Steve Shaw
For goodness sake, man. Have you nothing useful to be getting on with?

From someone who spends a great deal of his time arguing with Jack and pete, that's a bit rich. Actually, I think trying to promote a better understanding of science is a very useful thing to be doing. Prof. Dawkins earned his living at it for quite a while.

The only way I can respond to that is to repeat what I've said before to you ad nauseam. I positively refuse to churn it all out again.

Good. I'm not asking you to. I'm asking you to address the points that I have raised. I'm asking you to think outside your oft repeated doctrines. I'm asking you to consider (as all scientists must) the possibility that you are wrong.

Incidentally, I don't brush aside anything...

How are you doing on falsifiability? Have you actually read any of the links I've put your way?

I just happen to not particularly want to enter your booby-trapped and nice-but-irrelevant world of philosophical ramblings.

Without the philosophy that underlies science what is it that you think distinguishes science from religion?