Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What is that supposed to be-some sort of safety-rope similar to what mountain climbers use?Do you use a silver cord when you astral project?
Correctamundo!What is that supposed to be-some sort of safety-rope similar to what mountain climbers use?
You know-in case one projects too far and needs to pull oneself back?
Well, at one point in my life I was considering becoming a Rosicrucian and they spoke about astral projecting.Correctamundo!
Astral projection is fooling around with the darkside.
It is reported that people who do that sort of stuff have gone crazy, claiming that a demon cut the cord and they are lost in the astral plane.
Praise the LORD!Maybe dodged a bullet-eh?
Praise the LORD!
As John Bradford put it:
There but for the grace of God go I.
FWIW, I considered becoming a Hare Krishna!
My life is proof enough for me to know God exists.
Sounds to me that it is saying that we shouldn't stop investigating something just because it is unfalsifable AT THE MOMENT.
Sounds to me that it is saying that we shouldn't stop investigating something just because it is unfalsifable AT THE MOMENT.
Modern physics stretches into realms far removed from everyday experience, and sometimes the connection to experiment becomes tenuous at best. String theory and other approaches to quantum gravity involve phenomena that are likely to manifest themselves only at energies enormously higher than anything we have access to here on Earth. The cosmological multiverse and the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics posit other realms that are impossible for us to access directly. Some scientists, leaning on Popper, have suggested that these theories are non-scientific because they are not falsifiable.
The truth is the opposite. Whether or not we can observe them directly, the entities involved in these theories are either real or they are not. Refusing to contemplate their possible existence on the grounds of some a priori principle, even though they might play a crucial role in how the world works, is as non-scientific as it gets.
I mean, the idea of nuclear fusion was once unfalsifiable, wasn't it? And yet, that is now a scientific fact.
In any case, the passage is saying it is silly to refuse to CONTEMPLATE them.
And what in that post shows that I have an emotional need for it? I am simply pointing out that if something can't be falsified, then it is not scientific. It not an emotional need, in just the same way that I don't have an emotional need for 1+1 to be equal to 2.
But since you claim that something doesn't have to be falsifiable in order to be scientific, can you show me something that is unfalsifable that IS presented as scientific fact?
"Space expansion" is currently taught as "scientific fact", even though it is utterly and completely impossible to show that "space expansion" has any tangible effect on a photon in any lab on Earth, in this solar system, in this galaxy, or even inside the local galaxy cluster.
On the other hand, let's look at a theory that is not falsifiable and does not make any predictions - there are elves that live in my washing machine that steal socks. It is not falsifiable. If you look inside the washing machine and see no elves, I can say, "Oh, but they're invisible." Of you reach inside and can't feel them, I can explain it by saying they are intangible. Whatever you say to show the elves are not there, I can come up with some explanation to show they are the explains why your reasoning is wrong. and I can't use it to make predictions either. The elves steal socks completely at random. And sometimes they take other items of clothes instead of socks. I can never say if a particular sock will be stolen or not. Of course, this idea is silly.
I will.You still won't present evidence for the existence of God.
You read right past it.How is that evidence?
You're right.It's not even the most probable correct dating for the birth of Christ (if you believe in such things).
But the point is, none of that is evidence for the existence of Christ, it's evidence for widespread belief in the existence of Christ.You're right.
Christ wasn't born in AD 2017.
But see how those two letters made you think of Him?
That's like saying seeing an apple fall from a tree is not evidence for gravity, it is evidence for the belief in gravity.But the point is, none of that is evidence for the existence of Christ, it's evidence for widespread belief in the existence of Christ.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?