You can't use the "laws of physics" to erase past events or evidence of events you think should not have happened.
The bottom line is that there is no evidence for miracles - events that contravene the laws of physics and the normal progress of events - at any time or place in history, including modern times and the present.
This is ideology, or dogma, not a scientific statement of anything about the real world.
Nope. Wrong. It is logic and reason based on how the world actually works . . .
No, you're dictating WHAT HAPPENED, not how it works. Science/physics does not dictate what is happening or what happened, but explains HOW it happens. I.e., it accepts what has been observed or reported as happening, and then explains HOW it happened.
But your doctrine claims to prove certain alleged events could not have happened regardless how much evidence reports that they did happen. This is not what science or physics does. Physics does not pick out certain past reported events and declare that they did not happen because it was impossible and could not have happened.
Again, here's a site which says 9-11 did not happen because it would have violated the laws of physics:
https://911planeshoax.com/tag/911-impossible-physics/
You're saying the same thing about past reported events. I.e., they could not have happened because such a thing violates the laws of physics, according to you.
You cannot rewrite history or undo the historical record by simply declaring it violates the "laws of physics" -- you cannot just make up your own facts, or negate reported facts, by declaring what your version of physics allows and disallows.
The world is not required to conform to your version of what physics allows and doesn't allow to be possible. If something happened, your doctrines, whether you call it "physics" or some other title, cannot undo it by dictating that it's impossible. If it happened, then it is possible, regardless of your dogma.
. . . as opposed to how some people claim it works but cannot prove it.
You are the one claiming to disprove things which you have not disproved, declaring certain past events violated the "laws of physics" and thus could not really have happened. You have no "laws of physics" which have disproved anything, other than what you are fabricating. You have no more proof than the above character (
https://911planeshoax.com/tag/911-impossible-physics/ ) who claims the "laws of physics" prove that 9-11 never happened.
. . . there being not a single bona fide, provable miracle (as defined) to be found in ancient records or in modern times.
There is evidence that events happened, including the Jesus "miracles" in the gospel accounts, but this doesn't mean they are "provable" -- they are reported in the record, and this is evidence that they happened. A large part of the historical record is not "provable" as being certain, but there is evidence that the events did happen. You cannot undo that evidence, or prove those events did not happen, by imposing your "laws of physics" doctrine onto them. The historical facts did happen regardless of your twisted version of physics.
If an event happened, that overrides your subjective religious feelings which you clothe in this pseudo-scientific rhetoric. Calling your religion "the laws of physics" does not make it scientific.
Physics is not a religion or an ideology or a matter of faith but an ongoing study on how the world works . . .
Real physics is not, but your twisted version of physics is an ideology which pretends that reported events did not really happen because the "laws of physics" make it impossible, by your interpretation. But physics is not the ideology you pretend it is, presuming to undo past events or overruling reports of what happened, like a Cosmic Supreme Court handing down injunctions prescribing to us what did or did not happen. We know what happened from observations and reports of what was observed, not from an abstract doctrine prescribing what is allowed or disallowed to happen.
Which means it does not dictate that certain events could not have happened even though there is evidence reporting that it did happen. It cannot disprove that 9-11 happened, as this character says (
https://911planeshoax.com/tag/911-impossible-physics/ ) it can, and neither can it disprove that the Jesus miracles happened.
It is not the function of physics to review all the claims in the historical record and declare which ones did and did not happen based on your version of the "laws of physics" -- or anyone else's distorted version of what these "laws" allow or don't allow as possible.
Science / physics has to conform itself to what actually has happened, based on the evidence, including reports of what happened, and not pretend to dictate what really happened or did not happen based on someone's special version of what physics allows or doesn't allow.
. . . based on many decades of observation, testing, prediction and review.
There are no observations or tests or reviews which have disproved reports of what happened, except when a greater preponderance of reports or observations contradict others. These reports and observations give us our knowledge of what happened, not your doctrines imposing your "laws of physics" ideology.
The true "laws of physics" explain what happens or what happened. They don't overrule what happened or what was reported, as you imagine.
There is no faith involved.
For physics there is not. But your insistence that no "miracle" events can ever happen is based on faith, not on science.
Nor has there been evidence for miracles, events that contravene the laws and principles of physics, uncovered to date.
You cannot erase past events, or evidence of events, with babble jargon like this.
There is evidence (not proof) that the Jesus healing acts did happen. You cannot erase this evidence by labeling it "miracle" and defining "miracle" as something ruled out by your "laws of physics" jargon. You cannot erase that evidence anymore than this character --
https://911planeshoax.com/tag/911-impossible-physics/ -- can erase the 9-11 event with his jargon about the "laws of physics" relating to planes crashing into buildings.
If the events are reported in the record, that is "evidence" that they happened, even though it's not proof. You can't erase that evidence or blot out what happened with your doctrines about what physics allows or doesn't allow.
Again, what it says in the bible, or any holy book, is not evidence that what is said is something true and accurate.
The report that it happened, in ANY source, is evidence that it happened.
You don't negate that source by assigning it a derogatory label like "holy book" and censoring it from the record.
Regardless of your wish that it should not happen -- You cannot selectively go through the record and choose out what you don't like and dictate that it must not have happened because of what your version of the "laws of physics" allows or disallows to happen.
Do you believe whatever is said in the Quran, the Gita, Upanishads, the Tibetan book of the Dead - for example - because the things they say happen to have been written in these books?
It has the same credibility as something in Suetonius or Plutarch. As with all sources, some of it happened and some of it did not.
The report that something happened is evidence that it happened, but is not proof. So we have to look at each claim. We have to ask how close the source was to the event reported. And we have to ask if there's only this one source, or others saying the same.
And we have to apply the same rules to ALL the sources, without prejudice. You can't exclude a source because you hate its content or get negative vibes from it.
