As is par for you, you misrepresent. Nowhere did I state or imply the non-necessity of observable, testable, falsifiable evidence or the role it plays in forming theory and then testing and refining that theory. Nowhere did I state or imply that the scientific method is other than hypothesizing, testing and refining. But it is simply false to categorically state that religious faith and science are always and necessarily in conflict. Science seems to confirm that the Universe had a beginning, just as Genesis teaches. Science also seems to confirm the truth of the Biblical proposition that "in the beginning was the Word (logos)" because in all of human experience, intelligence and information always precede the existence of specified complexity. There are thousands of other examples. And it remains the case that appealing to "peer review" as the ultimate measure of ascertaining scientific truth is fallacious. It is to employ a logical fallacy---the appeal to authority.
Last edited by Tarquin; 01/26/20.
