Studying the supernatural

quote:

---

Ok, if you say so. Im sure there are some things still unexplained that were Scientifically investigated. Some things will never be explained and some of them are SN IMO.

---

That doesn't contradict what Percy said. Percy said that whenever we have found a cause it is natural. If it is unexplained then we haven't found a cause.

quote:

---

It's the same exact thing when we ask evolutionists about our origins. They say we only deal with current life. It's so very convienient.

---

Of course that isn't true. What you've doubtless been told is that the origin of life isn't part of the theory of evolution. And that is true. It isn't true that scientists aren't studying the origin of life - they are, and they keep making progress.

quote:

---

I don't know. There may be some ways but if it can be tested then it's not SN right? Isn't that what you would say?

​

Isn't this whole thread a set up? Mod is trying to make us look even stupider than what people already think?

---

Not at all. If the supernatural has effects on the natural world, those effects can be studied. For instance if prayer is at all effective it should be statistically visible and there have been studies trying to investigate that. Likewise, as has been mentioned there is a way to test out-of-body experiences (place items where they could only be seen by the patient if they had a genuine OOB).If you take a serious discussion as a "set-up" maybe it is because you aren't up to it. In fact your suspicious and hostile reaction does a very good job of making you look bad.

quote:

---

See Nuggin's condescending, ignorant, wimpy, cop-out reply to me Message 46 about how I should "grow up". Anyone who believes there is more to life than what we see is a "dreamer". A "delusional whack job" and the best one "uneducated". We need to "grow up" and think for ourselves. Get "educated" as they say, "take a look at what Science is saying, be free, open you mind". etc etc etc etc...

---

In fact Nuggin had a valid point. It's always possible to invent ad-hoc additions to anything we know. But if you're reduced to that then you are almost certainly wrong. And for all that you might quibble at his wording I don't think that it is any worse than some of the things you've done here.In fact if you don't want to look bad then I have to suggest that you work at reducing your bias, getting your facts right and understanding the posts that you are replying to. You have potential, but a lot of it is wasted right now.

quote:

---

First off, just because YOU say Nuggin has a valid point doesn't mean anything. He took what I said and twisted it around.

---

But he still had a valid point, even with GDR's explanation.

quote:

---

If ever you construct a post that isn't at all condescending flavored with arrogance with a hint of humility it will be a first.

---

Coming from you, that is a bit rich.

quote:

---

As for understanding the posts I make, I perfectly understand what it is I said to Straggler. Thanks kindly tho.

---

Now there's a perfect example. I said that you should make more of an attempt to understand the posts that you are replying to And you reply that you understand the posts that you write. See the problem ?

quote:

---

As for getting my facts straight, OBVIOUSLY I know what abiogenesis is! In fact if you read my post it says "most sciences" aren't interested in origins (I was using the TOE as one example). I thought that would imply abiogenesis was in play as ONE of the sciences that DOES seek answers for our origins.

---

Oh so you weren't being ignorant, just dishonest. Let us remind you of what you said: Now you know that that isn't true. So why did you say it ?

quote:

---

Who even knows what in the frikking world that even means. If you want to come over you can watch me pray anytime. Bring your pen and notepad.

---

I mean that a statistical study should be able to show that prayer is effective. Even if prayer only sometimes works, a positive outcome should happen more frequently than just chance.

quote:

---

I have prayed for certain things that most certainly have been answered. I seriously doubt you would say it was due to prayer as you would call it a coincidence. So save displaying your pious attitude for someone else.

---

But that is exactly why a proper statistical study is needed. If prayer really did work, you wouldn't need to rely on anecdotes that might be coincidences at best. It could be demonstrated. And it hasn't been.Chuck, you've written a few good posts here, and a lot of stinkers. I honestly am trying to give you some good advice here. You could be a lot better than ICANT or Buzsaw, but all too often you aren't.

quote:

---

Yeah, so what's the problem? How should we go about doing this?

---

The way it has been done is on the lines of a clinical trial. Split patients into two groups, organise prayers for one group and not for the other.

quote:

---

This is quite shocking. I wasn't aware. So all these prayers of mine that were answered don't count because a scientific study wasn't there to document it?

---

They don't count as reliable evidence because of all the problems with anecdotes. They are worth no more than the testimonials for "alternative" health care and for much the same reasons.

quote:

---

You have a weird way of doing so.

---

I don't think so. You can't correct the deficiencies in your posts unless you know about them, can you ?