/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14735515
Well, they were wrong. Also, Habermas is an avowed Christian, interested in the resurrection of Jesus Christ or whatever, so he is just totally irrelevant and not a truth-seeker. I would actually tell people to stay away from his writings.

The three books mentioned in that post - >>14734462 - are the three best ones, recognized as such by the actual experts in the field.

>>14735337
>>14735530
>>14735597
The public might be interested, but in reality academia is filled with self-appointed guardians of the status quo. Old paradigms go kicking and screaming, and science advances one funeral at a time. People, and especially academics with their whole academic publishing career invested into materialism being true, are NOT as open-minded to this stuff as you naïvely think they should be. Read this:

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc799144/m2/1/high_res_d/vol21-no1-5.pdf

To see for yourself why academia is resistant to this stuff.

Also,

>In all of that time, nothing compelling has come up to warrant any serious consideration.

So what are your counter-arguments to what these three books - >>14734462 - are arguing? Have you actually read them? Because IF YOU SAID WAS TRUE, that you HAVE looked at the most compelling stuff, you should have read them. And yet, I doubt them. You are all talk and pretend.