--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a bit confused here. Are you saying that since we can't demonstrate that things worked the same in the past as they do now, then we can't have any idea about how things were in the past?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, if you can't have any idea how they worked, how can you also have an idea how they worked? Either we do or don't.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What about the recent past?..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That we know. I am not a silly last thursdayist.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we can say that these laws worked the same as ten minutes ago as they do now, what allows us to do so? What allows us to assume the same physics ten minutes ago and not 10 million years ago?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We observed the recent past, not millions of years ago, or the future. We have history. We have many things that we know about the recent past up to thousands of years ago. That's it.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does this apply to spacial displacement also? Are you also saying that we can't demonstrate that the laws of physics apply equally to the place I am and to the place I am not?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I would think that they apply to all our physical universe. But this is according to the bible a temporary universe.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How does this new-found doubt about the past affect our ability to convict a murderer using forensic evidence? (actually not evidence since we can't trust that physics was the same yesterday.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn't. Good science is still good. Unless the guy is over 4400 years old.
**********************************************************************
sorry but you seem to want your cake and to be able to eat it ...
with scienctific methodology we observer the recent past in the same way as we observer the far past .. we no longer take the writen word of a 19th centry historian about the history of Rome .. we challenge it by examining the physical evidence , by critically looking at accounts from that time and later authors , by trying reconstuctions , by using analytical sciences to test things , and we make high demands of the level proof . In recent year much of the accepted history of the roman world has been changed dur to the application of science ....
Now you are saying this only works up to some date you have picked some 4400 years old .. but can you answer the question why it does not work for 4401 years ago .. or 400000 years or 400000000 years .
You are free to say because "a deity" wills it .. but where is you proof ... can you demonstrate this ...
you say your not a silly last thursdayist , but can you offer more evidence that such a person ....
as we learn more about "recent" human history , due to better science technology ,we are pushing back the dates for early civilisation further , do we then have to assume that only half the evidence for a civilization is "real" if seems to span 4700 to 4200 ???