Believe? I do not know whether God was involved or not.<quoted text>You also live in a culture of faith, but won't admit it. You believe that there was no GOD involved in the origin of life. That is a faith based belief.
However, my doubt tilts towards skepticism of the supernatural claim because I see good progress is being made in understanding abiogenesis and because there has never been any scientific evidence that the natural appearance of life is impossible.
Scientists will say "this happened" or "that happened" within their own audience and its ALREADY UNDERSTOOD by other scientists that they mean "this is what we think happened, based on our understanding of the evidence so far, but always open to new interpretation if new evidence demands it in the future".What you don't seem to get is that in this forum, science is not presented as a culture of doubt.
They don't have to repeat it every time they make a claim.
It gets a bit wordy, don't you think?
Yes, that might happen at times. But also, scientists get impatient with those who simply dismiss their claims without first getting to understand the evidence behind the claims and why they might find the evidence compelling.Faith based beliefs that have no place within science are broadcasted as fact, and if challenged, then the broadcaster belittles those who are challenging them with insults and sarcasim.
For example, I know you have dismissed climate change but I would wager a bottle of bourbon that you do so out of hand on the conviction that they are a bunch of eco-nazis and paid govt stooges looking for another tax excuse etc (or similar) and have not ever looked closely at the evidence they present.
Now I would ask that you explain the significance of the absorption spectrum of CO2 in the context of atmospheric temperature levels, without going and looking it up. I bet you cannot.
AND YET - you have a solid conviction that human influence climate change is rubbish! On the basis of WHAT? Essentially nothing more than ad hominem against those scientists.
There you go with the phrase "solid foundation" when I am trying to explain that science is a culture of doubt, not faith. Its NOT how a scientist approaches the world.If their philosophy was so rock solid they could stand on it's solid foundation, yet they dodge the challenges with childish ad hominums. THis is observable.
Yes, the ad hominems occur on both sides, and that is observable. People get heated about this stuff.