Past scientific theories rejected because of religous reason? (like evolution)

[Voyager]

@lekatt

When I read the title of the thread I see both religion and science in it.

I do know how science works,

That contention is not supported by the evidence.

but I am not posting about science, I am posting about spirituality. Spiritually deals with the feelings, emotions, intuition, sometimes called the sixth sense. All those things that science ignores or believes unimportant. Science can’t measure these things, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

Science has not ignored these things. I’ve read some of Rhine’s books, and science can measure the effects of the spiritual. The problem is that none of these effects ever seem much different from randomness or noise. Or the effects have a simple material explanation.

As for the Designer, I don’t know, certainly a Higher Intelligence (God). I have left this open for other debate.

Well, you can’t disprove deism. There is not particular reason to accept it either.

I do realize that scientists sometimes assume these spiritual things to be a product of brain biology, this has never been proven, the spirit is separate from the body. This is provable. But not in this thread.

I’ve seen your proofs before. Scientists don’t assume anything. They can force emotions and certain “spiritual” states by manipulation of the brain. This does not mean that all such spiritual states are caused by purely physical mechanisms, but it does mean that a possible physical cause is not a mere assumption.

[jimpatro]

It is perfectly normal for people to go to church on Sunday and believe what they do there is right, then go back to work in their lab on Monday and believe what they do there is right also. Seldom do people actually sort out their beliefs to see if they have conflicts, but if they did, everyone would find them. Some would rationalize them, others deny them. Only a scant few would do the research necessary to resolve them.

Thanks, lekatt.
Great to see you’re swinging my way.

[lekatt]

@jimpatro

Thanks, lekatt.
Great to see you’re swinging my way.

Yes, but it is hard to understand why you let others determine your beliefs.

[lekatt]

@Voyager

That contention is not supported by the evidence.

Science has not ignored these things. I’ve read some of Rhine’s books, and science can measure the effects of the spiritual. The problem is that none of these effects ever seem much different from randomness or noise. Or the effects have a simple material explanation.
Well, you can’t disprove deism. There is not particular reason to accept it either.
I’ve seen your proofs before. Scientists don’t assume anything. They can force emotions and certain “spiritual” states by manipulation of the brain. This does not mean that all such spiritual states are caused by purely physical mechanisms, but it does mean that a possible physical cause is not a mere assumption.

Who’s evidence – your hearsay?

Rhine’s work is ancient history, lots of studies since then, the results of his works did not measure spirituality. It only indicated the existence of knowledge without physical means.

Scientists believe they can force spiritual states by drugs, etc. It is covered on my site as to what really happens. Look in the FAQ section on Ketamine.

None of the proofs I have shown are mine. I have shown qualified research.
The Pam Reynolds surgery is the benchmark of proof we are spiritual beings. I know of no one honestly researching this event that at least doesn’t express the possibility. Susan Blackmore changed her mind after reading about it. She is no longer a skeptic.