"Blind faith" versus "choosing to believe"

[Archaeopteryx]

You may call it rambling but I like to go into some detail rather than just make a statement without an explanation. I find short statements without any support dismissive.

Detail is useful if there is a point to it. That's why your rambling is easily dismissed.

Yes and that is what I have said all along. You seem to be seeing things as just black or white. That belief is always associated with delusion.

Where did I say that? Find a single sentence in which I claimed that belief in general is always associated with delusion.

As I said belief is OK so long as we also use our minds to reason about where it can fit in with everything. But we can also question and investigate to much without allowing the possibility that some things are beyond our understanding that can play a role in things.

If it's beyond our understanding, then it's beyond our understanding.

A balance of the mental, physical and spiritual. One without the other is out of balance. We are multi dimension beings and so is life.

Absent a definition of "spiritual," it's not clear what this sort of "balance" would even look like.

I agree as I said before. But what I am trying to get at is that many people end up rejecting our natural ability to believe altogether as being totally unreal. So are you saying that all beliefs are just a delusion that we humans have formulated and there's absolutely nothing to them. The majority of humans on this planet have deluded themselves into believing something totally unreal.

Another frustrating thing about discussing these matters with you is that you switch words whenever it suits you. We weren't just talking about belief; human beings have all manner of beliefs about all manner of things. Some of these beliefs are warranted; others are not. We were talking about superstitious beliefs in particular.

This is the point of this debate that we will have differing views on this. I believe that we are incomplete without taking into account our spiritual side. Whether you call it superstition or not is up to you. But there is more and more evidence that there is other dimensions to our existence.

Yes, we've been through your quantum woo before. There's no need to go down that rabbit hole again.

The evidence has also shown that belief has also added a tangible benefit to peoples lives. So whether its imagined or real belief is a powerful and important aspect we need to consider and not dismiss.

This is another point which I have already addressed, so I'm not going to go into it again.

Yes and thats most of the problem. Many are not even open to the possibility because they completely reject any notion of the possibility. They go to the other extreme of positioning themselves in one camp where they wont even consider anything possibility of anything beyond what they see.

Rubbish. Again, I'm driven to repeat myself because you simply are not listening: There's a difference between acknowledging that the supernatural is a possibility and accepting it as a probable reality. The former need not entail the latter.

The problem here, steve, is that you are engaged in a monologue. You hit 'Reply' and type out a response, but it rarely touches on the substance of the post you are responding to. Long convolutes posts are not always good posts.

 

[stevevw]

Detail is useful if there is a point to it. That's why your rambling is easily dismissed.

You just dont agree with the point and thats why it is dismissed.

Where did I say that? Find a single sentence in which I claimed that belief in general is always associated with delusion.

I didn't say you said this. I was asking you the question are you saying that all belief is delusional if you read what I posted properly.

If it's beyond our understanding, then it's beyond our understanding.

Yes but that almost sounds dismissive. So long as we do the science and reasoning to get to the point where we cant go any further and realize that we cannot understand something. So long as we dont try and force explanations on things that we dont understand. It comes down to our beliefs. If you dont believe in anything beyond the science or our physics then you will always look for naturalistic explanations why something is what it is. You may even try to put an explanation on something that can never be understood because you have to find one that can explain how things happened naturally.

But if you also are open to believing there are possibilities beyond the natural world then you can also consider possibilities outside the natural world. As a believer in God I accept that there are things I will never understand because God made them.

Absent a definition of "spiritual," it's not clear what this sort of "balance" would even look like.

I think its more important to be open to allow possibilities beyond the mental and physical. To allow possibilities beyond the natural world and to allow possibilities beyond what science can explain. Such as quantum physics and spooky action at a distance or wave function. Or how something can come from nothing with the beginning of existence. Science may never know the answers. But we should also be open to something outside science being the answer even if we cant understand it. This allows us to include these possibilities which may add dimension to our understanding of other things.

Science has moved into other fields in recent years such as meta physics , bio-centrism, philosophical sciences ect. There is research being done on the influences of things like how the mine and consciousness. Even on things like belief, and prayer which are all showing some evidence of having some effect on things. Some will call this pseudo science but there is more and more doing it. I think we need an open mind.

Another frustrating thing about discussing these matters with you is that you switch words whenever it suits you. We weren't just talking about belief; human beings have all manner of beliefs about all manner of things. Some of these beliefs are warranted; others are not. We were talking about superstitious beliefs in particular.

So I dont understand what are you saying. I was asking you a simple question to clarify your position rather than assuming.

Yes, we've been through your quantum woo before. There's no need to go down that rabbit hole again.

OK well you call it woo and many scientists see it as a valid field of study and investigation. But see that in itself is dismissive and a good example of what I am talking about with the lack of an open mind and the allowance of the possibilities of things that may go beyond our reality. There is too much evidence now for it all to be called woo. Because it fringes on alternative sciences there will be some who postulate stuff that may go over the top and that is to be expected. But that is the nature of this area in quantum physics and what is causing scientists to come up with strange ideas. It is the scientists themselves who are creating this with their language and thought experiments.

Look at what even the mainstream scientists have come up with which is stemming from what they have discovered lately. Things like multiverses and hologram worlds, string theory and worm holes. Are you saying that these things dont have similar aspects to what you claim is woo from other scientists. To me it verges on science fiction but these ideas are accepted in main stream science as the latest theories that address things like the quantum world. In fact there are now tests and peer reviewed papers that have been done on the subject of quantum physics and our conscience having an influence on reality.
Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments
In this experiment, a double-slit optical system was used to test the possible role of consciousness in the collapse of the quantum wave-function. The ratio of the interference pattern’s double slit spectral power to its single slit spectral power was predicted to decrease when attention was focused toward the double slit as compared to away from it.
The study found that factors associated with consciousness, such as meditation, experience, electrocortical markers of focused attention and psychological factors such as openness and absorption, significantly correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double-slit interference pattern.(2)
http://deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2012doubleslit.pdf
http://www.collective-evolution.com...cs-nothing-is-solid-and-everything-is-energy/

Rubbish. Again, I'm driven to repeat myself because you simply are not listening: There's a difference between acknowledging that the supernatural is a possibility and accepting it as a probable reality. The former need not entail the latter.

I think you will find if you read what I said I am agreeing with this. I said the important thing is to be open to the possibility not automatically believe it is true. But I added the problem was as much as you are concerned with the line between being open to a possibility of something beyond our reality and believing those possibilities are true. I am saying that some many non believers are not even open to the possibility because they mode of thinking doesn't allow it to be considered.

The problem here, steve, is that you are engaged in a monologue. You hit 'Reply' and type out a response, but it rarely touches on the substance of the post you are responding to. Long convolutes posts are not always good posts.

That depends on what you believe. If you dont believe in what I am saying then you will see it as bull and having little substance. But what I am saying is supported by many and even scientists. So what I am saying isn't just my original thoughts but its also mixed with research of what other experts have said on the subject. So in that sense I dont take any offense because I know that I am in good company with many others.

But I can see that you are coming to the end of your tether. I dont want to go over things all the time as well. Just as much as you feel I am not getting things I can see that we have different views on this and that is fair enough. It is talking about some of the reasons why people believe and if you are a non believer then you are going to find all this unreal. Afterall thats the fundamental difference between believers and non believers and why atheists say that people who have a faith in God are deluded. So any discussion on the details of belief will also end with the same conclusions.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You just dont agree with the point and thats why it is dismissed.

What point? You ramble on endlessly and I'm supposed to discern a point in there somewhere?

I didn't say you said this. I was asking you the question are you saying that all belief is delusional if you read what I posted properly.

If you have been reading my comments, you'd know that this is a silly question.

Yes but that almost sounds dismissive.

No, it's honest.

So long as we do the science and reasoning to get to the point where we cant go any further and realize that we cannot understand something. So long as we dont try and force explanations on things that we dont understand. It comes down to our beliefs. If you dont believe in anything beyond the science or our physics then you will always look for naturalistic explanations why something is what it is. You may even try to put an explanation on something that can never be understood because you have to find one that can explain how things happened naturally.

As opposed to explaining things supernaturally? What is the track record of supernatural explanations?

I think its more important to be open to allow possibilities beyond the mental and physical. To allow possibilities beyond the natural world and to allow possibilities beyond what science can explain.

We can allow all manner of possibilities without necessarily accepting them as realities. You seem to continually miss the point: accepting that some state of affairs is possible does not entail accepting that that state of affairs must be real.

Science has moved into other fields in recent years such as meta physics , bio-centrism, philosophical sciences ect. There is research being done on the influences of things like how the mine and consciousness. Even on things like belief, and prayer which are all showing some evidence of having some effect on things. Some will call this pseudo science but there is more and more doing it. I think we need an open mind.

And a skeptical mind, particularly with regard to grandiose claims.

So I dont understand what are you saying. I was asking you a simple question to clarify your position rather than assuming.

If my position is not clear by now, then you haven't been paying attention.

OK well you call it woo and many scientists see it as a valid field of study and investigation.

Many also see it as bollocks.

But see that in itself is dismissive and a good example of what I am talking about with the lack of an open mind and the allowance of the possibilities of things that may go beyond our reality.

Don't confuse skepticism with closed-mindedness. As noted earlier, we can allow all manner of possibilities without committing ourselves to the position that these possibilities must be realities.

There is too much evidence now for it all to be called woo.

That's what the peddlers of woo always say.

I think you will find if you read what I said I am agreeing with this.

No, I'm finding the exact opposite, which is why I have been repeating myself.

I said the important thing is to be open to the possibility not automatically believe it is true. But I added the problem was as much as you are concerned with the line between being open to a possibility of something beyond our reality and believing those possibilities are true. I am saying that some many non believers are not even open to the possibility because they mode of thinking doesn't allow it to be considered.

And I noted that this was rubbish. Most nonbelievers accept that it is possible.

That depends on what you believe. If you dont believe in what I am saying then you will see it as bull and having little substance. But what I am saying is supported by many and even scientists. So what I am saying isn't my original thoughts but its also mixed with research of what other experts have said on the subject. So in that sense I dont take any offense because I know that I am in good company with many others.

I've already shown you what scientists think of this woo.

 

[stevevw]

As opposed to explaining things supernaturally? What is the track record of supernatural explanations?

Its not just a case of track record. Its the fact that we are using supernatural ideas to explain things more and more. Even mainstream science is and some of their ideas are pretty far fetched. I explained this with how even scientists are using things like multiverses and hologram worlds. If you check out most info or docos on anything to do with quantum physics, astrology, dark energy or matter, the finely tuned universe ect you will find some pretty crazy ideas floating around from mainstream science.

It doesn't mean its true but it does means we are taking these type of explanation into consideration more and more. Thats because its the only way scientists can explain what they see. Because what they see steps out side the natural realms of our reality so therefore its supernatural. You look at supernatural as ghosts and God. But I include anything that goes beyond our natural explanations like multiverses ect that even the mainstream scientists use. So because of this it shows that our existence may include something supernatural and thats why we may have this inclination to look beyond our world and reality.

We can allow all manner of possibilities without necessarily accepting them as realities. You seem to continually miss the point: accepting that some state of affairs is possible does not entail accepting that that state of affairs must be real.

Yes I agree but many atheists say that we shouldn't even consider their possibility. Do you consider the possibility for the supernatural.

And a skeptical mind, particularly with regard to grandiose claims.

We have known about people making grandiose ideas for years and are aware of the type of personality and characteristics that go with that. But much of this new stuff is very close to being science if not good science that people dont accept or understand yet. Just look at some of the theories and explanations that mainstream science has come up with lately with quantum physics. They sound pretty grandiose to me. Some may cross the line but much of it makes a lot of sense and seems to fit the evidence. Its a relatively new field and many use to say some accepted things in science was crazy as well. Many scientists dont like what quantum physics represents and Einstein was one of them.

Many also see it as bollocks.

Like I said main stream science use similar language. They just accept it more because it comes from prominent scientists.

Don't confuse skepticism with closed-mindedness. As noted earlier, we can allow all manner of possibilities without committing ourselves to the position that these possibilities must be realities.

I agree.

That's what the peddlers of woo always say.

No this is what mainstream science is saying.

No, I'm finding the exact opposite, which is why I have been repeating myself.

I think there is a communication breakdown here. When I say belief is part of our natural thinking you take that as we should all become Christians or something. You are reading things into what I am saying. There are two lines of debate here. One is what the facts are and the other is our personal views. I normally make it a point to say when its my personal view. Maybe you are mixing my personal views up with what I have been saying about the evidence.

And I noted that this was rubbish. Most nonbelievers accept that it is possible.

Fair enough

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Its not just a case of track record.

You didn't answer my question. What is the track record of supernatural explanations?

Its the fact that we are using supernatural ideas to explain things more and more. Even mainstream science is and some of their ideas are pretty far fetched.

No we're not. Where are we invoking supernatural forces to explain things?

I explained this with how even scientists are using things like multiverses and hologram worlds. If you check out most info or docos on anything to do with quantum physics, astrology, dark energy or matter, the finely tuned universe ect you will find some pretty crazy ideas floating around from mainstream science.

It doesn't mean its true but it does means we are taking these type of explanation into consideration more and more.

Weird does not entail supernatural. We've been through this before.

Thats because its the only way scientists can explain what they see. Because what they see steps out side the natural realms of our reality so therefore its supernatural.

Counter-intuitive does not entail supernatural.

You look at supernatural as ghosts and God. But I include anything that goes beyond our natural explanations like multiverses ect that even the mainstream scientists use.

To my understanding, multiverses are part of a natural explanation, not beyond one.

Yes I agree but many atheists say that we shouldn't even consider their possibility.

No, they don't.

Do you consider the possibility for the supernatural.

Yes, it's possible. See my previous comments on this.

Like I said main stream science use similar language.

Of course woo peddlers hijack the language of science. They need their woo to have the veneer of scientific credibility. It has to sound sciencey to convince people that "this is what mainstream science is saying."

No this is what mainstream science is saying.

No, it's not.

I think there is a communication breakdown here.

Yes, I noted that earlier. Hence my repetition.

 

[stevevw]

You didn't answer my question. What is the track record of supernatural explanations?

I did say that mainstream science is using supernatural type explanations more and more to explain what they are seeing. Is this what you are asking for as I have already mentioned some of those such as multiverses, hologram worlds, worm holes, time travel and string theory. I have linked some examples. All these examples are of prominent scientists from top universities. Their work is not regarded as woo and is accepted as mainstream science. Here are some ideas that mainstream science uses.

If the notion of dark energy sounds improbable, get ready for an even more outlandish suggestion.
Earth may be trapped in an abnormal bubble of space-time that is particularly void of matter.
http://www.space.com/5912-live-giant-cosmic-bubble.html
Newsflash: Time May Not Exist
Not to mention the question of which way it goes ...
http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-ti
Quantum physics says goodbye to reality
Some physicists are uncomfortable with the idea that all individual quantum events are innately random. This is why many have proposed more complete theories, which suggest that events are at least partially governed by extra "hidden variables".
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2007/apr/20/quantum-physics-says-goodbye-to-reality
An experimental test of non-local realism
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7138/abs/nature05677.html
Reality: Is matter real?
A set of relatively simple experiments reveals enormous holes is our intuitive understanding of physical reality. Trying to explain what goes on leads to some very peculiar and often highly surprising theories of the world around us.
No we're not. Where are we invoking supernatural forces to explain things?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528840.700-reality-is-matter-real.html
Many lives in many worlds
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v448/n7149/full/448023a.html
Simulations back up theory that Universe is a hologram
http://www.nature.com/news/simulations-back-up-theory-that-universe-is-a-hologram-1.14328
Freaky Physics Proves Parallel Universes Exist
Look past the details of a wonky discovery by a group of California scientists -- that a quantum state is now observable with the human eye -- and consider its implications: Time travel may be feasible. Doc Brown would be proud.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/05/freaky-physics-proves-parallel-universes/
Heres one from my part of the world so they must be crazy.
Quantum theory’s crazy reality demonstrated by Australian scientists
It seems the stuff we’re made of doesn’t actually decide what to be — and perhaps even when to be — until we look at it. Physicists from the Australian National University put “the bizarre nature of reality” to the test in a new study published in the science journal Nature Physics.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...alian-scientists/story-fn5fsgyc-1227380723772
http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3343.html
Physicists bid farewell to reality?
http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070416/full/news070416-9.html

These are only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to the amount of stuff out there from mainstream sites like Nature.com, New Scientist, Scientific America, Phys.org ect. The scientists are mainstream and many back this type of thinking. Most of what I have linked is very similar to what Robert Lanza who is also a prominent physicts who has a good reputation is saying. That our reality is not all there is. That our minds is what can create our reality and that our minds/conscience could be something that exists in other dimensions.

Weird does not entail supernatural. We've been through this before.

Counter-intuitive does not entail supernatural.

The descriptions and language that the scientists are using is describimg supernatural events. They state time and time again that our reality is not all there is.They state these things go beyond the normal measurements of our reality and natural world hence its supernatural. The problem is they cant have their cake and eat it to. They speak like they are describing some science fiction movie with things like other dimensions that can have all sorts of things happening.

They can include anything within the infinite number of realities with different conditions and physics to ours. That could include spiritual realms as they dont know what that may even entail. The point is they include everything in those worlds so that it allows them to explain some of the strange things they have seen in our reality and natural world. Who said that what they call natural is natural.

To my understanding, multiverses are part of a natural explanation, not beyond one.

As you stated that pseudo science can use real science to make themselves sound credible it is the same for mainstream science. They will use wooy type explanations to help them address the difficult problems they have encountered in trying to make the natural world fit in with what they are discovering. There is no hard evidence for multiverses. In fact there is some evidence against them. Multiverses or parallel worlds are beyond our natural explanation and physics therefore are supernatural. They involve all sorts of possibilities with millions of dimensions with different realities all outside our natural one. Any of these could have all the ingredients of what is classed as a spiritual realm.

Add to this all the other far fetched ideas that have not been proven but are promoted as real possibilities and in some cases claim to be proven then you have plenty woo or supernatural promoted by mainstream science. The reason they are doing this is because they have to. What they are seeing and what the evidence is finding causes science to turn to explanations beyond our reality and into the supernatural. Its not that they will find something that will make it all fall into place and make sense with the natural world we see today. They will never find anything that will fit in with the natural world because all the evidence points to something beyond that.
Science Will Never Explain Why There's Something Rather Than Nothing
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...ain-why-theres-something-rather-than-nothing/

Of course woo peddlers hijack the language of science. They need their woo to have the veneer of scientific credibility. It has to sound sciencey to convince people that "this is what mainstream science is saying."

Just like mainstream science needs to add a little woo and supernatural into their explanations.

 

[Winepress777]

Per the forum guidelines, I'd like to stay on topic with this thread and not get distracted into a theological debate.

I have a simple question:
1. Many atheists claim that Christians have a "blind faith" (meaning that they believe something with zero evidence to support their belief).
2. Many atheists also claim that one cannot choose to believe something. Rather, they say that people only come to believe something through the evaluation of persuasive evidence.

Isn't it contradictory for a single atheist to simultaneously profess that both claims stated above are true?

Probably. But maybe not to their spin on it. But more importantly, there is no profit to wondering about what any atheist claims about God, it doesn't matter in the least.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I did say that mainstream science is using supernatural type explanations more and more to explain what they are seeing. Is this what you are asking for as I have already mentioned some of those such as multiverses, hologram worlds, worm holes, time travel and string theory. I have linked some examples. All these examples are of prominent scientists from top universities. Their work is not regarded as woo and is accepted as mainstream science. Here are some ideas that mainstream science uses.

Those are not supernatural explanations. We've been over this before: being weird or counter-intuitive does not necessarily make an explanation "supernatural."

These are only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to the amount of stuff out there from mainstream sites like Nature.com, New Scientist, Scientific America, Phys.org ect. The scientists are mainstream and many back this type of thinking. Most of what I have linked is very similar to what Robert Lanza who is also a prominent physicts who has a good reputation is saying. That our reality is not all there is. That our minds is what can create our reality and that our minds/conscience could be something that exists in other dimensions.

Speaking of Lanza:

By the way, Lanza is not a prominent physicist. In fact, he isn't a physicist at all, much less a reputable one.

The descriptions and language that the scientists are using is describimg supernatural events.

No, it's not.

They state time and time again that our reality is not all there is.They state these things go beyond the normal measurements of our reality and natural world hence its supernatural. The problem is they cant have their cake and eat it to. They speak like they are describing some science fiction movie with things like other dimensions that can have all sorts of things happening.

We've been over this before. It's groundhog day with you.

They can include anything within the infinite number of realities with different conditions and physics to ours. That could include spiritual realms as they dont know what that may even entail. The point is they include everything in those worlds so that it allows them to explain some of the strange things they have seen in our reality and natural world. Who said that what they call natural is natural.

Do you have evidence for it being supernatural? You have opted to call it "supernatural" simply because it defies our common sense intuitions. By that standard, aeroplanes would be "supernatural" to people from the 18th century.

As you stated that pseudo science can use real science to make themselves sound credible it is the same for mainstream science. They will use wooy type explanations to help them address the difficult problems they have encountered in trying to make the natural world fit in with what they are discovering. There is no hard evidence for multiverses. In fact there is some evidence against them. Multiverses or parallel worlds are beyond our natural explanation and physics therefore are supernatural.

No. Again, I have to repeat myself because you simply are not listening: they are part of a natural explanation.

They involve all sorts of possibilities with millions of dimensions with different realities all outside our natural one.

More accurately, outside of our local spacetime universe. It's not clear whether our local spacetime constitutes all of nature or not.

Add to this all the other far fetched ideas that have not been proven but are promoted as real possibilities and in some cases claim to be proven then you have plenty woo or supernatural promoted by mainstream science. The reason they are doing this is because they have to. What they are seeing and what the evidence is finding causes science to turn to explanations beyond our reality and into the supernatural. Its not that they will find something that will make it all fall into place and make sense with the natural world we see today. They will never find anything that will fit in with the natural world because all the evidence points to something beyond that.

If we cannot find a credible explanation then we are in a position of ignorance. It doesn't follow that your preferred supernatural explanation simply triumphs by default. Again, groundhog day with you.

Just like mainstream science needs to add a little woo and supernatural into their explanations.

They can only do that if there is some reason to do so. There doesn't appear to be any epistemic benefit to doing so. Adding the supernatural doesn't advance our knowledge any further than admitting ignorance.

 

[sandwiches]

Per the forum guidelines, I'd like to stay on topic with this thread and not get distracted into a theological debate.

I have a simple question:
1. Many atheists claim that Christians have a "blind faith" (meaning that they believe something with zero evidence to support their belief).
2. Many atheists also claim that one cannot choose to believe something. Rather, they say that people only come to believe something through the evaluation of persuasive evidence.

Isn't it contradictory for a single atheist to simultaneously profess that both claims stated above are true?

I am one of those atheists. I believe that theists have "reasons" to believe, bad reasons, but no evidence. Evidence isn't merely a reason to believe something, it's a specific type that is empirically, intersubjectively demonstrable reason.

And no, you can't choose what you really believe. You can pretend your believe, you can lie to yourself or others, or you can believe based on bad reasons, but ultimately, you have no control over what you truly hold to be true.

 

[stevevw]

Those are not supernatural explanations. We've been over this before: being weird or counter-intuitive does not necessarily make an explanation "supernatural."

As I said you seem to want to limit supernatural to something to do with Ghosts or God. The actual meaning if supernatural is (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. That is exactly what these links and ideas from mainstream science are saying. They are stepping outside the parameters of our natural world and the laws of physics as we know them. Thats why scientists are frustrated because quantum physics acts in contradiction to the our laws of physics.

The quantum world cannot be reconciled with the general law of relativity. So that is why they come up with all these far fetched ideas that would make a good science fiction movie. Think about it when scientists say things like time travel is possible, there are worm holes that can go from one dimension in space to another. That other dimension could have physics or lack of physics that make it operate in a completely different reality to ours what else are we to think.

By the way, Lanza is not a prominent physicist. In fact, he isn't a physicist at all, much less a reputable one.

Lanza is a very prominent scientists. He has worked with some of the greatest thinkers of our time, including Nobel laureates Gerald Edelman and Rodney Porter, renowned Harvard psychologist B.F. Skinner (the “Father of modern behaviorism”), Jonas Salk (discoverer of the Polio vaccine), and heart transplant pioneer Christian Barnard. He is considered one of the leading scientists in the world. He is currently Chief Scientific Officer at Advanced Cell Technology, and Adjunct Professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine. He has hundreds of publications and inventions, and over two dozen scientific books: among them, “Principles of Tissue Engineering,” which is recognized as the definitive reference in the field.

So hes no dumbo and even though physics is not his special field he mostly talks about the brain and consciousness which is one of his areas in biology. I certainly think he has more know how than the average person to be fooled by to the point in which the video and others are saying. Often scientists can relate aspects of their fields to other areas and I'm sure that aspects physics was covered in his studies as it relates to physics.

But not just that many of the links I posted were more or less agreeing with what Lanza said. Sure some may go overboard and invest more into things than there is. But this doesn't mean that the basic idea is wrong. There are now studies, tests and peer reviewed work done that are confirming more or less what Lanza has said.

No, it's not.

Have you read some of the articles. Remember what the meaning of supernatural is beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. Just about everything they talk about is beyond scientific understanding and the laws of nature. They are even beyond our laws of physics.But now some want to lesson the criteria for proving a hypothesis, Because of the difficulties in addressing the problems of aligning everything with quantum physics and relativity. Because many of the ideas have been so far fetched and they have to resort to these ideas that go beyond our normal realms they want to allow some leeway without having to prove things 100%.

Scientific method: Defend the integrity of physics
This year, debates in physics circles took a worrying turn. Faced with difficulties in applying fundamental theories to the observed Universe, some researchers called for a change in how theoretical physics is done. They began to argue — explicitly — that if a theory is sufficiently elegant and explanatory, it need not be tested experimentally, breaking with centuries of philosophical tradition of defining scientific knowledge as empirical.
http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-defend-the-integrity-of-physics-1.16535[/quote]

We've been over this before. It's groundhog day with you.

Maybe thats because where in a alternative universe and you keep coming up against different versions of me. (<: But it seems the only reply you give is an unsupported one that doesn't address the question. Its quite dismissive really. You keep saying as far as you know its all within the natural world that we know of. Yet I keep showing you that its not according to what supernatural and natural mean. The fact is mainstream science has offered some crazy ideas that make God look like a reasonable hypothesis. But because its under the name of mainstream science its OK and because anything else has to do with God its crazy.

The fact is quantum foam, multiverses, hologram world which are 2 dimensional worlds by the way so it cant be anything like our natural reality, string theory and any others along these lines are beyond our reality, science, physics and natural world so therefore are supernatural. Show how these things are within our natural realms an not in the supernatural and then you can make a case.

Do you have evidence for it being supernatural? You have opted to call it "supernatural" simply because it defies our common sense intuitions. By that standard, aeroplanes would be "supernatural" to people from the 18th century.

No aeroplanes work in our world and we can explain the physics of how that works. Multiverses, hologram worlds only work in other dimensions because all their physics is go beyond the bounds of our world and reality. In fact multiverses allow for just about anything. So just conjure up anything like another you or me, giants, no gravity, spirit worlds, reptilian creatures it doesn't matter because it has to allow for any possibility.

No. Again, I have to repeat myself because you simply are not listening: they are part of a natural explanation.

They can be part of any explanation but that doesn't mean there is science to back them up. They are based on some indirect assumptions and other things that can never been proven. They are based in other worlds/dimensions that we can never see to verify. So they are more or less using stories of other worlds that are unverified just like you say believers are doing about God. Show me the support for multiverses being a valid part of a natural explanation.

More accurately, outside of our local spacetime universe. It's not clear whether our local spacetime constitutes all of nature or not.

But when you put it that way, being outside our space time could be anything. Heaven might be outside our space time. What does that even mean. If its outside our space time then its going to be outside a lot of other things that operate in our world. Its like the supernatural world you have when your not having a supernatural world. This is what I am saying. Some will argue that all this is normal because science says it is. Its not its unproven and beyond the normal reality and parameters as we know them. So is God and so is anything spiritual.

If we cannot find a credible explanation then we are in a position of ignorance. It doesn't follow that your preferred supernatural explanation simply triumphs by default. Again, groundhog day with you.

No I am not saying this and this is where you jump to the extreme conclusion again. I agree we need to do the science and verify things. But if its beyond our science then we shouldn't say that its a variable alternative until proven. But some things may never be able to be proven and we need to take this into consideration. Like the link I posted that said science will never be able to prove or explain how something comes from nothing.

So we have to acknowledge that there are things we cant know. If this is the case then we have to consider why and what is responsible for this. It doesn't mean we have to go to the extreme and say its God or Aliens or some other unknown entity. But we have to be willing to consider things at work outside our science and the realms of our reality. Simply because the evidence is pointing that way by the fact that we are already conjuring up many explanations that are in that realm anyway.

They can only do that if there is some reason to do so. There doesn't appear to be any epistemic benefit to doing so. Adding the supernatural doesn't advance our knowledge any further than admitting ignorance.

I disagree by the fact that if you are open then this can be an option. Otherwise you are negating a possible area where answers may be. But if you have a closed mind and think that you only want answers within a certain criteria like empirical ones then you will limit yourself. If your empirical evidence hits a brick wall for many years then maybe its time to look else where.

This seems to me to be what is happening in science lately. The evidence seems to be heading that way and what we are finding seems to be heading that way. If you look at the article I posted from nature that said many scientists are wanting to lesson the criteria for proving a theists. This is showing the difficulties they are having with finding the suitable answers within the boundaries of our reality to the difficult questions they are facing now with things like astrology, physics and the quantum world.

I guess thats why intelligent design has come into the fray. I dont think mainstream science can ever explain what is happening without a degree of the supernatural whatever that may be.
http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-method-defend-the-integrity-of-physics-1.16535

 

[Archaeopteryx]

As I said you seem to want to limit supernatural to something to do with Ghosts or God. The actual meaning if supernatural is (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. That is exactly what these links and ideas from mainstream science are saying. They are stepping outside the parameters of our natural world and the laws of physics as we know them.

No, you're misinterpreting this, as evidenced by the following statement:

Thats why scientists are frustrated because quantum physics acts in contradiction to the our laws of physics.

This statement is nonsensical. Quantum physics is physics, just at the quantum level. It doesn't contradict physics, because it is physics.

Lanza is a very prominent scientists.

Before, you claimed that he was a prominent physicist.

He has worked with some of the greatest thinkers of our time, including Nobel laureates Gerald Edelman and Rodney Porter, renowned Harvard psychologist B.F. Skinner (the “Father of modern behaviorism”), Jonas Salk (discoverer of the Polio vaccine), and heart transplant pioneer Christian Barnard. He is considered one of the leading scientists in the world. He is currently Chief Scientific Officer at Advanced Cell Technology, and Adjunct Professor at Wake Forest University School of Medicine. He has hundreds of publications and inventions, and over two dozen scientific books: among them, “Principles of Tissue Engineering,” which is recognized as the definitive reference in the field.

You appear to have copied this from his website, without attribution.

So hes no dumbo and even though physics is not his special field he mostly talks about the brain and consciousness which is one of his areas in biology. I certainly think he has more know how than the average person to be fooled by to the point in which the video and others are saying. Often scientists can relate aspects of their fields to other areas and I'm sure that aspects physics was covered in his studies as it relates to physics.

But he is not a physicist, contrary to what you claimed.

Thats because the only reply you give is an unsupported one that doesn't address the question. Its quite dismissive really. You keep saying as far as you know its all within the natural world that we know of. Yet I keep showing you that its not according to what supernatural and natural mean. The fact is mainstream science has offered some crazy ideas that make God look like a reasonable hypothesis. But because its under the name of mainstream science its OK and because anything else has to do with God its crazy. But the fact is quantum foam, multiverses, hologram world which are 2 dimensional worlds by the way so cant be anything like our natural reality, string theory and any other along these lines are beyond our reality, science, physics and natural world so therefore are supernatural. Show how these things are within our natural realms an not in the supernatural and then you can make a case.

These are not posited as supernatural explanations.

No aeroplanes work in our world and we can explain the physics of how that works. Multiverses, hologram worlds only work in other dimensions because all their physics is go beyond the bounds of our world and reality. In fact multiverses allow for just about anything. So just conjure up anything like another you or me, giants, no gravity, spirit worlds, reptilian creatures it doesn't matter because it has to allow for any possibility

We can explain the physics using the "supernatural" concepts of aerodynamics? Your standard is to treat anything that seems counterintuitive or in violation of common sense as "supernatural." Using that standard, aeroplanes are "supernatural" and explanations for flight that invoke physics are also "supernatural."

They can be part of any explanation but that doesn't mean there is science to back them up. They are based on some indirect assumptions and other things that can never been proven. They are based in other worlds/dimensions that we can never see to verify. So they are more or less using stories of other worlds that are unverified just like you say believers are doing about God. Show me the support for multiverses being a valid part of a natural explanation.

You're the one claiming that these hypotheses are "supernatural."

I disagree by the fact that if you are open then this can be an option. Otherwise you are negating a possible area where answers may be. But if you have a closed mind and think that you only want answers within a certain criteria like empirical ones then you will limit yourself. If your empirical evidence hits a brick wall for many years then maybe its time to look else where.

Elsewhere? Like where?

This seems to me to be what is happening in science lately. The evidence seems to be heading that way and what we are finding seems to be heading that way. If you look at the article I posted from nature that said many scientists are wanting to lesson the criteria for proving a theists then this is showing the difficulties they are having with finding the suitable answers to the difficult questions they are facing now with things like astrology, physics and the quantum world.

Astrology? Seriously? I'm going to assume that is a typo.

I dont think mainstream science can ever explain what is happening without a degree of the supernatural whatever that may be.

You just completely ignored what I said. So from now I'm just going to copy-and-paste: There appears to be no epistemic benefit to doing this. Adding the supernatural doesn't advance our knowledge any further than admitting ignorance.

 

[Ana the Ist]

You just dont agree with the point and thats why it is dismissed.

I didn't say you said this. I was asking you the question are you saying that all belief is delusional if you read what I posted properly.

Yes but that almost sounds dismissive. So long as we do the science and reasoning to get to the point where we cant go any further and realize that we cannot understand something. So long as we dont try and force explanations on things that we dont understand. It comes down to our beliefs. If you dont believe in anything beyond the science or our physics then you will always look for naturalistic explanations why something is what it is. You may even try to put an explanation on something that can never be understood because you have to find one that can explain how things happened naturally.

But if you also are open to believing there are possibilities beyond the natural world then you can also consider possibilities outside the natural world. As a believer in God I accept that there are things I will never understand because God made them.


I think its more important to be open to allow possibilities beyond the mental and physical. To allow possibilities beyond the natural world and to allow possibilities beyond what science can explain. Such as quantum physics and spooky action at a distance or wave function. Or how something can come from nothing with the beginning of existence. Science may never know the answers. But we should also be open to something outside science being the answer even if we cant understand it. This allows us to include these possibilities which may add dimension to our understanding of other things.

Science has moved into other fields in recent years such as meta physics , bio-centrism, philosophical sciences ect. There is research being done on the influences of things like how the mine and consciousness. Even on things like belief, and prayer which are all showing some evidence of having some effect on things. Some will call this pseudo science but there is more and more doing it. I think we need an open mind.


So I dont understand what are you saying. I was asking you a simple question to clarify your position rather than assuming.

OK well you call it woo and many scientists see it as a valid field of study and investigation. But see that in itself is dismissive and a good example of what I am talking about with the lack of an open mind and the allowance of the possibilities of things that may go beyond our reality. There is too much evidence now for it all to be called woo. Because it fringes on alternative sciences there will be some who postulate stuff that may go over the top and that is to be expected. But that is the nature of this area in quantum physics and what is causing scientists to come up with strange ideas. It is the scientists themselves who are creating this with their language and thought experiments.

Look at what even the mainstream scientists have come up with which is stemming from what they have discovered lately. Things like multiverses and hologram worlds, string theory and worm holes. Are you saying that these things dont have similar aspects to what you claim is woo from other scientists. To me it verges on science fiction but these ideas are accepted in main stream science as the latest theories that address things like the quantum world. In fact there are now tests and peer reviewed papers that have been done on the subject of quantum physics and our conscience having an influence on reality.
Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments
In this experiment, a double-slit optical system was used to test the possible role of consciousness in the collapse of the quantum wave-function. The ratio of the interference pattern’s double slit spectral power to its single slit spectral power was predicted to decrease when attention was focused toward the double slit as compared to away from it.
The study found that factors associated with consciousness, such as meditation, experience, electrocortical markers of focused attention and psychological factors such as openness and absorption, significantly correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double-slit interference pattern.(2)
http://deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2012doubleslit.pdf
http://www.collective-evolution.com...cs-nothing-is-solid-and-everything-is-energy/

I think you will find if you read what I said I am agreeing with this. I said the important thing is to be open to the possibility not automatically believe it is true. But I added the problem was as much as you are concerned with the line between being open to a possibility of something beyond our reality and believing those possibilities are true. I am saying that some many non believers are not even open to the possibility because they mode of thinking doesn't allow it to be considered.

That depends on what you believe. If you dont believe in what I am saying then you will see it as bull and having little substance. But what I am saying is supported by many and even scientists. So what I am saying isn't just my original thoughts but its also mixed with research of what other experts have said on the subject. So in that sense I dont take any offense because I know that I am in good company with many others.

But I can see that you are coming to the end of your tether. I dont want to go over things all the time as well. Just as much as you feel I am not getting things I can see that we have different views on this and that is fair enough. It is talking about some of the reasons why people believe and if you are a non believer then you are going to find all this unreal. Afterall thats the fundamental difference between believers and non believers and why atheists say that people who have a faith in God are deluded. So any discussion on the details of belief will also end with the same conclusions.

This is why I hate discussing things with you Steve, I've already disproved this...yet you continue on as if I haven't.

https://sandpaw.weblogs.anu.edu.au/2012/06/04/a-quantum-misunderstanding/

Your consciousness has nothing to do with affecting matter. Nothing.

 

[stevevw]

 

[stevevw]

This is why I hate discussing things with you Steve, I've already disproved this...yet you continue on as if I haven't.

https://sandpaw.weblogs.anu.edu.au/2012/06/04/a-quantum-misunderstanding/

Your consciousness has nothing to do with affecting matter. Nothing.

The problem with what you are proposing is that I accept the support you give as fact and proven and then keep quite without a reply. Thats what your more or less saying. That because I keep debating the issue and questioning what you put forward I am either not listening or I am wrong. That is just as bad as you saying that any of my links that I post are invalid because they are not proven. You want to question my support but then say I have to accept yours and what you say from your personal opinion.

The thing is there is plenty of support for our conscience having some affect on things. This area has become one of the greatest frontiers in science and will lead the way in the future. People have often talked about the power and ability of the mind. Whether its mind of matter or there is something actually happening that connects the mind to the material world we have to do more work and find out. But certainly there are many per reviewed papers that are supporting this area. There are studies and evidence for things such as mind over matter, the placebo affect, prayer, ESP, engineering and consciousness, psychokinesis, Teleportation. This is where the science has been heading naturally and this is where we should be open to look and research. This could unlock the door to a host of new ways we can communicate or to overcome sickness and other health issues. The thing is some can close their mind to much because they are over skeptical.

Here are some links to good science from top universities dedicating million of dollars to this area and peer reviewed research. In fact the military are working in this area as well and see it as part of the future.


The mental Universe
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7047/full/436029a.html
Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments
http://deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2012doubleslit.pdf
CONSCIOUSNESS AND ANOMALOUS PHYSICAL PHENOMENA
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/pdfs/1995-consciousness-anomalous-physical-phenomena.pdf
Mind, Matter & Active Information
The Relevance of David Bohm’s Interpretation of Quantum Theory to Cognitive Science
http://quantum-mind.co.uk/theories/david-bohm/mind-matter-active-information/
CONSCIOUSNESS, INFORMATION, AND LIVING SYSTEMS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17560345
Effects of mass consciousness: changes in random data during global events
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22051562
Experiments Testing Models of Mind-Matter Interaction
http://www.deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2006MarkovRNG.pdf
Quantum theory’s crazy reality demonstrated by Australian scientists
http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...alian-scientists/story-fn5fsgyc-1227380723772
Characteristics of adults who use prayer as an alternative therapy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15895540?dopt=Abstract
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/coronary.html

 

[Ana the Ist]

The problem with what you are proposing is that I accept the support you give as fact and proven and then keep quite without a reply. Thats what your more or less saying. That because I keep debating the issue and questioning what you put forward I am either not listening or I am wrong. That is just as bad as you saying that any of my links that I post are invalid because they are not proven. You want to question my support but then say I have to accept yours and what you say from your personal opinion.

The thing is there is plenty of support for our conscience having some affect on things. This area has become one of the greatest frontiers in science and will lead the way in the future. People have often talked about the power and ability of the mind. Whether its mind of matter or there is something actually happening that connects the mind to the material world we have to do more work and find out. But certainly there are many per reviewed papers that are supporting this area. There are studies and evidence for things such as mind over matter, the placebo affect, prayer, ESP, engineering and consciousness, psychokinesis, Teleportation. This is where the science has been heading naturally and this is where we should be open to look and research. This could unlock the door to a host of new ways we can communicate or to overcome sickness and other health issues. The thing is some can close their mind to much because they are over skeptical.

Here are some links to good science from top universities dedicating million of dollars to this area and peer reviewed research. In fact the military are working in this area as well and see it as part of the future.


The mental Universe
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v436/n7047/full/436029a.html
Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments
http://deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2012doubleslit.pdf
CONSCIOUSNESS AND ANOMALOUS PHYSICAL PHENOMENA
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/pdfs/1995-consciousness-anomalous-physical-phenomena.pdf
Mind, Matter & Active Information
The Relevance of David Bohm’s Interpretation of Quantum Theory to Cognitive Science
http://quantum-mind.co.uk/theories/david-bohm/mind-matter-active-information/
CONSCIOUSNESS, INFORMATION, AND LIVING SYSTEMS
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17560345
Effects of mass consciousness: changes in random data during global events
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22051562
Experiments Testing Models of Mind-Matter Interaction
http://www.deanradin.com/evidence/Radin2006MarkovRNG.pdf
Quantum theory’s crazy reality demonstrated by Australian scientists
http://www.news.com.au/technology/s...alian-scientists/story-fn5fsgyc-1227380723772
Characteristics of adults who use prayer as an alternative therapy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15895540?dopt=Abstract
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/coronary.html

I'm sorry Steve, I'm not going to go over each of these links with you. After reading the first 4...it's clear that you haven't read them. They don't support your post.

I explained to you why you should just post one link in support of what you're saying ...but you don't. You post multiple links that you don't even read. So why should I?

 

[stevevw]

I'm sorry Steve, I'm not going to go over each of these links with you. After reading the first 4...it's clear that you haven't read them. They don't support your post.

I explained to you why you should just post one link in support of what you're saying ...but you don't. You post multiple links that you don't even read. So why should I?

Ok well Lets just look at the first one. I posted one version of the nature paper which had a shortened summary. But I also had more complete version which I did read and as I have with all the links I have posted. I think it is you who hasn't read them. The paper actually supports what I am saying very well. That our minds create reality. But in this example Richard Conn Henry is describing the universe as a mental one because its a product of our minds. If you read it you can see quite easily where he is coming from and there's no question he believes that it is our minds that is creating a reality through what quantum physics has shown us.

The reason I have posted several links is because there are different aspects to this. Some are showing the power of the mind to influence the material world. Some are showing how the mind and our world/universes are connected and a couple are showing the evidence from experiments done to show how our minds can create our reality with how the quantum world works. The writer in the above paper is showing how the classical physical side of seeing things with our eyes receiving light to visualize things biologically is different to what our minds see. The mind doesn't see things like our physical abilities do. He then links this back to what we have discovered in quantum physics and how its the observer who can create the reality. Heres some of the language he is using.

The only reality is mind and observations, but observations are not of things. To see the Universe as it really is, we must abandon our tendency to conceptualize observations as things.

According to Sir James Jeans: “the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine.

The Universe is entirely mental. The world is quantum mechanical: we must learn to perceive it as such.
The Universe is immaterial — mental and spiritual. Live, and enjoy.

http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/the.mental.universe.pdf

 

[stevevw]

No, you're misinterpreting this, as evidenced by the following statement:


This statement is nonsensical. Quantum physics is physics, just at the quantum level. It doesn't contradict physics, because it is physics.

I am meaning that the quantum world acts differently to classical physics. Quantum physics and general relativity cannot be reconciled and scientists cant find any way of fitting them together.

Before, you claimed that he was a prominent physicist.

Ok well I may have thought he was. Never the less he is a prominent scientist who even Dr Moriarty acknowledges he is surprised that Lanza would write something like that. He is relating things to his field of science the brain. He would have a better understanding of physics and quantum mechanics that most. What he says is validated with the support I have linked. That our minds can have an influence on reality. He says that the conscious may live on and this is an extension of our minds being something that can have more control over our reality.

Quantum physics points to there being something that may be active or have an independent influence over the material world. Like I said there can be a fine line between this and someone crossing over into all sorts of things. But in many ways this is the nature of things in the quantum world and there is evidence with tests done to substantiate this that I have posted.

You appear to have copied this from his website, without attribution.

Wikipedia says more or less the same thing. That he has worked with some great scientists. He is head of stem cell research. He has been recognized for his great work. He was regarded as one of the top 100 people in the science world at one stage in the world.

These are not posited as supernatural explanations.

And this is part of the problem if they are not considered supernatural. Because everything about these ideas is beyond our reality and natural world. They conjure up worlds that allow physics that go far beyond the boundaries of what happens in our world and physics. So this is expanding the criteria of what can happen and be allowed. What is the difference between this and what is proposed for God or the spiritual world. Neither have any definite proof and are based on indirect evidence.

We can explain the physics using the "supernatural" concepts of aerodynamics? Your standard is to treat anything that seems counterintuitive or in violation of common sense as "supernatural." Using that standard, aeroplanes are "supernatural" and explanations for flight that invoke physics are also "supernatural."

The point is however it works we can see it. But with multiverses, hologram worlds, worm holes ect we can't. A lot of assumption is allowed. But theses ideas are taken very seriously. Scientists believe that something along one of the lines of thought with these ideas will be right. Its just a matter of refining things. But the explanation is going to involve strange things that defy our physics and natural world. It may involve almost magical things according to what we understand.

You're the one claiming that these hypotheses are "supernatural."

Like I said the things that can happen in these hypothesis have all the ingredients of the supernatural. Science may say that they are not for whatever reason they do. But they all involve things that are beyond our reality. Take the hologram world. It is based on a 2 dimensional world. They say that the universe and everything in it is a 2D projection like a movie screen. That we are only seeing this projection with our minds. This is no different to what Lanza is more or less saying. This is no to different to a spiritual world.

Elsewhere? Like where?

Some place beyond the physical and material world I guess. Somewhere outside the parameters of our known physics and natural world. Just like they are including now with all these other dimensions of many world ideas. Science is now looking at these areas because it seems thats the direction things are going. They have hit a bit of a wall with things and many are thinking outside the circle with things like alternative medicines and technicians. There can be many quacky ideas as well because it fringes on unproven things. But there are some good supported science and testing that is showing some results. The point is with physics its the way it is naturally heading. The quantum world is what is taking us that way.

Astrology? Seriously? I'm going to assume that is a typo.

Yes it was a typo. I meant astronomy. As with dark energy and dark matter, the finely tuned universe, our increasingly faster expanding universe and how the universe began with something from nothing.

You just completely ignored what I said. So from now I'm just going to copy-and-paste: There appears to be no epistemic benefit to doing this. Adding the supernatural doesn't advance our knowledge any further than admitting ignorance.

The benefits are that we may find answers that we couldn't find with conventional methods. Like with the medical fields. They are finding that there is evidence for health benefits in unconventional methods like prayer, placebo effects and other alternative ideas. So long as it is controlled and tested as they go and they get good results thats all that matters. But if we dont consider these type of things and are only willing to stick with conventional ways then we may restrict ourselves and miss out on possible ways of learning new things.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I am meaning that the quantum world acts differently to classical physics. Quantum physics and general relativity cannot be reconciled and scientists cant find any way of fitting them together.

Which is different to saying that quantum physics is "outside the parameters of our natural world and the laws of physics as we know them." That statement is not accurate.

Ok well I may have thought he was. Never the less he is a prominent scientist who even Dr Moriarty acknowledges he is surprised that Lanza would write something like that.

He is not pleasantly surprised. He is annoyed, and justifiably so.

Wikipedia says more or less the same thing. That he has worked with some great scientists. He is head of stem cell research. He has been recognized for his great work. He was regarded as one of the top 100 people in the science world at one stage in the world.

Which doesn't make him an expert in physics.

And this is part of the problem if they are not considered supernatural. Because everything about these ideas is beyond our reality and natural world. They conjure up worlds that allow physics that go far beyond the boundaries of what happens in our world and physics. So this is expanding the criteria of what can happen and be allowed.

But it's not, steve. These are not intended as explanations of something beyond our physical reality; they are intended as explanations of our physical reality.

What is the difference between this and what is proposed for God or the spiritual world. Neither have any definite proof and are based on indirect evidence.

The difference is that these explanations do not invoke supernatural agencies.

The point is however it works we can see it. But with multiverses, hologram worlds, worm holes ect we can't. A lot of assumption is allowed. But theses ideas are taken very seriously. Scientists believe that something along one of the lines of thought with these ideas will be right. Its just a matter of refining things. But the explanation is going to involve strange things that defy our physics and natural world. It may involve almost magical things according to what we understand.

You keep missing the point. They don't defy "our physics". They are postulated as part of "our" physics. You seem to think that any advance in physics somehow contradicts physics.

Like I said the things that can happen in these hypothesis have all the ingredients of the supernatural.

Yes, you keep making this assertion, but you never support it beyond saying that they are "strange" or "weird" and therefore "supernatural." So what if they are strange or weird? As we have already established, being counterintuitive need not imply something supernatural.

Science may say that they are not for whatever reason they do. But they all involve things that are beyond our reality. Take the hologram world. It is based on a 2 dimensional world. They say that the universe and everything in it is a 2D projection like a movie screen. That we are only seeing this projection with our minds. This is no different to what Lanza is more or less saying. This is no to different to a spiritual world.

Except that those committed to a "spiritual world" usually claim much more than the mere existence of such a world. They claim that this world is populated by deities, angels, demons, etc.

Some place beyond the physical and material world I guess. Somewhere outside the parameters of our known physics and natural world. Just like they are including now with all these other dimensions of many world ideas. Science is now looking at these areas because it seems thats the direction things are going. They have hit a bit of a wall with things and many are thinking outside the circle with things like alternative medicines and technicians. There can be many quacky ideas as well because it fringes on unproven things. But there are some good supported science and testing that is showing some results. The point is with physics its the way it is naturally heading. The quantum world is what is taking us that way.

"This is where science is heading..." You keep saying that, but I don't see that happening at all. I can't comment on where physics is heading, as I'm not a physicist, but I do know people working in physics departments and they roll their eyes at this sort of nonsense. Similarly, I roll my eyes whenever I hear that medical science is heading in the direction of alternative therapies like homeopathy. No, it's not.

The benefits are that we may find answers that we couldn't find with conventional methods.

How? When has trading the language of physics for the language of theology ever improved our understanding of physical phenomena? Should we also abandon the language of neurophysiology and attribute seizures to demonic possession rather than aberrant electrical activity in the brain?

Like with the medical fields. They are finding that there is evidence for health benefits in unconventional methods like prayer, placebo effects and other alternative ideas. So long as it is controlled and tested as they go and they get good results thats all that matters.

:rollseyes: Yes, the outcomes are important. But so too is our understanding of the mechanisms underlying those outcomes. The reason so many of these alternative therapies are alternative is because there is either (1) a paucity of evidence for their effectiveness, (2) evidence that they are ineffective, or (3) evidence that they are effective but the effect size is too small to justify the cost of the treatment.

 

[stevevw]

Something went wrong with the reply button as it didn't erase all my older comments.I will try again.

 

[stevevw]

Which is different to saying that quantum physics is "outside the parameters of our natural world and the laws of physics as we know them." That statement is not accurate.

Ok thats fair enough. But the problem is the way the quantum world acts is different to the way the physics works that we use to measure all the things in our world which dictate cause and effect. So science then takes this and expands explanations into all sorts realms that defy how we normally measure things. They conjure up all sorts of descriptions of worlds based on the strange things they have found with quantum physics to make their hypothesis. Its almost as if they have free rein on creating all sorts of explanations based on what they see in the quantum world and they do this without any hard evidence to prove these worlds or alternative realities. So it seems they can use the quantum world to make crazy predictions but others like Lanza cant.

He is not pleasantly surprised. He is annoyed, and justifiably so.

From what I remember he said Lanza seems like a smart guy who would know the difference so why would he say something like this. Thats the point. Lanza is a smart person and a lot smarter than the average person. Perhaps to smart to make such a basic misinterpretation of science that perhaps a lay person would make. I dont think Lanza is totally dumb on this. I think he has thought things through and is using some good science to make his hypothesis. There is a reasonable amount of evidence to support what Lanza is broadly saying now so he isn't totally wrong on this.

But it's not, steve. These are not intended as explanations of something beyond our physical reality; they are intended as explanations of our physical reality.

That doesn't make sense. How do multiverses and hologram worlds explain our reality and physics. They say that a multiverse or parallel world is in another dimension. The physics that go into these other parallel worlds can be of millions of variations of physics compared to our world. How is this part of our physical reality.

The difference is that these explanations do not invoke supernatural agencies.

Yes but they also dont explain how these seemingly supernatural realities can happen from a naturalistic cause. So they say that all sorts of things can happen which look and act like a supernatural events or realms but then dont explain how this can be. Its like they can turn to any explanation that conjures up all sorts of things that go beyond or act differently to our physics and yet when someone says that God can also do this they say there's no evidence. But there is also no evidence for what they say. How do we know that God is not the one behind it.

You keep missing the point. They don't defy "our physics". They are postulated as part of "our" physics. You seem to think that any advance in physics somehow contradicts physics.

They do defy our physics. Since when is a parallel universe where there may be no gravity or where particles can travel faster than the speed or light. Or where you can time travel the same as our physical reality. These are only some of the things they say can happen in these parallel worlds because they use what they see in the quantum world to build them. Any time they come up against a problem they cant explain in our world or universe they then appeal to alternative worlds and universes as a way of reconciling the answer.

Like with our finely tuned universe for life. They appeal to millions of parallel universes which then makes our perfectly tuned one seem not so special because it then becomes one of millions. This also fits in with what they see in the quantum world in that it can show that their could be other realities. But in doing this they are introducing alternative realities with alternative physics happening in them. If they were all the same as ours then it would defeat the purpose of their explanation. So they are stepping outside the realms of our reality to explain what they cant explain within our reality. Isn't that what people say religion is doing with God.

Yes, you keep making this assertion, but you never support it beyond saying that they are "strange" or "weird" and therefore "supernatural." So what if they are strange or weird? As we have already established, being counterintuitive need not imply something supernatural.

I think I have posted at least a dozen links to show that evidence. Have you read them properly. So if some of the things that these scientists are describing are within our natural world then our natural world can have many more possibilities than what most people realize.

Except that those committed to a "spiritual world" usually claim much more than the mere existence of such a world. They claim that this world is populated by deities, angels, demons, etc.

Yes but first we have to see if there are things that are happening or can happen beyond our world. If it is possible for supernatural things to happen. Many people use a spiritual concept without using God. Its a way of describing a force beyond our material world. So between religion and all the other possible examples of what people believe in including what some areas of science are turning to there seems to be more and more evidence for something beyond our material world. I have posted some of those examples.

"This is where science is heading..." You keep saying that, but I don't see that happening at all. I can't comment on where physics is heading, as I'm not a physicist, but I do know people working in physics departments and they roll their eyes at this sort of nonsense. Similarly, I roll my eyes whenever I hear that medical science is heading in the direction of alternative therapies like homeopathy. No, it's not.

The fact is the evidence speaks for itself for which I have already posted if you will take the time to check. They are getting results that the conventional methods didn't get. If it works it works.
Scientific Studies that Show a Positive Effect of Religion on Health
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/religionhealth.html

The fact is science is using what we see in the quantum world to explain things. Its a relatively new area in that we have better tech like the LHC to do experiments to find out how this all works. As time goes on we will understand better. But it seems that as time goes on we are seeing how there is something happening beyond our world that we may be able to tap into.