designing a convincing prayer experiment

"The guy who started all this, Frank Loehr, did kitchen table experiments with seedling sprouting and growth rates. (The power of prayer on plants). I've done experiments of this sort with skeptics, where they did all the work, and I did all the praying, with interesting results." [RaSBey, Post #1]Did the "kitchen table experiments" happen to include exhaling hot, moist breath over the "prayed on" seedlings, thereby contributing a more warm, humid atmosphere for one set of plants than the other set of plants that did not benefit from the growth-stimulating hot air prayers?Oh, and did that hot air happen to contain any extra nutrients like, say brewer's yeast? If so, I can see why praying directly over seedlings would induce accelerated growth rates.Peace.

Trixie:We also must take into consideration that the person proposing this "double blind" experiment is the same individual that supposes both inanimate and animate entities to be inhabited by or play host to demons and evil angels.So, could it be that praying over one control group of plants causes the Devil to direct his minions to enter the physical structure of the control grouup plants and inhibit their growth, say for the purpose of misguiding the Obedient Scientist into false beliefs?I'll bet RaSBey has an answer that will safeguard the integrity of the experiment. Afterall, the Devil's in the details.Peace.

In Message #5, RaSBeY says, "[I] hope we get some ideas and projects started."I do too, Stephen. How can I be of assistance before this thread goes down the tubes.I have a big collection of wildflower seeds I plan to reintroduce to the wetland behind our house this spring. I'll be starting seed beds inside over the next couple of months.What do you say I include at least one control group of Prairie Sunflowers over which we chant Native American prayer songs?Peace.

Stephen:Again, in Message #21, you give evidence that an advantage to growth is automatically built into the Loehr "kitchen table" experiments."Loehr, if memory serves, took two jugs of water into a prayer meeting, where one was passed around and prayed for, the other set aside."How many warm hands held the Jug "A" of water?How long did each person hold Jug "A" while praying?How much body heat was transferred into Jug "A" by the hands?Where was Jug "B" stored during all this praying?What were the individual water temps from each jug when the seeds were initially watered?Do you know that soil and water temps affect germination rates and growth rates, Stephen?If we structure an experiment, I sure hope it's better structured than Loehr's appears to have been structured.Peace.

Stephen:In Message #22 you seem to have missed my point entirely.What I asked was, "so, could it be that praying over one control group of plants causes the Devil to direct his minions to enter the physical structure of the control group plants and inhibit their growth, say for the purpose of misguiding the Obedient Scientist into false beliefs?"You said in reply, "I would mostly pray that God would deliver us from evil as we do the experiment, keeping the devil out of the picture ... but, if allowed to mess with the experiments, the devil might try to enhance the growth of the controls, so that it looks like prayer did nothing."Okay, let's digress for a moment and look back. Up to now, your philosophy as stated in this and other threads includes your beliefs that:(1) There is a supreme god.(2) The supreme god you believe to exist can be petitioned by prayer to cause physical differences in otherwise similar or same inanimate and animate objects.(3) We can structure an experiment that will provide strong evidence that the supreme god has been successfully petitioned by prayer to possitively affect the germination rates of same species seeds and the growth rates of the resulting seedlings.(4) There is an evil power embodied in an entity or evil angel who has a posse of demon minions.(5) The devil and his minions have the physical ability to enter into animate and inanimate objects and influence the objects to cause evil or reflect evil attributes.(6) The supreme god can be petitioned to prevent the evil entities from interfering with the prayer experiment, and thereby prove your hypotheses.Also, in Message 22, you indicate you could avoid the "devil default" I pointed out as possible, and guarantee the success of the experiment by, "mostly pray[ing] that God would deliver us from evil as we do the experiment, keeping the devil out of the picture."Okay. Now let's assume we conduct an absolutely unquestionably double-blind scientific experiment or whatever you scientists want to call it ... but definitely it's unquestionably correct in structure. And the result is that Group "A", the prayed-over seeds, germinate more quickly and the resulting seedlings grow more quickly and more healthy and all that.Again, my previously stated questions are rephrased here as:(1) Does that prove existence or even likelihood of a supreme god whom we successfully petitioned with prayer to have possitive effects on Group "A"; or(2) Does that prove existence or equal likelihood of an evil entity, or a trickster god like Pan, who finds it amusing or beneficial to his purposes to retard the seed germination and subsequent health of seedlings in Group "B"?Do you see the point of my questions now, Stephen? See, you believe in BOTH scenerios before the experiment begins. You have this mishmash of Jewish, Christian, Voodoo, animism, pagan, wiccan, pantheonistic cabbala of good and evil theologies.But you are willing before the results are in to accept that possitive results in Group "A" can only point to the existence of a supreme god who has dominion over and the will to exercise that dominion over evil. And that there could be no other possible scenerios.My point is that even if the prayer experiment is absolutely unquestionable and results in Group "A" accelerated growth, that there are other metaphysical explanations possible; and, in fact, some of those explanations are manifest in other theologies or philosophies past and present. Right?Peace.Peace.

Re: Message 36:Stephen "I could not see the devil making God look loving or good, so I did miss your point."My point is that you may be proving that only the Devil, Pan, or some trickster god exists, and there is no "loving or good" god as that whom you apparently are set on proving.Stephen: "So, you start praying in particular ways, to see if you can separate these factors."And again, my point would be that Pan, the Devil, or some singular, trickster god says, "now I really have this fellow going, and I am going to befuddle him even more."Stephen: "The purpose of all this is to get people to see the possibility, the probability of success, if they want to connect up with the Jehovah self-described in the Bible."And the possibility exists that what the experiment results in is that people are deceived by one of your other perceived entities that you have called up.Stephen: "But, I do have confidence in the H-D method, that persistently applied, in a search for the One True God, He will be found if He is out there."But Stephen, you have repeatedly expressed your belief in a pantheon of gods, good and evil; so, how do you hypothetically deduce which one is responding to your prayer petititions. Again, an evil or trickster entity may be the respondent.By "the One True God" we may assume you mean "Jehovah" yet the Jehovah portrayed in the Bible repeatedly allows man to be bamboozled by supernatural tricksters. This does not prove the existence of Jehovah. In fact, it indicates a possibility that at least one author subconsciously surmises that if a superior power exists, it is evil.Stephen: "But, I can see it producing all sorts of weird pagans as well."What could be weirder than a pagan concept of evil angels that mount asteroids and ride them into Planet Earth like Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove?Stephen: "Other gods, confusions, mistaken thoughts, fantasies, all get trimmed away, as you keep trying to come up with new predictions, new studies."Why then, friend Stephen, do I continue to see message after message from you that attributes natural phenomena to the willfull actions of a pantheon of demons.Stephen: "I don't think other philosophies will survive the process, unless they are true, too."Other philosophies have survived, and will survive, as long as people are willing to put stock in mistaken thoughts, fantasies, confusions, and pantheons of gods and godlets as the embodiment of good and evil.Stephen: "But then, the One True God isn't out there."Maybe not. Or maybe s/he is and does not require some silly parlor game to prove his/her existence.Freedom from self-doubt.Peace.

Re: Message 43:Stephen: "I can't imagine that they cannot do stuff that we can do, theoretically."I can't imagine that they can do the stuff we do without a corporal body.

From Message #51: "It can always be said that god's will is unknowable or that god doesn't want to be tested if such tests fail."From Message #41: "Maybe not. Or maybe s/he is and does not require some silly parlor game to prove his/her existence."[This message has been edited by Abshalom, 01-27-2004]

Re: Message #60Stephen: "I'm helping others walk the trail that has got me in such (interesting) trouble. And, every post, every reply, I learn something."Do I detect a taint of the old suffering servant syndrome here, Stephen? Are we gonna have to watch while you bear your cross, trudging along in Bro. Buz's well worn path?Please tell me it's not so, and you're gonna nip it in the bud. I pray you do.Peace.