Originally Posted by serandfae

In an article by Carl Sagan I read years ago, he said he thought that science and religion are trying to answer many of the same questions by different means. For the what and how, science is perfectly equipped, but not for the why of things.

Sagan didn't think religion answered the why either. Who said there was a why? I don't think there is. I don't think religion answers anything except how people can imagine things and come up with the gods that are like them.

Originally Posted by serandfae

And it wasn't religious peope who said powered flight was impossible, the sound barrier could not be broken, the adult human brain could not rewire itself, it was the scientific community. Yes, indeed, fundamentalists in science. Flat-earthers in lab coats.

And science expanded knowledge. Religion NEVER has. Only going backwards.

Originally Posted by serandfae

The guy that started that Ghost Hunters show started out as a skeptic trying to disprove the existence of ghosts by scientific means. He now believes that they exist, because those means pointed in the other direction. Many may argue not conclusively, but how many have dared to research the subject scientifically? To do so is suicide in the scientific community (you know, the same ones who said the human brain couldn't rewire itself in adulthood). Your credibility with them will just be shot. Research into psychic phenomena is regarded with the same disdain.

So, for someone like me who has experienced both, who do I have to turn to? I sure don't trust the New Agers and Scientologists, conservative Christians consider such things of the Devil, moderate religions barely touch upon it, and the scientific community regards it as anathema. I am left with only what I know from what science has touched upon and my faith to guide me to the next thing.

If you have any verifiable evidence for ghosts, present it. There is none that I know of. Many of what ghost believers claim for ghosts makes them matter and subject to scientific experiment. Remember seeing is accomplished by matter emitting electrons and striking mechanisms in the eye. Matter is electromagnetic and is not immaterial.

If people want to engage in wishful thinking, go for it. Don't try to make science agree with it without verification. That's all I have heard by the religious on this board - wishful thinking and futile attempts to try to get science to let in their unfounded beliefs.

Originally Posted by joder

Sagan didn't think religion answered the why either. I don't think religion answers anything except how people can imagine things and come up with the gods that are like them.

And science expanded knowledge. Religion NEVER has. Only going backwards.

Regarding Sagan, you are correct, but he also didn't try to invalidate religion like you do. For all you say about religion trying to hold science back you still didn't address the fact that science does a pretty good job of holding itself back.

Originally Posted by joder

If you have any verifiable evidence for ghosts, present it. There is none that I know of. Many of what ghost believers claim for ghosts makes them matter and subject to scientific experiment. Remember seeing is accomplished by matter emitting electrons and striking mechanisms in the eye. Matter is electromagnetic and is not immaterial.

The guy who does the Ghost Hunters show is using electromagnetc sensors and thermal imaging. Like I said, he's the only one I know of who has at least attempted to go at it scientifcally. And who said a ghost had to be immaterial?

Originally Posted by joder

If people want to engage in wishful thinking, go for it. Don't try to make science agree with it without verification. That's all I have heard by the religious on this board - wishful thinking and futile attempts to try to get science to let in their unfounded beliefs.

What you're hearing from me is that I wish the scientific community would address the questions that I have, but I'm addressed with the same scorn I seem to be getting from you.

People used to think acupuncture was just hocus-pocus. "Auras" too. Thing is, anything that conduct electicity emits a magnetic field, and the human nervous system is no different. The "aura" is little more than the body's EM field, which is altered when needles are put around the body. That's what makes acupuncture work.

I can feel the changes in the magnetic field of a stoplight and know when it's going to change, so my foot's on the gas right when it does.
Now I think I've ruled out other explanations for that, but you tell me if any scientist would research it. Probably not, because they wouldn't consider it "real" science. I'm not asking you to believe what I just told you, I'm telling you that if the scientific community doesn't have the cahones to research something it loses the right to scoff at those who find other ways to explain their experiences.

Originally Posted by serandfae

Regarding Sagan, you are correct, but he also didn't try to invalidate religion like you do. For all you say about religion trying to hold science back you still didn't address the fact that science does a pretty good job of holding itself back.

Bull. Science is about the real world. Not the fantasy world for which there is 0 evidence.

Originally Posted by serandfae

The guy who does the Ghost Hunters show is using electromagnetc sensors and thermal imaging. Like I said, he's the only one I know of who has at least attempted to go at it scientifcally. And who said a ghost had to be immaterial?

Was it verifiable? What material are ghosts made of. If eletromagnetic, you might check out a grade school science text book on what electromagnetism is. Or do you have a new theory?

Originally Posted by serandfae

What you're hearing from me is that I wish the scientific community would address the questions that I have, but I'm addressed with the same scorn I seem to be getting from you.

Duh. You want science to give credence to things you can't prove and have been attempted to be examined by science but have come out with no validity. You don't want science to be science. Unless middle ages science counts. You want science to entertain fantasies even with out evidence.

Originally Posted by serandfae

People used to think acupuncture was just hocus-pocus. "Auras" too. Thing is, anything that conduct electicity emits a magnetic field, and the human nervous system is no different. The "aura" is little more than the body's EM field, which is altered when needles are put around the body. That's what makes acupuncture work.

Then it would be verifiable. Not wishful religious thinking.

Originally Posted by serandfae

I can feel the changes in the magnetic field of a stoplight and know when it's going to change, so my foot's on the gas right when it does.
Now I think I've ruled out other explanations for that, but you tell me if any scientist would research it. Probably not, because they wouldn't consider it "real" science. I'm not asking you to believe what I just told you, I'm telling you that if the scientific community doesn't have the cahones to research something it loses the right to scoff at those who find other ways to explain their experiences.

Have you ruled out that the light is timed? That your eye may see the other side when it turns yellow? Even if you had ruled them out, what are you trying to say. Electromagnetism is material interacting with material.

Science wins again. Superstition still 0.

EDIT:

I wish you wouldn't misquote me. I said religion has done nothing, zero, nada to expand knowledge. Get your facts straight. Science is updated as new evidence is available. Not so with religion. The religious try to put down science in order to feel better about unsubstantiated beliefs.

Originally Posted by joder

Bull. Science is about the real world. Not the fantasy world for which there is 0 evidence.

Ah, so when I challenge you on the scientific community holding itself back, you lash back with a remark about religion. You still haven't addressed it because you can't, it's been well established. And if you cannot grasp that not all religious people are the kind who want to push creationism, etc., or that there are a great number of scientists who are religious, well that's your problem. You've made your prejudice quite clear. Mind you, I did not extend atheists the same discourtesy.

Originally Posted by joder

Duh. You want science to give credence to things you can't prove and have been attempted to be examined by science but have come out with no validity. You don't want science to be science. Unless middle ages science counts. You want science to entertain fantasies even with out evidence.

It's really no use to have this conversation when you haven't listened to one word I've really said; you're just reacting with your own preconceptions. When has science *ever* addressed these questions?

Originally Posted by joder

Then it would be verifiable. Not wishful religious thinking.

Acupuncuture has been verified, and is in use in medicine around the globe. Do your homework.

Originally Posted by joder

Have you ruled out that the light is timed? That your eye may see the other side when it turns yellow? Even if you had ruled them out, what are you trying to say. Electromagnetism is material interacting with material.

I've had twenty years to rule out those things, the ones you mentioned and other factors (like seeing cars stopping, for one). Electromagnetism is energy, and is present when electrons interact with matter. And you said I needed to pick up a grade school textbook? What am I saying? Just what I said before--don't expect science to research it. What aren't you getting here? I am looking for a rational explanation! Are you saying that if science refuses to look at something it's not a legitimate question? Now that's real blind faith.

Originally Posted by joder

Science wins again. Superstition still 0.

We're keeping score? OK, here's the score--you haven't really answered any questions, and you've proven yourself to be just as reactionary as any conservative Christian ever thought of being. The question wasn't even science vs. religion, moreover I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I don't give a rip if you ever embrace any religion, nor do I expect you to. But just what is it doing for you to rip into people who are religious? Is it cathartic because you don't like the ones who try to push it down your throat, even if the ones you're ripping into aren't that way?

Originally Posted by joder

I wish you wouldn't misquote me. I said religion has done nothing, zero, nada to expand knowledge. Get your facts straight. Science is updated as new evidence is available. Not so with religion. The religious try to put down science in order to feel better about unsubstantiated beliefs.

As I said, your prejudice has been made patently obvious. It does little good to debate someone who dodges questions and comes back with the same rhetoric. It's like a debate with a conservative Christian. Or a former one falling into old habits.

Originally Posted by serandfae

As I said, your prejudice has been made patently obvious. It does little good to debate someone who dodges questions and comes back with the same rhetoric. It's like a debate with a conservative Christian. Or a former one falling into old habits.

You've dodged every question and only come back with rhetoric. You don't even know one basic thing. No scientist has ever said science is perfect. You have presented some things like ghosts and cry and wail that science doesn't investigate them and if you ever actually researched anything, you would see that science has. Carl Sagan helped found CSICOP. No evidence has been found. You just make unwarranted assertions with no evidence and site a TV show where anything can be created.

Then you ask why I refer to science and religion when you do? Move your eyes up and look at the title of this thread and your other posts in it.

Originally Posted by joder

Bull. Science is about the real world. Not the fantasy world for which there is 0 evidence.

To quote pinhead, no tears, please. It's a waste of good suffering. I think you made his point by stating that anything having 0 scientific evidence is considered "Fantasy" (implying not worth studying IMHO). He is saying, if more people were willing to study some of these "Fantasies" which many people have common stories about, probably at the cost of their career and reputation, maybe there would be some scientific evidence. Unless you are implying that Mr. Sagen's studies are all we need.....

Originally Posted by serandfae

And, of course, the mother of all questions: Do your answers to these motivate you to set rules for your daily life, and if so, what are they?

Actions, not rules. Today I got a phone call from a friend telling me someone built a structure on some farm land I own in Costa Rica. The same guy also apparently had his cattle on my land. I find out it is the guy who owns the neighboring farm. In my opinion/belief system, this guy is trying taking advantage of Costa Rica "squatters rights" to pick up some property for free, thus benefiting his gene-pool(obviously not a believer in karma). I sent a crew of guys over with machettes and burnt his structure to the ground with everything in it. I then had someone send him the message that they would be back to shoot any of his cattle still on my land in 48 hours. What do you want to bet he has his cows off my land within 48 hours? Thats me doing what it takes to benefit my gene-pool. Funny how doing what you consider the right thing always leaves you with a good feeling inside.

Originally Posted by cbwm

To quote pinhead, no tears, please. It's a waste of good suffering. I think you made his point by stating that anything having 0 scientific evidence is considered "Fantasy" (implying not worth studying IMHO). He is saying, if more people were willing to studying "Fantasy", probably at the cost of their career and reputation, maybe there would be some scientific evidence. Unless you are implying that Mr. Sagen's studies are all we need.....

Who said they have not been scientifically investigated? Sticking ones head in the sand does not indicate lack of evidence.

Are you saying scientists are supposed to run out and investigate every claim no matter how much evidence is already against it? Just because someone claims it needs to be? Ghosts claims have been investigated. They don't need to be investigated ad nauseum just to be ignored by "believers".

Maybe you should found the scientific investigation of fairies and unicorns.

BTW, very apt avatar.

If anyone has any evidence for their religion besides conjecture and blind faith, I will listen. Otherwise, I think it is fantasy. It's not real and there is no reason for me to think otherwise.

In post 14, someone tried to bait me from another thread. I guess I should have continued to ignore the bait. I get the feeling that a couple of people just want to taunt someone to try to validate their own beliefs for which they have no evidence. Evil, evil scientists wanting evidence. I can hear them. "I don't believe this part of the bible. That part is all parable except the part I choose the accept. But then why don't you accept it too you evil non-believer?"

How about we change the subject and talk about the wonderful Flying Spaghetti monster. What's wrong with him as a god?

Originally Posted by joder

Who said they have not been scientifically investigated? Sticking ones head in the sand does not indicate lack of evidence.

Are you saying scientists are supposed to run out and investigate every claim no matter how much evidence is already against it?

I wasn't aware there was evidence against the existence of ghosts, only lack of evidence to support their existence. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

Originally Posted by joder

Just because someone claims it needs to be? Ghosts claims have been investigated. They don't need to be investigated ad nauseum just to be ignored by "believers".

From the Wikipedia:
The scientific process is iterative. At any stage it is possible that some consideration will lead the scientist to repeat an earlier part of the process.

Would I be out of line if I said that perhaps we lack the scientific means to properly test for the existence of ghosts right now? I know the study of DNA, something we all now take for granted, was quite impossible prior to certain other scientific milestones being met.

To criticize those who want more scientific study into Ghosts as "Believers" who are wasting our Scientists precious time could be embarrassing if we one day discover they do in fact exist.

Originally Posted by joder

Maybe you should found the scientific investigation of fairies and unicorns.

Perhaps I shall. You ever hear the one about the leprechaun with a 12 inch unit?

Originally Posted by joder

BTW, very apt avatar.

Thank you. I thought you would approve.

Originally Posted by joder

In post 14, someone tried to bait me from another thread. I guess I should have continued to ignore the bait.

That was Tim. He is a master baiter.

Originally Posted by cbwm

To criticize those who want more scientific study into Ghosts as "Believers" who are wasting our Scientists precious time could be embarrassing if we one day discover they do in fact exist.

That is a big, big "if". There has to be a reason to think there are ghosts in the first place. That hasn't even been established.

Come on. What about the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Shouldn't he be investigated? Doesn't he have just as much validity as ghosts and some Jesus in some far off place called heaven?

Originally Posted by cbwm

I sent a crew of guys over with machettes and burnt his structure to the ground with everything in it. I then had someone send him the message that they would be back to shoot any of his cattle still on my land in 48 hours. What do you want to bet he has his cows off my land within 48 hours? Thats me doing what it takes to benefit my gene-pool. Funny how doing what you consider the right thing always leaves you with a good feeling inside.

Ah, now you a tough guy

What happened to your conservative compassion, Christian love your neighbor doctrine?
Oh, I know you are preparing yourself for 8 years of Democratic domination where you will go to old fashion days, earn money and share them with others.

Wait a minute… Isn’t this is what good Christians normally are doing, share?
I am confused

Come on Carl, help me out here


fastreplies

You should qualify your "Big" if as in your opinion. The truth is, it is unknown. Speculation in one direction or the other is speculation and nothing more. To present opinion as fact on something that is obviously unknown is to beg for embarrassment (in a greater karmic sense).

Regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I don't know the numbers on how many people have claimed to have seen or experienced a ghost, but I am confident they are high. How many have experienced your Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Part of the fascination with ghosts is the desire to know what happens after we die. That is something your Spaghetti Monster is going to have difficulty competing with, but I'm sure you could get somebody to look into it.

Out of curiosity, who was your favorite character from Planet of the Apes (excluding the hot brunette). I got you pegged for Cornelius. Am I wrong?

Originally Posted by cbwm

Out of curiosity, who was your favorite character from Planet of the Apes (excluding the hot brunette). I got you pegged for Cornelius. Am I wrong?

The hot brunette. Then Cornelius. I bet you some here hate Cornelius. LIke Doctor Zaus, would you bury the cave with the proof to protect the superstition? Take the scroll as the only evidence you need?

You can investigate and investigate and hope for more. Until there is evidence, I don't accept ghosts as some disembodied spirits. The "believers" have it backwards. They think no matter if all the tests come up negative and rule their view out, they keep believing and expect everyone to give credence to their views. To take your view would be to give credence to everything as of equal validity.

You might want to extol on a theory of electromagnetism that allows for "ghosts". Have you ever looked at the investigation and what they have discovered or are you only extolling your hate of evidence and skepticism.

How many people "experiencing" something before you think it deserves investigation? How about investigating Krishna. There a few hundred million believers there. Just in case, maybe you better not eat any beef. The Flying Spaghetti Monster has just as must evidence as any other god.

Originally Posted by fastreplies

What happened to your conservative compassion, Christian love your neighbor doctrine?

Who said I was compassionate? Did you read my belief system post? I only posted the story as I thought it represented belief system in action. Its funny you brought religion and politics into it, as I believe your belief system should guide your hand in religion and politics as well.

Originally Posted by fastreplies

Oh, I know you are preparing yourself for 8 years of Democratic domination where you will go to old fashion days, earn money and share them with others.

I see you are a man of faith as well. Fact is, the current democrat ruled congress has some of the lowest approval ratings in history. I don't know which way it's going to go but it wouldn't surprise me at all if they threw the rats out like Jesus throwing the money changers from the temple ( I know your going to love that analogy). Keep rubbing your rabbits foot, clicking your heels together, or whatever it is you do. Maybe it will work. In the mean time perhaps you should begin thinking about the idea of a republican presidency, house, and senate in 2008 so you don't kill yourself when it actually happens. Now would also be a good time to accept Jesus into your heart as your personal lord and savior.

Oh, and the concept of earning money and giving it to others, unless you are talking about my friends and family, is what I(and pretty much everyone else) calls communism.

Come on Carl, stop dreaming LOL






fastreplies

Originally Posted by joder

The hot brunette. Then Cornelius. I bet you some here hate Cornelius. LIke Doctor Zaus, would you bury the cave with the proof to protect the superstition? Take the scroll as the only evidence you need?

A very great man once said "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac". At the end of the day, Zaius gets his pick of the chimp bikini girls and Cornelius goes back to his laboratory alone but not empty handed. Its good to be the king. Regarding burying proof, I'm down with any science that supports my opinion. For that matter, I'm good with any opinion which agrees with mine. We should dismiss everything else as superstition and heresy.

Originally Posted by joder

The "believers" have it backwards. They think no matter if all the tests come up negative and rule their view out...

But they haven't ruled their view out, or at least not by any evidence you have provided. I haven't looked at the results of the particular theory of electromagnetism which allows for ghosts. Perhaps that is the evidence you need to present to enlighten me and dismiss the silly notion of ghosts with science once and for all!

Originally Posted by cbwm

But they haven't ruled their view out, or at least not by any evidence you have provided. I haven't looked at the results of the particular theory of electromagnetism which allows for ghosts. Perhaps that is the evidence you need to present to enlighten me and dismiss the silly notion of ghosts with science once and for all!

Use Google. That is a search engine. There have been numerous studies examining claims of ghosts. When they were done by scientists using their equipment where ghost enthusiasts said they were, they didn't find any. Ever watched the show Is It Real?

Science lesson #1. If someone has a belief in something, here ghosts, they have to provide the evidence. It is almost impossible to disprove anything including fairies and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just because something is possible doesn't make it a fact or give it the same validity as what is fact.

We can look at the claims of ghosts and electromagnetism. As I've already explained. Electromagnetism is matter and is derived from an energy source. Hydroelectric generators are fueled by coal or natural gas and move turbines which send electricity down power lines to your house. In the body, electromagnetism is produced chemically by the food you eat being turned into that energy. Electromagnetic waves traveling through space are produced by stars (or televisions, radio telescopes, etc). Point is you have to have a source to produce the energy. With ghosts, no one has ever posited one. You are not supposed to think about it. Just believe.

Originally Posted by joder

There have been numerous studies examining claims of ghosts. When they were done by scientists using their equipment where ghost enthusiasts said they were, they didn't find any.

The problem is those silly scientists brought equipment to measure electromagnetism, instead of those special spectrometers doodads the Ghostbusters had. Seriously though, it sounds like your hypothesis is "No measurable electromagnetism, therefore ghosts do not exist". From your Science lesson #1, you believe ghosts don't exist, and present this as the best and only evidence you have to support your preposterous claims, I think you have sadly failed the burden of proof, and therefore proven they DO exist!

Originally Posted by cbwm

The problem is those silly scientists brought equipment to measure electromagnetism, instead of those special spectrometers doodads the Ghostbusters had. Seriously though, it sounds like your hypothesis is "No measurable electromagnetism, therefore ghosts do not exist". From your Science lesson #1, you believe ghosts don't exist, and present this as the best and only evidence you have to support your preposterous claims, I think you have sadly failed the burden of proof, and therefore proven they DO exist!

You still get it backwards, ghost proponents have to produce the evidence for their claims. I am saying until you produce evidence I don't accept that they exist. Are you saying I should say they exist until every conceivable way that can be come up to test them is exhausted?

It is the ghost believers who claim they produce electromagnetism. You continuously twist everything to where people who believe something without any evidence are somehow logical and anyone who wants them to produce evidence are wrong. If someone believes in ghosts, they should put up the evidence. Until then, I don't accept their claims.