On 20/09/2018 20:58, Gary Harnagel wrote:
On Thursday, September 20, 2018 at 8:53:18 AM UTC-6, Paul Schlyter wrote:

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 06:49:59 -0700 (PDT), Gary Harnagel
wrote:

On Thursday, September 20, 2018 at 7:22:00 AM UTC-6, Paul Schlyter
wrote:

They may have been at some point, but everyone is fallible. And
when you ignore evidence, you are not doing science, period.

The problem is that "evidence" doesn't have the same strength to
different scientists. There is a subjective component.

True, but if one scientist fail in his subjective opinion here,
another scientist can later correct that. The arbitrer is the success
or failure in predicting unobserved phenomena, or to improve the
predictions about already known phenomena.

True. The arbiter is experimental evidence, but evidence that is
open to subjective interpretation isn't quelled until MORE evidence
is generated with less (or no) wiggle room.

Science is always subject to revision when better evidence becomes
available. The speed of light as a function of time with error bars
makes salutary reading for anyone who believes that scientists are
infallible. A famous experimentalist applied one of the terms for
correcting for an imperfect vacuum in the wrong sense and everyone after
him did the same *until* a new even more precise microwave method came
along and got a systematically different answer well outside 3 sigma.

During the intervening period of decades the error bars were getting
narrower with each refinement but around a systematically wrong value.

However, polytheism typically envisions various gods at odds
with one another. Christianity, OTOH, has them in full
agreement, working in perfect harmony.

Satan is also a part of the Christian pantheon. Is Satan and
God in perfekt harmoni with one another?

It is important for our development that there be opposition.
Of course, not everyone will be admitted through the "Pearly
Gates." This is a basic teaching of Christianity.

So why are you then making false claims?

Which "false claims" would those be? That the "advanced
civilization" won't have different levels, lower ones not involved
directly in governing? YOU are making false assumptions :-).

Your false claim was that all Christian deities live in harmony,
without making any exceptopn for Satan.

Satan is NOT a deity. YOU are the one that made that claim.

Hmm! What would you call him then "a disgruntled former employee of God"
aka a "fallen angel". Can't be much good as an omnipotent deity if he
can't keep his own house in order can he? At least the polytheists were
honest about having their Gods in conflict about how to run the Earth.

Romans just quietly absorbed any new Gods they ran into their pantheon.
That was until they ran into the awkward problem of monotheists.

"There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and
another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star
in glory.

In case you didn't know, the "glor of the Moon" is really the gliry
of the Sun. The Moon does not shrine with its own light.

It's a metaphor, I'm sure you've heard of them.

And because of it heaven will very certainly be hotter than hell ;-)
Blackbody Thermodynamics 101.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown