think this is the reason we have a problem with the scientific origins debate in the first place. Science demands explanation through naturally occurring processes.
And guess what, reality is in accordance with this demand. Which makes it what we high-falutin' science types call "true".
This contradicts the foundation of scientific fundamentalism in that it does in fact take upon suppositions for the "evidence" to make sense.
The precise "supposition" being that
the universe is not a lie.
You speak of science as if it is a religion.
No he doesn't.
And we can all read what he said, so we know that he doesn't.
Whom did you hope to fool by saying this?
Am I denying reality? I'm denying whatever reality your in
And since we are all in the same reality, and you assert that you're denying it ...
I also take issue with this term "natural processes" as if the natural isn't supernatural in itself.
Well, that's what the words mean, isn't it?
™ Version 4.2
