Please provide a cite to a scientific study that shows this.
I see. Human science is limited by human perception of the natural or material world. So, to believe only in the proofs of human science is to fail to acknowledge human limitations of observation, measuring, and testing.
I think people, such as myself, who rely on human or material evidence to support their beliefs, acknowledge that limitation by admitting that what we might consider “supernatural” is possible, but we lack the current ability to consistently observe or test it. That is why many atheists do not affirmatively deny the existence of God; rather, they simply withhold affirmative belief due to the lack of current material evidence that can be tested by human perception.
That doesn’t explain why so may people hold an affirmative belief in something “supernatural” and make all kinds of claims as to the behavior, motives, and properties of supernatural things.
I’m not sure which of the threads I should post to …
As Believer has not been defined in this post, and I do believe in something beyond our current capabilities of measurement (consider conventional v. electron microscopes), I will post here.
In my opinion, your friend is, indeed, crazy.
Why the hell would anyone posit a one god that plants deceptive evidence instead of one that create systems rather than things?
This is not just a matter of Occam’s Razor. Your friend’s world view requires a deceitful omnipotent god and no valid science. That just is not right.
It is also, if your friend is a Christian, blasphemous, akin to an American opposing the burning of the flag.
Gods are not magic.
We are not clay stick figures.
Events are explained, not justified, in science.
Math and logic are wonderful basic tools for exploring and explaining the observed universe.
Life, breathed into dust or created otherwise, is growth, including intellectual growth.
What do I believe in? I believe there are things I do not understand, that no scientist has defined, measured, tested, and published about.
I also believe there is a logical coherence to the universe.
I believe that energy can be neither created nor destroyed, and that human efforts are a type of energy.
I believe that people cannot develop abilities for which there is no cultural context.
Most of all, I believe in science. The universe is ours to observe, measure, understand, and question again.
This is in direct contreadiction to your own claims:
So, you falsely claim that science teaches that there is no spiritual realm, when science does no such thing. Then you claim that the members of this board were taught your version of what science teaches.
Now you claim that you do not care what they were taught (which is what you claimed) but that you are only intereested in their current beliefs.
So you are just making up stuff and changing your position whenever you need to squirm away from your earlier claims.
I don’t believe science will ever have the ability to consistently observe spiritual events. By their very nature they are personal, one time, events. Even when someone has two visions, or NDEs, or OBEs, they are unique to the time and situation of the occurrance. I think scientists need to get over the idea that everything can be tested by the scientific method. It is not infallible, being devised by man, it will not cover all situations.
Spirituality is connected with love, and love while being normally thought of as an emotion is much more than that in reality. Love is a state of consciousness, that empowers the individual to an awareness, and knowledge they wouldn’t have without it. Love is also a force, or creative power that changes lives and creates the desires and wishes of the individual’s beliefs, and thought patterns. Love holds things together, without it things fall apart. Love is the spiritual path, and those who walk it have a decided advantage over those who don’t. We are in the physical to learn those facts and test them. Some do quickly, and others may take hundreds of years to do so. It is only a matter of choice. That is why God is Love.
Again, I ask you to provide a cite for this claim about quantum mechanics. Please, no opinion pieces or anonymous anecdotes-scientific studies would be greatly appreciated.
http://www.aleroy.com/blog/2009/07/entanglement/
Spiritual Oneness of all things.
http://www.aleroy.com/blog/2009/10/quantum-consciousness/
All is consciousness.
W.
T.
F??
Is this some sort of sick joke, or did you not understand what I asked for?
Please, quantum mechanics is so poorly understood by the lay population (myself included), that it’s easy for quacks to take it and mold and massage it into looking like it backs up their beliefs.
These are teaching videos that explain the laws of quantum mechanics to those interested.
Whatever you think the research might be would not suit you.
A list of quantum teaching videos.
http://www.aleroy.com/blog/category/quantum-thinking/
I never expected to please any atheist or skeptic, these are for those who want to learn.
Well, these videos were not produced by quacks, they were done by qualified people. However, no one can shield you from those that would want to mislead, so you study the subject from many angles by many scientists, and that will produce the thread of reality you seek. There are no guarantees on anything in this world.
Walking the path of love is a guarantee of knowledge and reality.
Could you please link to something other than your(already overly promoted by you) website? A direct link to a site that contains real studies done by real people.
What ‘laws’ of QM are explained in those videos do you think?
You could search for that on your own.
You will just have to view them to find out.
It was your claim, therefore you should provide a valid cite.
How in the world would us viewing those videos tell us what you think about the laws of quantum mechanics?
They don’t explain any laws of QM.
Please show me how wrong I am by pointing to a video and a time stamp on the video, here fill in the X, Y and Z in this statement:
“On video at time [Y] the QM ‘law’ [Z] is explained.”
Thank you.
You might try looking here
Why would you need to know what I thought? Just view, read and make up your own mind.