Science and religion

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…therefore if it can be demonstrated scientifically that 'UNUSUAL THINGS may be observed when elements are subject to UNUSUAL circumstances', THEN it can be established that there is a basis that this SAME THEORY, may be "interpreted" to apply to the phenomena of miracles themselves,
… (my emphasis)

The extremely vague terms “UNUSUAL THIN ure would happen there because those “NATURAL LAWS” would include those “UNKNOWN laws”.[/b]

it cannot be demonstrated that unusual things happen in unusual circumstances Andrew, oh really? is lead a good conductor electrical conductor?, no its not normally a good conductor, what happens when it is immersed in liquid helium and cooled to a temperature of -271° C. (-456° F.) it strangely becomes a superconductor and a powerful electromagnet when a bar magnet is placed near it. this is certainly unusual whether you like it or not my friend, thus the statement stands, 'unusual things happen in unusual circumstances'

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
it cannot be demonstrated that unusual things happen in unusual circumstances Andrew, oh really? is lead a good conductor electrical conductor?, no its not normally a good conductor, what happens when it is immersed in liquid helium and cooled to a temperature of -271° C. (-456° F.) it strangely becomes a superconductor and a powerful electromagne ...[text shortened]... or not my friend, thus the statement stands, 'unusual things happen in unusual circumstances'

…it cannot be demonstrated that unusual things happen in unusual circumstances Andrew, oh really? …

Not SCIENTIFICALLY because there is no formal scientific meaning to the word “unusual”.

…is lead a good conductor electrical conductor?, no its not normally a good conductor, what happens when it is immersed in liquid helium and cooled to a temperature of -271° C. (-456° F.) it STRONGLY becomes a superconductor and a powerful electromagnet when a bar magnet is placed near it. this is certainly unusual whether you like it or not my friend, thus the statement stands, 'UNUSUAL things happen in UNUSUAL circumstances'
..…(my emphasis)

No, not SCIENTIFICALLY so. Exactly what is the SCIENTIFIC definition of “UNUSUAL things” or “UNUSUAL circumstances” or “STRONGLY becomes“? -answer, there is none. For something to be truly SCIENTIFIC it must, ideally, avoid such vague language.
The extremely vague terms such as “UNUSUAL things” have no formal scientific meaning whatsoever.

The fact that some substances become superconductors at low temperatures doesn’t imply anything about ‘miracles’ nor the ‘supernatural’ nor does it imply that all natural law is violated (if that is what you would imply here judging by your previous few posts?).

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…the 'nameless void' which we ALL spring from
… (my emphasis)

-and I thought I came from egg and sperm.[/b]

Again the question arises: Who are we?
My physical orientation on this planet is only a small part of who I am.
Really it is not me at all but only a vehicle.
My true essence is largley unknown to me, however I kmow that I am not this body I drag around with me all day!

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Again the question arises: Who are we?
My physical orientation on this planet is only a small part of who I am.
Really it is not me at all but only a vehicle.
My true essence is largley unknown to me, however I kmow that I am not this body I drag around with me all day!

…however I know that I am not this body I drag around with me all day!
..…

Are you talking about the process of the brain i.e. mind?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…however I know that I am not this body I drag around with me all day!
..…

Are you talking about the process of the brain i.e. mind?[/b]

Huh?
Do you mean is this dragging around of my body part of the process in my brain?
Let me ask you: Does spirit eminate from the brain or does the brain (and physical systems) eminate from spirit?
(I would say the latter)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Huh?
Do you mean is this dragging around of my body part of the process in my brain?
Let me ask you: Does spirit eminate from the brain or does the brain (and physical systems) eminate from spirit?
(I would say the latter)

…Does spirit emanate from the brain or does the brain (and physical systems) emanate from spirit?
..…

I would say neither -what makes you think there exists a “spirit“?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…Does spirit emanate from the brain or does the brain (and physical systems) emanate from spirit?
..…

I would say neither -what makes you think there exists a “spirit“?[/b]

So many things make me Know there is spirit.
I just don't see how there can't be spirit.
(but I'm not going to get into a debate about it. not that your comments aren't welcome...they most surely are!)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
So many things make me Know there is spirit.
I just don't see how there can't be spirit.
(but I'm not going to get into a debate about it. not that your comments aren't welcome...they most surely are!)
I think that the question of how we could know if there is such a thing as a spirit is interesting. A pity you don't want to discuss it.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
]…it cannot be demonstrated that unusual things happen in unusual circumstances Andrew, oh really? …[/b]

Not SCIENTIFICALLY because there is no formal scientific meaning to the word “unusual”.

…is lead a good conductor electrical conductor?, no its not normally a good conductor, what happens when it is immersed in liquid helium and cooled al law is violated (if that is what you would imply here judging by your previous few posts?).

ok , instead of unusual, can we substitute, "contrary to its natural state", is that more acceptable?

Originally posted by Lord Shark
Originally posted by karoly aczel
[b]So many things make me Know there is spirit.
I just don't see how there can't be spirit.
(but I'm not going to get into a debate about it. not that your comments aren't welcome...they most surely are!)
I think that the question of how we could know if there is such a thing as a spirit is interesting. A pity you don't want to discuss it.[/b]

I'd love to discuss it-like I said all comments are welcome on the subject and I am learning evermore with ever new thread I read.
I just don't want to debate the existence of spirit because anything I say can be refuted and argued against.
I just know what I know . which is not everything , but I do Know there is Spirit. ( if someone doesn't believe me,thats fine with me, like I say I'm not going to be very good at trying to justify my claim.)

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ok , instead of unusual, can we substitute, "contrary to its natural state", is that more acceptable?

No.
Substituting this into you previous statement:

“it cannot be demonstrated that unusual things happen in unusual circumstances”

And adjusting the syntax to make it make as much sense as I can gives:

“it cannot be demonstrated that things that are contrary to the natural state of those things can happen in circumstances that are contrary to the natural state of those circumstances”

That is rather vague to say the least (actually, I would say it is totally confusing).
What scientifically meaning does “things that are contrary to the natural state of those things” or “circumstances that are contrary to the natural state of those circumstances” have?

And what on earth would ““circumstances that are contrary to the natural state of those circumstances” mean in any way (scientifically or none scientifically)? It appears to be a logical contradiction!

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
No.
Substituting this into you previous statement:

“it cannot be demonstrated that unusual things happen in unusual circumstances”

And adjusting the syntax to make it make as much sense as I can gives:

“it cannot be demonstrated that things contrary to the natural state of those things can happen in circumstances contrary to the natural st ...[text shortened]... e of those things” or “circumstances contrary to the natural state of those circumstances” have?

it has been demonstrated conclusively and is quite clear in my mind, your objections having centred around arguments and trifles over semantics, but once again, this is the spirituality forum, and i am not buying it!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
it has been demonstrated conclusively and is quite clear in my mind, your objections having centred around arguments and trifles over semantics, but once again, this is the spirituality forum, and i am not buying it!

…trifles over semantics
..…

If you cannot define what you mean by a claim then it isn’t scientific and thus has no relevance to science. You may call that “trifles over semantics” if you wish. But the fact is semantics matter when defining something about science -if the semantics don’t make sense in the context of science than you aren’t defining anything about science!
That’s why I said “For something to be truly SCIENTIFIC it must, ideally, avoid such vague language”.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I'd love to discuss it-like I said all comments are welcome on the subject and I am learning evermore with ever new thread I read.
I just don't want to debate the existence of spirit because anything I say can be refuted and argued against.
I just know what I know . which is not everything , but I do Know there is Spirit. ( if someone doesn't believe me,thats fine with me, like I say I'm not going to be very good at trying to justify my claim.)

Well, we might know many things without being able to justify them. That isn't the issue for me. I'm more interested in how you know that you know. In other words, what is it about the state of affairs that prompts you to use the word 'know'?

Originally posted by Lord Shark
Originally posted by karoly aczel
[b]I'd love to discuss it-like I said all comments are welcome on the subject and I am learning evermore with ever new thread I read.
I just don't want to debate the existence of spirit because anything I say can be refuted and argued against.
I just know what I know . which is not everything , but I do Know er words, what is it about the state of affairs that prompts you to use the word 'know'?

Well thats a good question and tricky to answer.
I would say it has to do with personal experience.
Like first I just thought there was this 'physical' reality and nothing more. Then I had a 'mind-shatterring' experience where i saw another reality.
I tried to dispel this new reality as hallucination,whatever.
Then these experiences began to haunt me-it seemed I couldn't go to a friends place without the walls falling away or something like that. (i was tripping with no acid!)
I worked my way through this new understanding and worked my way through the fear. I dropped a lot of cherished notions and romantic beliefs. I worked on keeping my ego in check....etc...etc...
...Until I came to my present point of view which is: The physical reality I once thought was concrete is actually less substantial than the 'other' reality. The 'other' reality,(spiritual realm) is more 'real' than the physical one.🙂