, or in the near past. We never observed them 13 billion years ago. You cannot tell us the state of the universe when they were created. You cannot tell us the state of the universe in the far past, or the future. Not with science. That is a fact. If you disagree, show us here and now how you have a scientific case for the state of the past!!!
Some scientists have postulated that light was faster and has slowed down, but there's no evidence for it. All indications show that light has travelled at the same velocity.
I don't say our light was faster. I say that the universe, space, and light, was not our light! Big difference. Our light stayed more or less the same since the split, probably.
So I don't need to prove it changed, it didn't. You need to prove the universe was the same, and light. Because science CLAIMS that the present IS the key for the past, and the future!!! That must be backed up AS a science claim. It can't be, it is merely an assumption!
My ideas only need biblical support, and they have that in spades.
You can't back your bible claim up with the bible. That's fallacious reasoning. Scientists back their claims up with evidence, not with science. Science is a method. The rest of your paragraph is compeltely incoherent.
Oh yes I can! That is how it works. A spiritual claim requires spiritual proof, such as the spiritual book of God. It does not require physical proof. Science claims REQUIRE that kind of evidence and support, testing, and observation, etc. There are science claims, and there are spiritual claims. Science is not spiritual, and the spiritual is not physical only. That is pretty basic reasoning.
It is less evidenced than my claim, because it has no evidence. It fits nothing, and makes no sense. Science doesn't deal with the spiritual because it's unfalsifiable. It can deal with it, and it has shown a number of times that spiritual things are in fact not spiritual.
False. Your same past and future is NOT evidenced at all. My spiritual claim is evidenced greatly. We know there is a spiritual, most men know that. The bibe supports it. It has support. It fits the natural evidence as well as your claims do, and better!
Science does not deal in spiritual things. They can't go there. What ghosts have they observed?? What biblical life, and inspiration have they detected? Which angels have they interviewed? What are you talking about???!