Alright, I have to say that the student is very smart to be good on such a comeback, but his arguments are flawed.
There is no person that can say that they know every single information about something, but that is why we have experts. These experts, although might be biased (which is why we have competition), know their specific field of study more than a commoner. Through this, we can establish a few certain things:
And it seems to me that this proffesor is not a scientifical one. Because he could easily crush the philosophy of the student. Indeed, the proffesor seems to fall short, either to support creative thinking or because he has no clue on what he is talking about.
The way science works is this: take an experiment, repeat it multiple time untill a usual observation is made. Figure out how this occurs and repeat the experiment to prove that this is so. This is used to take things for granted; for example, since every human seems to have an organ that pumps blood, we can assume that every human does have it. It is not really necessary to test all 6 million people.
Evolution: It has indeed been observed (a species deviating so far that it cannot reproduce with the original, it has happened over 50 years). Now it is not the question of is this true, but how true can we make it?
And no, cold and darkness is just a relative term. They are descriptory, used for literature and such to bring it to life. Most people don't think in numerical terms.
Last edited by flareofdragon; 12-05-2005 at 08:18 PM.