You can be as certain as you like that I am completely bereft of any scientific understanding or knowledge, but unless you provide facts to correct what you think I have incorrectly expressed, then you are in the realm of the NPF.
I, on the other hand, am as convinced as I can be that you have zero objective evidence for any god or whatever-it-is you believe in. Your posts give me the impression that your patronising attitude is more to cover your own shaky ground - I could be entirely wrong, but I don't think so without evidence to the contrary.

Susan
drrayeye Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quote
>
>
> Ray: but I'm certain that nothing you wrote in
> response to Eddie has any grounding in empirical
> science--actual studies with methods, statistical
> analyses, and results. If you tried to make some
> sort of connection, I doubt that you would have
> enough understanding of methods and data analyses
> to understand articles that might give your
> analyses some credence.
>
> Susan: After your first sentence, this paragraph
> needs evidence.
>
> Ray: Then provide it. Cite the study--and your
> analysis.
>
> My characterization of your capabilities is is not
> pomposity nor looking down--it's pretty obvious.
> I've completed high school, college, and graduate
> school science and math classes and carried out or
> partnered in many scientific studies or technology
> applications. My reports have survived peer
> review. You have neither mastered the key concepts
> in academic institutions, nor participated in
> experimental research activities. Teaching in
> elementary school doesn't count.
>
> Susan: And if that isn't a pompous, slightly
> looking-down-your-nose attitude, then I'd like to
> know what is!!!
>
> Ray: If anything I said about you in my
> comparison is inaccurate, let's have it.