Are you trolling? I stopped reading this after "Nothing in scientific method contradicts Christian teaching." Evidently, he isn't familiar with the part of the scientific method that insists on testability.
FTA :
Darwin was, in many ways, a model of good scientific method. He observed the world around him, developed a theory which sought to explain what he saw, and then set about a long and painstaking process of gathering evidence that would either bear out, contradict, or modify his theory. As a result, our understanding of the world is expanded, but the scientific process continues. In science, hypotheses are meant to be constantly tested.
Shoulda read two more lines...
I like this article. If all religious people were this reasonable, we'd have very few problems related to religion in this world.
Comments
Are you trolling? I stopped reading this after "Nothing in scientific method contradicts Christian teaching." Evidently, he isn't familiar with the part of the scientific method that insists on testability.
FTA : Darwin was, in many ways, a model of good scientific method. He observed the world around him, developed a theory which sought to explain what he saw, and then set about a long and painstaking process of gathering evidence that would either bear out, contradict, or modify his theory. As a result, our understanding of the world is expanded, but the scientific process continues. In science, hypotheses are meant to be constantly tested.
Shoulda read two more lines...
I like this article. If all religious people were this reasonable, we'd have very few problems related to religion in this world.
I found the apology in the last paragraph to be an important shift in approach
Good religion? As distinct from what? The other guys nonsense?