You have to back up a bit and take a larger perspective. You have to fundamentally believe that there is such a thing as "demonstrable" in order to make your argument work. You have to believe that there are phenomena that are measurable and consistent, otherwise the whole process falls apart. The religions I know…

You have to have faith that there is a correlation between the science and the results, that there is, in fact, such a thing as cause and effect. I think most people would like to believe this to be so, but there is no reason to believe it to be so except through a fervent application of faith.

Ok, but consider this: you have to have a fundamental belief in the existence of "evidence" in order for the scientific method to work, yeah? Otherwise, it falls apart. There is an underpinning of faith there: that the universe is measurable and consistent. Many people would love to believe that, but there is no…

Thanks for being civil. Yes, belief systems, generally, seek to impose understanding on the world around us. That, first of all, presupposes that there is a world around us, and also that it can, in fact, be understood. They also take a lot of matters on faith (many of which they agree upon, fundamentally: cause and…

Ok, let's start with your first statement. What makes you believe that you (or anyone) can, indeed, understand the world/universe (assuming that those do exist, which is a separate, but related, argument). THAT is the first (and one of the most important) tenants of both science and other religions: that one can…

I suspect this won't be a productive discussion, since I am guessing you are set in your beliefs. I'd gladly write up a clear explanation for you, demonstrating it to be so, but I am not sure I have the time right now.

Seems like an awful obtuse way to formulate a comment, no? And it's especially awkward, since there are several words in that sentence (well, not really a sentence, since it lacks proper capitalization and punctuation, though at least it was more cogent than the reply), such as the conjunction, that would be difficult…

Are you talking about the history of the world? I feel like there are probably more than that. On the other hand, perhaps writing in a complete sentence would have been a better way to communicate… whatever it is you're trying to say? (assuming you didn't just accidentally hit a bunch of keys)

yeah, there may be the cultural zombies of West Africa/Caribbean lore, but certainly not the kind of zombies they have to deal with every day

Thanks for the reply! I loved that it was as detailed as it was (even a minor character like Ant-Man has a convoluted 50+ year Marvel history!). I can see that more about Cassie, Scott's time filling in for Reed, etc., would have ended up with something bloated, but glad you considered putting that all in there!

Well, then, I would say the writing style of the individual who wrote this piece is lacking, then. Those bits read like they were written by a small, bratty child. I had hoped for some intelligent criticism, but starting with that left me cold

Interesting thoughts, Mr. Dick Van Dyke! (You can't fool me with your clever name!)

um, nothing quoted here seems particularly bad to me? I don't understand this article at all…

The Sting is one of the best movies of all time

1,5,4,6,2,3

Outlaws is my favorite episode of season 1

I am surprised the person who works on the Sherlock Holmes series didn't mention Jane Watson (played by Lucy Liu) on Elementary

Sorry, did you post this in the wrong place? I was correcting an error in the story. Your comment seems unrelated to mine, so I am guessing it's in the wrong spot?

There were two Asian-Americans in the cast of Agents of SHIELD

Link?