Doesn't Strobel do this in every one of his "Case For X" books?

Ah, the claims of how reality isn't somehow "really" what is out there. I do wish that those who claim this would be required to pick up a white-piece of metal with their bare hands. So much for their solipcism then.

If science is oh-so bad, why won't these people refuse to use the other benefits of science like medicine, computers, forensics, etc? Why, they're hypocrites! Lazy and evidently so ignorant that they think no one notices.

Hey, buttons can be scary.

He is, in fact, ruling out a hypothesis at the outset. He is ruling out the hypothesis that the natural/ material world is all there is. By seeking out consultants who don't limit themselves to the natural/ material world, he is essentially refusing to talk to anyone who doesn't already agree that the supernatural world exists.

Greta Christina wins the thread for that comment. If Strobel claims to be pursuing all possibilities, then he should be speaking to at least one person who does believe that natural laws are sufficient. He doesn't do this, instead interviewing only people who believe in an active supernatural component to the evolution of life.

Of course, it's his book; he can limit his "investigation" to whatever ideas he wants. But if that's what he's going to do, he ought to stop being dishonest by pretending he's giving an open-minded survey of all the options, when in fact he's chosen his interviewees carefully to advance one specific and widely scientifically rejected hypothesis.

Creationists, among others religious, conveniently accept scientific proofs all the time when trying to explicate various religious claims. Holy texts are authenticated by comparing ancient manuscripts; authorship is established by historical analysis; appeal is made to the reliability of Isaiah, for example, by scientific studies of textual consistency; miracles are confirmed by meticulous assembly of reports; modern medicine is brought into service by the Vatican to verify Lourdes' miracles; the world's ancient literature has been combed through time and again and subject to literary analysis for the least mention of anything in the Jesus story; studies of roman crucifixion habits and tomb burials are accepted if they support anything in the New Testament.

Creationists I am sure run to doctors' offices and hospitals whenever prayer fails. Modern antibiotic treatments are probably never refused when trying to treat bacteria which have evolved antibiotic resistance; radiometric dating as a basis for many lab studies are eagerly accepted; or are they refused because of the unreliability of elements' half-lives?

I wonder if they use energy derived from coal and oil? Millions of year old fossil materials? Oh no, I'd rather freeze to death. Hmm, modern automobile technology or horse and buggy like the Amish (who have a pathological fear of buttons, yes BUTTONS, and need to use pins on their clothing). Modern book publishing, new papers and inks, the internet, space satellites? Or are they shunned in favor of papyrus and smoke signals?

How much longer can we go on with this hypocrisy and stupidity?

If 'Yes it is! No it isn't!' was in Monty Python, then my use of same was an instance of synchronicity. Never heard of it that way. I think Ben Franklin said something pretty similar regarding the nature of a quarrel between 2 'devines', which I saw in the quotes section of Positive Atheism.

How about Callosal Disconnection?

This is something we observe. Perhaps it can be reconciled with the claim "humans have souls", but to do so would be completely ad hoc. If the religionist is honest, he has no choice but to admit that there are reasons to believe his theory is wrong.

Bravo. This is win in a bottle.

Theory, the development of any human race is a predictable process, similar to watching a child develop in the womb. In our humanities case we entered that final and predictable phase of OMY GOHA FOMA - (Oh my God , the kids have found the matches) in 1945 with the explosion of the first nuclear weapon at Hiroshima. From that point forwards our humanity entered a predictable potentially self-destructive phase in i'ts development. This is a testable theory, we are the test! and their is a prediction. If you think this is science-fiction, then within the context of this theory, so are the dangers of nuclear war ,and over-population.
There is an interesting quote ' the more primitive a race, the more deistic it is. If you had the technology to go to the stars, you would do exactly the same thing, and it does no harm to be pleasantly received and respected as Gods. In fact it is quite amusing and it is in fact the only way an advanced humanity can approach a lesser advanced society'. Clearly today we are much more advanced so this approach is hardly appropriate any more, given that our scientists are now approach the very early stages of artificially creating life.It does not need much imagination to see where these experiments by our scientists will lead, through progression of design, as evidenced by the wonderful theory of Evolution, except that the speed of progression would be so much quicker. When our scientists create life, they will become Creators, like those whom our ancestors mistook for God or Gods.

Such as?

If we could confirm out of body experiences that would go a long way to verifying souls. But most religions don't claim this necessarily occurs. And it hasn't been convincingly shown to occur.