Evidence of miracles.

[AV1611VET]

I find worship to be a pointless and demeaning activity,

According to the Bible, everyone worships something.

 

[Mountainmike]

You keep saying this but I don't know of anyone that thinks that scientific models ARE the universe. They think they accurately describe the universe but no one thinks they ARE the universe. So what do you really mean by this?

The entire "god of the gaps" falasy, presumes that because the universe itself is increasingly "known" by science, there is less and less place in it for a God to hide in it. But that very premise is a misunderstanding.

We don't know and more importanlty cannot know what the universe IS, eg how many dimensions it has, we can only model what it usually does in as far as phenomena that repeat, within our limited senses , which is projection of a reality into our sensor space.

An ardent evolutionist will tell you develop only as far as is needed to get a survival advantage. So we cannot sense it all, or the beings in it, or perhaps even most of it.

We cannot be certain that what it usually does, is what it always does. Or whether we share it with things and beings we cannot sense most of the time. The creature that lives in the dark, does not have eyes. If humans are not a threat to it, it has no need to develop senses.

Kant rationalises this, as the "noumena" the underlying reality, and the "phenomena" of how we perceive them. Plato postulated a shadow world, and that our sense of the universe was a mere shadow of a reality.

Science is a marvellous tool. But that is all.

Kids grow up thinking science explains the actual universe. Not our perception of it. The two are radically different.

 

[Hans Blaster]

According to the Bible, everyone worships something.

Then it's wrong. (or at least the author of that passage was wrong.) (or the author of that passage didn't foresee modern society.)

 

[Hans Blaster]

The entire "god of the gaps" falasy, presumes that because the universe itself is increasingly "known" by science, there is less and less place in it for a God to hide in it. But that very premise is a misunderstanding.

"God of the gaps" isn't a fallacy. It's a *bad* argument.

"God of the Gaps" is the argument that the unknowns are themselves arguments for the existence of god.

When used in attack mode it claims the failure of science to explain everything means that science itself might be a failure and the underlying assumption (methodological naturalism) fails and therefore the supernatural must exist. (Or some such similar claim.)

 

[Mountainmike]

Dark matter is a substance detected by inference from astronomical observations

No it isnt.
Its the absence of matter in the normal scientific model to explain behavioural observations..


You have no idea what it is or what it is not. You certainly cannot be sure it is a "substance" ie in some sense real

There are those who think it is a lot of small non interacting things, and those who think it is a lot of really big non interacting things. There are those who think the equations need a rethink based on The lack of interaction.

In reality dark matter "Is" not a thing at all. Its a name for the fact the behaviour equations dont add up, and one way of defining that error can be expressed in the dimensions of matter!

Its a model. Maybe as hawking said, model dependent reality. Maybe the models will never give a unique ubiquitous answer.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

One of the most fascinating things to me about Fatima is the many witnesses who described the torrential rain all morning (and it does rain in near biblical proportions here! I presently speak from portugal) .

Yet these many witnesses said their clothing and they dried in minutes - all natural fibre , so water retaining then, as the sun appeared to approach the earth. Professors. Sceptics. Police. Journalists. Why would they make it up?

They wouldn't have to make it up - clothing dries surprisingly quickly in hot sun, and when such a thing is pointed out, people become more aware of it. In the context of some supposedly miraculous event, anything people have become particularly aware of is likely to be come part of the event and subject to exaggeration. People in groups are demonstrably suggestible and inclined to subsume their independence to groupthink.

I also find anecdotal evidence compelling where it can be verified that a person knew something way beyond random chance they cannot have experienced, discovered or predicted.

As before, the problem is in establishing that, especially as autobiographical memory is subject to distortion, revision, and confabulation, particularly in support of some interpretation or belief.

 

[AV1611VET]

When used in attack mode it claims the failure of science to explain everything means that science itself might be a failure and the underlying assumption (methodological naturalism) fails and therefore the supernatural must exist. (Or some such similar claim.)

Works for me.

My preference is to use mistakes made by scientists, technicians, and who-have-you to point out that scientists, technicians, and who-have-you make mistakes.

And, of course, a major one is mistaking what the Bible is, and what It contains.

 

[Hans Blaster]

No it isnt.
Its the absence of matter in the normal scientific model to explain behavioural observations..


You have no idea what it is or what it is not. You certainly cannot be sure it is a "substance" ie in some sense real

There are those who think it is a lot of small non interacting things, and those who think it is a lot of really big non interacting things. There are those who think the equations need a rethink based on The lack of interaction.

In reality dark matter "Is" not a thing at all. Its a name for the fact the behaviour equations dont add up, and one way of defining that error can be expressed in the dimensions of matter!

Its a model. Maybe as hawking said, model dependent reality. Maybe the models will never give a unique ubiquitous answer.

I wrote about these details a few months ago. Those details are not the point. This is:

DARK MATTER IS NOT A WEDGE TO SQUEEZE MIRACLES INTO SCIENCE OR DEMEAN THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS WHEN WE IGNORE YOUR "evidence".

 

[Mountainmike]

They wouldn't have to make it up - clothing dries surprisingly quickly in hot sun, and when such a thing is pointed out, people become more aware of it. In the context of some supposedly miraculous event, anything people have become particularly aware of is likely to be come part of the event and subject to exaggeration. People in groups are demonstrably suggestible and inclined to subsume their independence to groupthink.

As before, the problem is in establishing that, especially as autobiographical memory is subject to distortion, revision, and confabulation, particularly in support of some interpretation or belief.

In the context of fatima, the "quick drying clothes" and even more astounding is the quick drying ground , simply doesnt add up.

All eye witnesess agree that it was torrential rain for hours, that stopped only at the beginning of the apparition, that had left a quagmire. Then 10 minutes later as recorded by all, they and the ground were stone dry.

It was so dry, it was one of the things the witnesses said in many cases unprovoked - all spoke of the torrential rain. Why would they make up an unnecessary detail ?

 

[AV1611VET]

They wouldn't have to make it up - clothing dries surprisingly quickly in hot sun, and when such a thing is pointed out, people become more aware of it. In the context of some supposedly miraculous event, anything people have become particularly aware of is likely to be come part of the event and subject to exaggeration. People in groups are demonstrably suggestible and inclined to subsume their independence to groupthink.

You'd think Bigfoot would be ninety feet tall by now.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Meanwhile in mainstream science galaxy rotation and shape was one of the factors that showed the mass imbalance, that led to the postulation of a fudge factor called dark matter. I guess being one time director over a big astrophysics company helps me know that.

In that case you should know that dark matter is the name for phenomena that consistently behave like a distribution of invisible gravitating mass.

Of the two main hypotheses to explain the observations, Modified Newtonian Dynamics (modified gravity) has provided only a partial explanation so far, whereas dark particles (matter particles that only interact significantly with gravity) can explain all the anomalous mass observations, and also account for CMB details, and the clumping of matter into the 'cosmic web' (galaxy clusters, superclusters, etc.), among other things.

This makes dark particles by far the most promising candidate at present.

 

[Mountainmike]

I spoke about the real state of the debate about dark matter.

Just as "displacement current" in maxwells equations does not model a physical (ie real ) current. It maybe the astrophysics equations need a tweak with a term that has dimensions of matter that does not represent a real mass at all.

Which model by the wayis pure invention of a mans brain. It is part of a man made scientific model of what the universe normally does, but in the case of galaxy shape and rotation the usual formula does not model it well.

What (and who) is actually "there" is in reality still up for grabs. As kant can tell you Science has little to say.

Seriously. Start by reading such as "quantum reality" baggott. Your unshakeable belief that science models an underlying reality, will certainly be shaken by it.

I wrote about these details a few months ago. Those details are not the point. This is:

DARK MATTER IS NOT A WEDGE TO SQUEEZE MIRACLES INTO SCIENCE OR DEMEAN THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS WHEN WE IGNORE YOUR "evidence".

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

In the context of fatima, the "quick drying clothes" and even more astounding is the quick drying ground , simply doesnt add up.

All eye witnesess agree that it was torrential rain for hours, that stopped only at the beginning of the apparition, that had left a quagmire. Then 10 minutes later as recorded by all, they and the ground were stone dry.

It was so dry, it was one of the things the witnesses said in many cases unprovoked - all spoke of the torrential rain. Why would they make up an unnecessary detail ?

I've given my suggestions. You claim that "All eye witnesess agree" and the rain dried "10 minutes later as recorded by all", which I find highly unlikely (did they really all check their watches as the rain stopped, and again when all was dry?) - is there somewhere I can get a definitive count of these eyewitnesses and read their individual statements and the circumstances in which they were obtained?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Seriously. Start by reading such as "quantum reality" baggott. Your unshakeable belief that science models an underlying reality, will certainly be shaken by it.

Seriously, start by sticking to the topic. The "meaning" of quantum mechanics isn't relevant to the nature of dark matter. Neither is relevant to "miracles".

 

[Mountainmike]

I've given my suggestions. You claim that "All eye witnesess agree" and the rain dried "10 minutes later as recorded by all", which I find highly unlikely (did they really all check their watches as the rain stopped, and again when all was dry?) - is there somewhere I can get a definitive count of these eyewitnesses and read their individual statements and the circumstances in which they were obtained?

In this case those details are known.
There are hundreds of witnesses, both taken at the time and shortly after, reported in media, letters and cards, several systematic interrogations of witnesses.

They are recorded in
"documentacao critica de fatima" (part of the systematic investigation)
And various books
"o milagro do sol"
And hafferts "meet the witnesses"
Many newspapers, articles and media

All record the seer asking for shutting of umbrellas before the rain stopped - then the miracle started. All were asked how long it lasted. All said around 10 minutes , many gave actual times it started.

Some of the verifications were miles away.







All witnesse

 

[Mountainmike]

Seriously, start by sticking to the topic. The "meaning" of quantum mechanics isn't relevant to the nature of dark matter. Neither is relevant to "miracles".

The nature of reality matters, indeed it is the most important question in physics. What is the underlying reality represented by a behaviour? Is the moon there before you look?

I have given you an example from physics that shows that just because of the dimensions of an error term are in a particular unit, does not mean it represents a physical instance (your word substance (sic)) . Displacement current in maxwells equations is not a physical current despite having the dimensions of one.

It may yet be that dark matter (or rather the inadequacy of modelling for galaxy roation) is best modelled by an additional term in the units of mass that is not a representation of a physical thing. Small or large non interacting mass may not be needed.

The world is a far stranger place than assumed by the model of science. We simply cannot detect or know what is there in reality.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The nature of reality matters, indeed is the most important question in physics. What is the underlying reality represented by a behaviour? Is the moon there before you look.

Sure, but if you're going to make every discussion dependent on the nature of reality every discussion will just break down. (Or maybe that's you plan.)

An interpretation of QM that requires conscious observers for things to "exist" is inane.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I spoke about the real state of the debate about dark matter.

Just as "displacement current" in maxwells equations does not model a physical (ie real ) current. It maybe the astrophysics equations need a tweak with a term that has dimensions of matter that does not represent a real mass at all.

As I understand it, various attempts have been made to account for the phenomena by modifying Einstein's equations (not just for gravity) and introducing large-scale quantum effects, and additional forces. None have so far matched the dark particle hypothesis for explanatory scope and simplicity. A number of potential candidate particle ideas have been ruled out.

Seriously. Start by reading such as "quantum reality" baggott. Your unshakeable belief that science models an underlying reality, will certainly be shaken by it.

Given the reviews of it, I don't think so; I've read a number of books on QM, and various articles & papers, and some courses on it (i.e. The Great Courses: Understanding the Quantum World, Quantum Physics Course, The Great Questions of Philosophy and Physics, The Theory of Everything, and others).

My conclusion is that our familiar (classical) reality is emergent from a very different reality for which we have a well-defined mathematical description, but not yet a unique testable visualization or interpretation. As usual, science models observables, and observables reflect what we call reality, and our interaction with it as part of it.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

In this case those details are known.
There are hundreds of witnesses, both taken at the time and shortly after, reported in media, letters and cards, several systematic interrogations of witnesses.

They are recorded in
"documentacao critica de fatima" (part of the systematic investigation)
And various books
"o milagro do sol"
And hafferts "meet the witnesses"
Many newspapers, articles and media

All record the seer asking for shutting of umbrellas before the rain stopped - then the miracle started. All were asked how long it lasted. All said around 10 minutes , many gave actual times it started.

Some of the verifications were miles away.

All witnesse

So basically all anecdotal and unverifiable. Unless you have a link to an English translation of this 'systematic investigation', I can only shrug, refer you to my previous answer (also see Asch conformity experiments), and point out that there are numerous sceptical responses to the accounts that don't require supernatural explanations, e.g. Fatima Miracle Claims All Wet, Illuminating the Fatima Miracle of the Sun, The Lady of Fátima & the Miracle of the Sun, Debunking the Fatima hoax.

Frankly, applying reasonable criteria for 'argument to the best explanation', I have much a higher credence for explanations that don't require an unsubstantiated, untestable ontology, with no explanatory scope or power, that's entirely outside of and contradictory to our best-tested knowledge of the world, and that raises more unanswerable questions than it purports to answer. YMMV.

I can explain the paragraph above in more detail if you missed my previous explanations in these forums - just ask.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

You'd think Bigfoot would be ninety feet tall by now.

Exaggeration doesn't always mean making taller