OK. I am going out on a limb here (Revelation, quote, God)

[Mr5150]

And I hope that I am not violating any TOS rules of this site.

But I was stuck by this post which gave me some insight into the skeptic's mindset

//www.city-data.com/forum/33121767-post15.html

Has to do with the speculation aspect of what I see so often. Preconceived mindset, I think. "If it can be explained away by a possible natural explanation" then it is assumed that supernatural event is not true. Speculation in my opinion. I would prefer solid evidence that something is a fake or the Actual result of an actual natural phenomenon .

Give me evidence, not opinion!

[hiker45]

What is the point of your post?

[TroutDude]

Originally Posted by hiker45

What is the point of your post?

Glad I wasn't the only one scratching my head.

[Asheville Native]

I assume you are talking about this post "Something is suggestive of supernatural only if you have exhausted every possible natural explanation for the event." and not your response.

The sun traversing the sky every day was once assumed to be supernatural because any natural explanation just didn't fit man's preconceived notions about the world they saw. The problem was a lack of information, knowledge and understanding.

The failing was that many gave up and surrendered to the ignorance of calling it supernatural. What's wrong with saying 'we don't know because we don't have enough information'. The 'goddunit' cry is only an excuse to play the willful ignorance card.

[mhans123]

Shouldn't most of the burden of providing evidence fall on the supernatural explanation? ...Or do you assume the supernatural is more plausible than the natural?

[allenk893]

There is no excuse to be played. The world and humanity are living evidence and manifestations of a creator. You choose to deny it. And that is your choice. But it is NOT fact. This world and humanity was sprung from the mind of God and created by him. You are just living in it.

[mhans123]

Originally Posted by allenk893

There is no excuse to be played. The world and humanity are living evidence and manifestations of a creator. You choose to deny it. And that is your choice. But it is NOT fact. This world and humanity was sprung from the mind of God and created by him. You are just living in it.

Suppose what you say is true. What makes you so sure that the Christian God is the Creator as opposed to all others?

Originally Posted by allenk893

There is no excuse to be played. The world and humanity are living evidence and manifestations of a creator. You choose to deny it. And that is your choice. But it is NOT fact. This world and humanity was sprung from the mind of God and created by him. You are just living in it.

You're just wrong but you choose to deny it.

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Originally Posted by allenk893

There is no excuse to be played. The world and humanity are living evidence and manifestations of a creator.

Why? Because you simply assert it to be so? Or because you have the first shred of substantiation for the postulations you simply bandy around for the sake of it?

Originally Posted by allenk893

This world and humanity was sprung from the mind of God and created by him.

Why? Because you simply assert it to be so? Or because you have the first shred of substantiation for the postulations you simply bandy around for the sake of it?

[TRANSPONDER]

I don't see that and TOS is being flouted.. This is a good point or question. And I love people who go out on limbs.

Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
"Something is suggestive of supernatural only if you have exhausted every possible natural explanation for the event."

.
Mr 5150 "The problem with "every possible natural explanation" is that said possible explanations are mere opinion. Facts are facts. It could be this or that is not the same as "this is actually what is going on".

There are two points here. The Grandstander one is that a supernatural explanation should be considered only when all possible natural explanations have failed to provide an explanation.

The problem there is that, if that happens, the event only becomes 'unexplained'. It does not become 'supernatural'. For that we require some definite hard evidence that some supernatural mechanism was involved, and that is a hard one to prove.I'm almost inclined to say that this line leads no -where and the better results come from looking at the increasing number of 'natural' explanations. because they should increase the amount of credit that 'natural' explanations should be given.

Now, you point is more the 'how do we know what we know' argument, which essentially argues that validated data is only based on human understanding. We had some lively debates recently about the validity of science vs. divine revelation.
To me it is simple: science has a good track record on reliable data. Religion does not.