==The motivation behind science doesn’t change the nature of science.
Oh, ok, so does that mean that you are in full support of the work of Creation and Intelligent Design scientists?
Oh, ok, so does that mean that you are in full support of the work of Creation and Intelligent Design scientists?The REAL question is at which stage the Intelligent Design scientists attempt to 'define' (literally: describe God's 'thought process' when he created 'the world') the mind of God in this process; I say they are putting God 'in a box' (literally: conforming him and his methods to that extent that humans can conceive, and that is limited since we are 'limited' in our intellect and ability in contrast to God) when they do this ...
Never said that. Never implied that. I was supporting a science that was showing promise in expanding human understanding. Calling science a religion is just as bad as calling religion a science.