[quote]pookie wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Why is it dishonest to include the possibility of God from a discussion?
In a scientific inquiry, “God did it” is never an acceptable response. Science is based on the assumption that nature and the universe operate on knowable laws. Things we can’t explain (and there are many) indicate that there are flaws in our understanding.
You can believe that those laws were put in place by God; but here, your conclusion implies that God is actively “breaking” the laws of physics to make hexagons, because we don’t yet understand how they are formed.
You are making the same mistake as those who say that ONLY God could create that hexagon.
I’m not the one trying to explain the phenomena by invoking entities for which there is no evidence that they even exist.
Not inventing invisible, imperceptible entities to explain stuff is not usually referred too as “a mistake.” But then, I’m more familiar with science than with voodoo or witchcraft, so maybe it makes sense to you.
If, according to all known physical laws, the hexagon above Saturn’s North Pole could not possibly exist, then EITHER there is a physical process (or law) we don’t yet know, or the hexagon gives credence to ID.
It’s pretty clear we don’t understand the process. There’s already been tons of speculation and various explanations proposed. Testing them is a problem, but I doubt we’ll find any news laws from Saturn’s poles. We’ll probably depend our understanding of gas giant’s atmosphere.
As for ID, you can give it all the credence you wish; it’s not a scientific theory to start with. How does it rank in witchcraft incantations?
I cannot prove, though I do like the ID argument.
No doubt. But then, why do you even ask the question, since God speaks to you directly.
In your case, since you keep calling me a liar though, I’m not at all sure about Intelligent Design. You might be a counter-example.
Are you typing this using your elongated nose, Headocchio?
[/quote]
ID is not a scientific theory. I never claimed it was. Science and religion are not connected in any way. However, if science, by its own definitions, cannot explain an observation, then its laws are incomplete (realizing, of course, that it never will be).
Therefore, it is possible for there to be a non-scientific explanation for an event. You simply don’t know and neither do I.
Now, suppose you found a piece of pottery buried 10 feet underground in your backyard. You would conclude that an intelligent being made that object. You do that because pottery does not occur in nature. How do you know that? You’ve never seen it.
How many times have you seen hexagons swirling (for decades) above planetary poles?
An example, of course, is never proof, which is why ID is not accepted as ‘scientific’. I’d never claim that any event is somehow a proof. It DOES however cause us to question.