Theist derision of science

[Sheldon]

@Sherlock-Holmes

If you disagree with something I said then quote me verbatim and I’m happy to discuss.

This:

@Sherlock-Holmes

If the truth of some claim can fluctuate, be true today but not tomorrow, then we have no business referring to such claims as objective facts, facts are always true not conditionally true.

I am still waiting for you to define what you think the word fact means, as I seriously doubt it means what you think it does, judging from that, but an irrefutable scientific fact is never immutable.

This:

@Sherlock-Holmes

Of course Tour doesn’t (and nor do I) argue that his credentials prove him right, he has pretty involved scientific justifications for his position which is that abiogenesis is a fantasy, a fairytale.

If they were scientifically justified then there would be a scientific consensus reflecting that.

This:

@Sherlock-Holmes

Mathematical arguments and proofs for example are nothing to do with science.

Though it could just be very poorly worded, as you seem fond of sweeping assertions.