Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
So maybe it's the kind of clue that could give us information about the event, but it is not the actual image of the event. Do you see the difference. Maybe there's no real conflict.
|
L.O.L. now she's going to weasel that we might get information from which we can get an 'Image' of a past event but it is not the 'Real Image' because it isn't of the present event. I think we need to get ready for another bit of fantasy created by Peacegirl, just so that she can hang on to her fictional world created by Lessans |
This is where more empirical testing will be necessary to prove, once and for all, that the eyes are not a sense organ. Until then, this is just another far out theory. |
Didn't take long.
But I can see in the way you phrased your statement that for you the only valid tests will be the ones that support you idea, everything will be thrown out for one reason or another, no matter how well controled the tests are. This is what creationists do, they deny every thing except that which they can distort and twist to fit their ideas.