Homeopathy is nonsense?  C’mon, Les.  Really?  I, personally, have taken care of, and continue to take care of, many ailments with homeopathy.  You don’t believe that herbs and the like can have any therapeutic use?

I didn’t say herbs don’t have any therapeutic use. It’s entirely possible that they do, but there haven’t been a lot of studies done yet on what useful benefits they may or may not provide and at least one study of St. John’s Wort has shown it to be dangerous because it interacts and interferes with other drugs. That said, there are a number of herbs undergoing further study that seem to hold promise for use as treatments.

Homeopathy, however, has been studied quite a bit and has yet to hold up under testing. It’s basis requires water to have some previously unknown properties that don’t make a lot of sense given what we know about physics and quantum mechanics, but even that wouldn’t be a problem if there were any valid scientific studies that indicated homeopathic remedies provided any benefit at all beyond the placebo effect.

I take a raincheck on this conversation until my brain is rested up and can think again.  *yaaawn*

Not a problem. Completely understandable as I’m on the verge of gibberish mode myself.

See, I didn’t forget.

I agree that there is evidence that St. John’s Wart is not necessarily a good thing.  It’s also true that a lot of man-made drugs are not necessarily a good thing, either.  Most drugs and medications have side-effects, or can cause damage to the human body if misused, but the mainstreaming of those medications seems to make it “okay” that taking them can actually hurt you; whereas people throw up their hands and say “see! that’s bad and you shouldn’t take it!” when something like St. John’s Wart is shown to have certain problems interacting with other meds and/or misused.  It’s like throwing the baby out with the bath water.  My theory is that most of the people doing the complaining and nixing of such things as St. John’s Wart are those behind the pharmaceutical companies.  They certainly don’t want something they don’t manufacture to actually work!  God forbid! 

I just think the use of holistic and/or homepathic medicine is worth the time it takes to investigate, and shouldn’t be written off as nonsense before all evidence is in. 

On a personal note, let’s just say that I am immensely thankful for Flaxseed and Evening Primrose Oils, as well as B-complex vitamins, magnesium and zinc.  Without them, I would be a raging, hair-on-fire, insane bitch; with them, I am the sweet, lovely, calm woman you “see” here.  *snicker* And I’d much rather be taking something natural than pumping my body full of synthetic hormones!

If homeopathy were true we could bottle the water coming out of the east river as a cure for every allergy know to man.  I don’t even think any dilution would be neccesary.  Think about it and I’m sure you’ll get it.

Les, the thing about herbs is that they are much less invasive than synthetic replacements. It takes much longer to do damage to oneself with herbal remedies and ill effects are usually recognized and are able to be averted.

It’s great to be a fan of science and progress but tens of thousands of years of knowledge of how to use herbs to heal are all but lost and that’s a shame.

Their healing properties haven’t changed but we have. Herbs were free - now we have to pay for their substitutes, and in greed’s name we’ve allowed wise men and sage advice to be replaced with doctors who mainly prop up the drug industry.

Brock, there have been some studies done on some herbs that do seem to indicate they may have medicinal properties, but then I admitted as much in my previous reply to Leigh.

What I was poo-pooing is homeopathy which is the practice of diluting substances that cause symptoms similar to what a person is experiencing in water repeatedly under the premise that the water will somehow “remember” the properties of the substance and will then work as a treatment against whatever ails you. The whole idea behind homeopathy is just ridiculous and not a single double-blind study to date has shown that it has any of the positive effects folks claim it does.

More studies of herbs is certainly encouraged, but homeopathy is just bunk.

On science and the paranormal: Science recognizes as factual only that which can be perceived by the five senses and/or scientific intruments (scientific intruments could be classified as extensions of the five senses; a microscope, for instance, could be seen as an aid to visual perception, like a pair of eyeglasses)
Now, let’s take the field of extra-sensory perception. Can you see where this is leading? If it’s extra-sensory how the fuck could science ever hope to even approach it with their emphasis on the five senses?

Chuckiepoo, you don’t need to directly measure something to prove it exists.  Take gravity for instance, all we can do is measure the affect is has on objects with mass, not the force itself.

For example, say telekenisis was true, all you have to do is get someone to USE the power to move a glass, and you can prove it.  No one has even come close, James Randi will give you $1,000,000 if you can show “evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event.”.

I’ll give you another example, say you believe you have prescience, and can see the future.  Certainly this may be extra-sensory, but it’s certainly testable.  Tell me the lotto numbers!  There is a very good reason that NOTHING supernatural has ever been proven.  Can you see where this is leading?

Good job on the summary there Shanness. Couldn’t have said it better myself. In fact, it would’ve probably taken me several more paragraphs to say the same thing.

Yeah, ever wondered why the ONLY way for psychics to use their “talent” to make a living is to tell OTHER people what’s in store for them—and charge for it?

Which wouldn’t be so bad if it was something significant they were telling us other than “you will be getting new rugs in the near future.”

Oh. Joy. I’ll look forward to that with bated breath.

Oh, come on, it must have been something more significant than THAT (unless it was a veiled reference to your current sleek scalp-style) ...

Like: “You will benefit from new social connections ... Someone in your past will return to you ... Stay away from runaway vehicles on the 22nd (why just then?) ... I’m getting something with an ‘h,’ something that was very important last year ... Be open to new ideas next week.”

There, how’d I do?  Five cents, please.

Excellent comments on the evils of religion iv been wondering when Randi was finally going to address the subject directly.

But it was the incredible stories I was told, that really made me rear back in disbelief. For examples, they told me, some 2,000 years ago a mid-East virgin was impregnated by a ghost of some sort, and as a result produced a son who could walk on water, raise the dead, turn water into wine, and multiply loaves of bread and fishes. All that was in addition to tossing out demons. He expected and accepted a brutal, sadistic, death — and then he rose from the dead.

There was much, much, more. Adam and Eve, they said, were the original humans, plunked down in a garden to start our species going. But I didn’t understand, and still don’t, that they had only two children, both sons — and one of them killed the other — yet somehow they produced enough people to populate the Earth, without incest, which was a big no-no! Then some prophet or other made the Earth stop turning, an army blew horns until a wall fell down, a guy named Moses made the Red Sea divide in two, and made frogs fall out of the sky….

I needn’t go on. And that’s only a small start on one religion! The Wizard of Oz is more believable

Well, science is not religion and it doesn’t just come down to faith. Although it has many of religion’s virtues, it has none of its vices. Science is based upon verifiable evidence. Religious faith not only lacks evidence, its independence from evidence is its pride and joy, shouted from the rooftops

I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. Faith, being belief that isn’t based on evidence, is the principal vice of any religion. And who, looking at Northern Ireland or the Middle East, can be confident that the “brain virus” of faith is not exceedingly dangerous?

Brain Virus is defined here by the author.
http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/Dawkins/viruses-of-the-mind.html
humorous way of simply saying Psychosis

We find religion in so much of our history, our philosophy, our everyday lives, and our legal system. Miscegenation was banned based on Biblical rules, slavery was justified by the same book. It’s convenient to have an ancient set of rules to back up odious actions and behavior, especially when it can be argued that a certain amount of “interpretation” — though never outright denial! — is necessary for them to properly be applied to any given situation. In that regard, I reject the tired arguments that try to excuse perfectly obvious errors and blunders of religion by insisting that “it doesn’t really mean that.” It means what it says, and no amount of alibi-ing and explaining will convince me that they didn’t intend the faithful to actually believe that the Universe was created in seven days. Make up your mind: either it’s right, or it’s wrong

Alot of “alibi-ing” goes on here, along with total denial of the obvious, anyway to skirt the issue etc. 16 post and not one addresses what the thread is even about “why James Randi refutes religion”

Its quite obvious religious fanatics, Christian fundamentalist, zealots, whatever you choose to call them are suffering a mental illness a psychosis if you will, you can accept whatever those numbers are in whatever manner you wish.
I choose various polls taken by several different unrelated orgs that ask the direct question and allow the fundamentalist/zealot/fanatic to stand up and count HIMSELF, thats about as close as your going to get as far as polls go.
If you choose to think there are about 2 dozen on the planet thats your opinion, i choose to accept the answers given by the zealots themselves as to their numbers which translates to approx 60-70 Million in the USA alone, anywhere between 400-700 Million globally.

One of the closest elucidations is “Shared Psychotic Disorder” to explain the insidiousness of Religious extremism.

DSM-IV Criteria:

A. A delusion develops in an individual in the context of a close relationship with another person(s), who has an already-established delusion. (proselytized into religious indoctrination)

B. The delusion is similar in content to that of the person who already has the established delusion. (all the other members of cult)

C. The disturbance is not better accounted for by another Psychotic Disorder (e.g., Schizophrenia) or a Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features and is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical condition. (mass psychosis not created by chemicals).

Treatment of Shared Psychotic Disorder:

It is uncommon for individuals with shared psychotic disorder to seek treatment on their own as they feel nothing is wrong. Once the disorder becomes known, treatment generally includes separation of the psychotic individuals and administration of antipsychotic medications.”

Thorazine (chlorpromazine)
Prolixin (flupehazine)
Haldol (haloperidol)
Moban (molindone)
Trilafon (perphenazine)
Mellaril (thioridazine)
Navane (thiothixene)
Stelazine (trifluoperazine”

http://www.angelfire.com/home/bphoenix1/shared.html

OK, Nunyabiz, you say you’re a proponent of science. You believe in only what can be proved to you (witnesses don’t count). Alrighty then, how can you claim to know where the earth came from? you were not there. Or really, pretty much lay claim to any knowledge at all? If all you know is only that which you can reason out, then how can you possibly believe in using your car to get to work? Or are you telling me that you’ve examined every working part of your car and know exactly how and why it functions? I doubt it, you probably relied on someone who’s knowledge of cars you trust to do that for you. There is nothing wrong with that. Commerce and Technology would be almost impossible without doing that. But the way you present your argument, you must be against it.

But instead of going down that road, which is likely fruitless, I’ll just ask you this: how do you account for the existence of the universe? Name some actual evidence *you* know of for evolution. I don’t want websites, that’s other people’s evidence. I want your actual, hands on, experience in this matter, or by your own argument, it must just all be a bunch of folktales.

how can you claim to know where the earth came from?

Since when have i claimed to “know” where the Earth came from? Only humans suffering from religious psychosis have that “knowledge” and they are 100% certain of it.

I like most sane individuals dont claim anything of the sort, i acknowledge the fact that currently there are some things that can only be theorized and speculated on using falsifiable evidence obtained through observation.
Currently “The Big-Bang” theory sounds just as plausible as any.
BUT, i do know what is NOT plausible, what is so utterly unlikely as to make it laughable and that is “The Earth being magically created by a few chosen words by an invisible omnipotent being”

how do you account for the existence of the universe?

well nobody can account for the existence of the universe, well anyone thats sane at least.
Of course that brings us back to the insanity of religious conviction again since they are 100% certain of who what how and why of everything all of which to them is clearly outlined in a 2000 year old book.

I certainly dont claim any such absurdity.
I can state some theoretical hypothesis but thats about the extent of logical reasoning on something where there is no falsifiable evidence of.
Such as:
If it is physically possible, actual or necessary that some states of bodies or particles are instantaneously caused to begin to exist by other such states, then this is both metaphysically possible and logically possible. Suppose we have a first state of the universe that consists of the initial temporal part (initial state) of three particulars (e.g., elementary particles). Let us call the three initial states or temporal parts of the three particles the states a, b and c. (For simplicity’s sake, we shall adopt a ‘geni-identical’ theory of objects, namely, that objects are not enduring particulars but a succession of causally connected temporal parts (states, events).) The temporal part or state a of one of the particles instantaneously causes the state b to begin to exist, b instantaneously causes c to begin to exist, and c instantaneously causes a to begin to exist. This causal loop obtains at the first instant of time, t = 0.

In this case, the universe begins to exist, is caused to begin to exist, but is not caused to begin to exist by God or any other cause(s) external to the universe. Perhaps it is worth spelling this out in detail. The universe at t = 0 is nothing other than the particles’ temporal parts a and b and c. Each of these time-slices of the particles is caused to begin to exist by something internal to the universe, namely, by one of the time-slices or states of one of the other three particles. If the universe at t = 0 is a, b and c, and a, b and c are each caused to begin to exist by something internal to the universe, it follows that the universe is caused to begin to exist, but not by anything external to the universe. The universe is self-caused in the sense that each part of the universe is caused to exist by some other part of the universe. Got that? good

Hmm so my actual hands on evidence, which i assume can include what i see as daily observations for evolution.

Technology and culture have protected us to a great extent from the selective pressures that drive evolution, allowing many people, especially those in developed nations who would otherwise not live to reproductive age, to pass their genes on to the next generation. In addition, human groups are no longer isolated; they travel the globe. Without genetic isolation, there is no further opportunity for speciation among humans. On the other hand, natural selection is a function of environmental change, and our physical, biological, and cultural environments have changed tremendously. Humans face, for example, new diseases like HIV/AIDS that can greatly impact survival and reproduction. Human populations may also be undergoing evolutionary changes of which we’re not yet aware

We can and do experience the indirect effects of evolution nearly every day. One of the more important evolutionary concerns facing humans today is the continual evolution of antibiotic-resistance in bacteria. The successful medical battle we have waged against bacteria for the last 50 years is now an even race, according to some scientists. Similarly, the use of pesticides in agriculture has driven the evolution of resistant insects, requiring the use of harsher chemicals in greater quantity to kill them.
These are things i have observed personally.

I am not a scientist specializing in evolutionary experimentation, if i were im sure i could flood this website with mountains of data showing beyond any reasonable doubt to a “sane” human being that Evolution is fact.
But like most humans i do learn from others through their life experiences, through books, classes, verbally, and yes even websites.

In 150 years no one has even remotely proven evolution to be false, 1000s upon 1000s of scientist would like nothing better than to prove what is currently regarded as fact to be false, that is a guaranteed Noble Prize and instant recognition among there peers.

Just like no one has collected James Randi’s million $$ challenge, there have been many such challenges presented for many many years to disprove evolution and no one has collected.

One question for you:

What is *your proof* that God exist?

and i dont mean “The Bible tells me so” mantra.

GeekMom: Yeah, ever wondered why the ONLY way for psychics to use their “talent” to make a living is to tell OTHER people what’s in store for them — and charge for it?

I find that view a bit naive, and I will tell you why: Those kind of psychics are the only ones that make the news.

I think there is probably nothing supernatural about extrasensory perception. I think every human brain is capable of it, but it seems those who hold some perceived spiritual connection to it are those who have genuine skill with it. Personally, I think it is their faith and dedication which carry them along.

I also think that no one has taken Randi’s offer (and collected) is in no way proof all this is a bunch of bullshit.

In 1993, a strange respiratory illness began claiming Navaho lives. Doctors were stumped. Medicine men were not. It was, in fact, the medicine men who figured out the problem was coming from the mice. Doctors there listened to these medicine men and discovered a hantavirus infection in the feces of the mice. Case solved. But here it is 11 years later, and when I went to research some sources for an entry I was writing, I found a New England Journal of Medicine report which clearly accredited doctors for saving the day.

In fact, I could find only one article that mentioned the Navaho medicine men, which I provided. And it was either The Learning Channel or The Discovery Channel that made an episode about this case, and they did mention the medicine men, suggesting doctors should not immediately dismiss their skills.

If you went to the Navaho medicine men and asked them to participate in this Randi offer, I would bet the same amount Randi is offering that you would get a flat “no,” if you got a response at all. The reason is simple. Those medicine men got their answer engaged in the rituals so many here and elsewhere ridicule, and those ways are sacred to them. Which is also why you won’t find them in the back of some metaphysical shop charging $20 to peer into your future.

It is my contention that Randi will never get someone in there with true skill, as those with true skill hold it very sacred.

I also believe this whole “lottery numbers” argument is a bit naive. That really means nothing to say people do not have “psychic” experiences. When I was 10, I could not shake the feeling I was going to fall over the edge of the pick-up bed I was in. I even said as much to my friend. We decided it was safer to sit in the middle. Neither of us were behind the wheel when it wrecked and threw us out of the back.

My grandmother was also known for warning family members of impending doom. She never picked up a tarot card, but claimed she was visited in dreams by an elderly native man. The details in which she described events before they happened were amazing. A lot of times however, she would get one detail wrong, and it was perhaps the most important detail, and that was who said event would happen to. Still, it means nothing to say she was nuts or fake when she described, for instance, a white van being chased by police, etc etc. She never went looking for answers for people and did in fact consider her dreams a curse.

Since I cannot get my dead grandmother to attest to this, I offer it not as proof, but to suggest that if you look around, you will find people around you who have experienced this kind of thing at least once. People have premonitions and psychic experiences. That is a fact. It may not be supported by modern scientists in the how’s and why’s, but that does not mean it does not exist. And that people are not hitting the lottery with these experiences in no way means it does not exist.

I don’t see mathematicians who have probability down to a science hitting those lotto numbers either. ~ Just a thought. I do wonder about that. It should be one helluva math problem.

I just realized I misread that quote. Oops. I missed “to make a living.” Anyway, what I posted is not irrelevant.

Sorry, Stefanie, I don’t find your arguments convincing at all.

First off, rodents are classic disease vectors, so it’s no surprise at all that someone would figure out that the hantavirus was being carried by mice.  So the Navajo medicine man had it in their oral traditions.  That doesn’t show any evidence of psychic ability.

Same thing with your incident with the pickup truck.  MOST people who sit in the open bed of a pickup worry about falling out; you’d be stupid NOT to.  You just happened to take note of the time your fear was actually realized.  Again, that’s no proof of premonition.

And your claim that ALL the “real psychics” out there hold their ability as “too sacred to be tested,” well, that’s just convenient, isn’t it?  Do you mean to tell me that NOBODY could use a million bucks?  I sure could.  Think of what it could do for a poverty-stricken reservation, for example.

It is a classic mistake to take note of all the times a vague idea of something came somehow true and to subconsciously dismiss all the times it DIDN’T.  We tend to try to make things fit even when they don’t, quite. 

Now, if you can produce concrete proof such that the most objective, knowledgeable observer who DOESN’T want to believe it finally has to admit that it’s there, then you’d have something.  But people have been trying that for thousands of years and NOBODY has done it. 

I find it terribly suspicious that nobody with this purported talent has been able to use it reliably, consistently and significantly enough even to make their own lives better.  Just issuing vague warnings from bad dreams isn’t a sufficient demonstration of a reproducible phenomenon.  Whenever you try to pin down reports like this, you always get evasive, slippery explanations like “the conditions weren’t right,” “it comes and goes,” “I don’t know what it means so I can’t give you any concrete information,” and even “you ruined it by not believing in it.”

No thanks.  If it were real, it would be inescapable, not elusive.

So the Navajo medicine man had it in their oral traditions. That doesn’t show any evidence of psychic ability.

Okay, I’ll give you that.

Same thing with your incident with the pickup truck. MOST people who sit in the open bed of a pickup worry about falling out; you’d be stupid NOT to. You just happened to take note of the time your fear was actually realized. Again, that’s no proof of premonition.

Call me stupid, but I loved it and never feared it before. My feeling was there because of the sensation I was being pulled out, therefore couldn’t shake the feeling that I was going to fall out. I know what I felt. But you don’t. And yet, you immediately dismiss it as something I misjudged. You are right though, it is not proof, as neither of us can prove what I felt. It is however, evidence. Evidence quickly dismissed by “authorities” of science.

And your claim that ALL the “real psychics” out there hold their ability as “too sacred to be tested,” well, that’s just convenient, isn’t it?

I thought about that later and decided that statement was flimsy. But I do know there exists out here people with gifts science cannot explain who would not go near a lab.

Do you mean to tell me that NOBODY could use a million bucks?

I am sure everyone could. That is not to say that because psychics are not hitting the lottery, they do not exist. Funny, when I mentioned this to my daughter she said “how do you know they aren’t hitting the lottery?” The underlying question, of course, being “who would admit to it?” And think about that, who really would want to subject themselves to becoming a lab rat? Do you realize what would happen to a person who could prove they had true psychic abilities? Think not only about scientists, doctors, and government officials, but the general public as well.

I find it terribly suspicious that nobody with this purported talent has been able to use it reliably, consistently and significantly enough even to make their own lives better.

Better by whose standards? Yours and the million bucks? Again, just because they are not hitting the lottery does not mean these people do not exist, and it does not mean they are not using their skills to better their own lives. It also does not mean you would know about it.

Just issuing vague warnings from bad dreams isn’t a sufficient demonstration of a reproducible phenomenon.

(Thank you for not assuming I just pulled that out of my ass. I really appreciate that.) They weren’t vague, and I don’t see how one could call even the short example I gave vague. That was only a small part of one thing she said. But you have there a vehicle, the description of that vehicle down to the color (no one in the family owned one, including the person who ended up being involved in the event), what it was doing, and who the others were around that vehicle… even that is hardly vague. But again, it is not proof, only evidence.

Whenever you try to pin down reports like this, you always get evasive, slippery explanations like “the conditions weren’t right,” “it comes and goes,” “I don’t know what it means so I can’t give you any concrete information,” and even “you ruined it by not believing in it.”

I think of a few of those could very well be legitimate. “the conditions weren’t right.” ALL scientific experiments are subject to contamination. “it comes and goes.” Well, it is possible that you would have to find a person with an uncommon level of skill to find someone who can “control” their sixth sense, which could also be a reason people are not hitting the lottery by psychic means. “i don’t know what it means...” It has been argued that the conscious and subconscious mind do not speak the same language, and so there is a fallible interpretation between the two. Not that I am arguing it, just that it has been argued. That mostly deals with dream subjects. “you ruined it by not believing in it.” This one I find interesting that it is so quickly dismissed. If you are studying a subject that deals with the mind, how is it impossible that another mind cannot influence it?

Pretty much what I think it boils down to is this: No other area of science instigates more emotion than that dealing with the so-called “paranormal.” I believe this is because of prejudice and fear. Really, if “authorities” of science admitted that there is something to the sixth sense, it would open the floodgates to all sorts of taboo. Science resists knew ideas, and there is hard evidence of that in its history. Despite the mountain of evidence provided by independent scientists - not just parapsychologists, but biologists and others too - that there is something to the sixth sense, “authorities” of science immediately reject it.

“Authorities” of science reject the idea that the mind stretches beyond the brain, and to except otherwise would change conventional, and highly emotional beliefs. That is not easily done in any arena, but I would argue particularly in science. I have yet to meet a person with no more than a healthy dose of skeptism on this subject. It seems everyone forms their opinion on highly emotional beliefs. Even I am guilty of that because I know what I have seen and experienced. But people on the other side of this argument seem less skeptic than selectively cynical. And the reason I say that is because ALL evidence is immediately rejected, just as you rejected it above regarding my truck wreck. 

:devil:I love you all. I truly do.

Just as magnetic fields changed the nature of the materialists arguments, I think there is that one small detail scientists have yet to discover, which will eventually prove there is something to the sixth sense.

If it were real, it would be inescapable, not elusive

Science is only as smart as the scientists who practice it. Sometimes it takes a while to find those elusive answers.

sorry there Stef but but science would like nothing better than to prove Paranormal/sixth sense/psychic, abilities.

Just imagine the possibilities of what could be done, 1000s upon 1000s of scientist for many many years have studied the paranormal & there has never been any solid conclusive evidence ever gathered.
100s of psychics have made outrageous claims throughout the years and none have backed any of it up.

So IF all these psychics are covering up their so called abilities for whatever selfish reason you may want to try and contribute it to then it seems to me a bit odd to see so many out flaunting their so called abilities nation wide.

So what about the ones that obviously dont mind that everyone knows they claim to be a psychic?

Uri Geller is one of the more famous ones that Randi has debunked.
http://skepdic.com/geller.html

I find it completely unbelievable that not one single psychic or anyone claiming ANY kind of paranormal activity of any kind whatsoever, be it stigmata or proof of ghost, etc etc has ever given a shred of solid evidence in order to claim that Million $$ UNLESS it is what it is which is BS.
These are psychics btw that WANT this attention badly they have made a career of it, they are saying look at me look at me im a psychic looky what i can do.
They are’nt trying to hide anything about their so called alleged abilities but when put through any controlled testing show ZERO psychic ability to back up their claims and stroll out with a million $$ and more importantly, advertising and recognition on a global scale that they are a true psychic and proved James Randi wrong!
which would make them millions more through endorsements.

Your telling me there are’nt ANY psychics or anyone claiming any kind of paranormal activity that would’nt just love to prove Randi wrong?
Seems to me all these “True” psychics would be lining up at the door.

So i must completely agree with Geekmom as ALL the falsifiable/verifiable evidence is clearly on her side of the arguement.

Its exactly the same as the Creation vs Evolution debacle, one side has ALL the empirical evidence clearly on their side while the other has nothing but hearsay & chicanery.

Stefanie,

by and large, you present an elaborate rationalization that supports why something you believe in can’t be demonstrated to the world at large.

Call me stupid, but I loved it and never feared it before. My feeling was there because of the sensation I was being pulled out, therefore couldn’t shake the feeling that I was going to fall out. I know what I felt. But you don’t. And yet, you immediately dismiss it as something I misjudged.

Rather than a psychic event, I call this a bout of common sense. Maybe you had misgivings before but ignored them, maybe the combination of the driver’s state and the traffic and road conditions gave you a hunch. We ignore these feelings at our peril, but they are nothing more than our subconscious telling us that something important escaped our attention. And again, there’s nothing supernatural about this.

My grandmother also had this kind of “premonition”. Like your grandmother, she often had the most important detail wrong, too - that something would happen at all. At other times, anybody who considered the full context could make a fairly good guess that there was a potential for something bad to happen.

I’ve read Vodoo Science, too, and it’s the same old “A precedes B, therefore A causes B” fallacy.

“Authorities” of science reject the idea that the mind stretches beyond the brain, and to except otherwise would change conventional, and highly emotional beliefs. That is not easily done in any arena, but I would argue particularly in science.

I bloody well hope so!

No competent scientist will tell you that ESP doesn’t exist, but so far all claims have either been debunked or the people that allegedly possess these powers evade an objective test. This is pretty much like saying that a small pink dinosaur lives in the third drawer from the top, but it’s only there when I’m not looking - but I know it’s there, for sure, because it eats holes in my socks.

Science is only as smart as the scientists who practice it.

This is absolutely true. However, you imply that scientists just aren’t smart enough to find what you believe is there. Remember, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. As yet, there isn’t even something to prove.

NunyaBiz,
Great laugh, thanks. OK, so If I begin with the presumption there is no God, I end up believing there is no God. Wow, amazing logic. Try your logic out, but start with the presumption that God created the very laws that you describe. Couldn’t an all powerful being pretty much ignore the laws of physics he created? I think we call that a miracle. I think it’s pretty well accepted doctrine among Christians that creation was a miracle, and not the following of ordinary physics. But again, it’s the presumptions we are starting with leading to the conclusion that confirms our presumptions. Admittedly as circular as your argument. We admit it, and just say it requires faith, you’re the one denying that your argument is circular and demanding that we accept it as fact.

Humans face, for example, new diseases like HIV/AIDS that can greatly impact survival and reproduction.

AIDS is new? That’s news to me, care to prove that it didn’t always exists? Good luck. The rest of that paragraph is more circular nonsense. I’d have to believe in the concept of evolution in order to buy that it’s now being masked by the factors you introduce. The humor doesn’t stop there. No, you go on to tell us why you can’t prove the thing you’re trying to prove because we’re too advanced along the path of your proof. A self cleaning argument. The lack of proof is the proof? LOL

One of the more important evolutionary concerns facing humans today is the continual evolution of antibiotic-resistance in bacteria

Funny, but my physical biochemistry professor would laugh you out of the room if you tried to bring this one up. There are plenty of scientists that believe that the resistant strain concept that you bring up is hogwash. And there are plenty of concepts, including the concept of evolution, that work against the idea of this being a problem. And, by the way, you are talking about breeding, not evolution. A poodle is still a dog, “resistant” E. Coli, is still E. Coli. I won’t deny that breeders have been successfully producing sub-species for centuries. But since you’ve observed it PERSONALLY, I’m sure you’ll enlighten us with your proof of evolution.

I am not a scientist specializing in evolutionary experimentation, if i were im sure i could flood this website with mountains of data showing beyond any reasonable doubt to a “sane” human being that Evolution is fact.

Flood with data, sure, any idiot could. And that idiots would take your culled data and come to your conclusion, well, your living proof. But that rational people would accept it as proof, well, some might, but I’d hope they consider all the facts and realize that the theory has some gaping holes in it.

But like most humans i do learn from others through their life experiences, through books, classes, verbally, and yes even websites.

Now we get to the meat of it. You accept the authority of others, through faith. Just like a Christian.

I thought James Randi’s challenge was for psychics. I’ve never read it was for creationists. Many many people have scientific approaches to creationism. I’ve read a lot, but not all, of them. Try out answersingenesis.org. You may not find the arguments completely persuading, but you cannot deny they offer as good a proof as the evolutionists. But then you’ve already shown me that you’ve never critically looked at evolution. You got spoon-fed it as a babe, and you’ve no reason to question it now.

I can give a proof that God exists. In fact many. But I suggest you run off and read CS Lewis and Norman Geisler first.  When you’re ready to refute their arguments, we can start. That is, if you’re still convinced that only irrational people could believe that God exists.

Geekmom, let me back this up a little here and make clear that I do not believe any part of this is supernatural. What I know is that the human brain is not completely understood. And scientists do admit that.

What I know is that over time science has evolved to understand or explain concepts that seemed completely far-fetched and irrational to predecessors.

And that always begins with some newly discovered detail which sparks evolutionary change in the way a theory is perceived and sometimes tested. I am not implying modern scientists are stupid, only that it is possible they do not have the measuring stick they need yet to properly guage it.

Both you and Nunya have said there is not one shred of evidence, but there is. It has yet to be regarded as proof and rightly so. But we send people to the electric chair with less evidence.

It is not a sensational claim that scientist who do take so called “paranormal” studies seriously are regarded as “flakes.” That says something about the prejudice.

Nunya, where you say that it is amazing not one psychic has collected on Randi’s offer, I would be amazed if one did. Discount any regard to their personal beliefs, that’s fine. But I challenge, again, to give that some thought. I would think a true psychic would know better.

Forget for a minute that it may or may not prove the existance of psychics and really think about that. I have had my life threatened and I have been harrassed on the rumor that I was Pagan. I can imagine what my family and I would go through if I could prove I was… for instance, telepathic. Where you might think a person with this skill would be highly celebrated as the long sought proof, I think you would be mistaken. I promise you, as much as I would love to see the doors on this subject blown open, you could not pay me $10 million to be the proof that does it.

Nunya and GeekMom, I am not saying that any and all of the so-called “paranormal” subjects are beyond the grasp of modern scientists. All I am saying is that it is possible there is more to it than we currently realize, and I think there is enough evidence to support that idea.

I do believe eventually more will be understood about it, and I do believe eventually science will prove there is something to the sixth sense, namely that it is a normal function of a brain that over time, we might have starting using less of.