Quote: zooo @ February 23 2009, 2:13 PM GMTMost scientific theories can be proven so much more, overwhelmingly so, than ANY of the religious theories, etc. I just don't understand why people insist on giving them equal consideration.
There was really no point in bringing religion into this discussion in the first place. It's always better to prove your point with actions rather than pointing fingers and making excuses.
Quote: DaButt @ February 23 2009, 2:13 PM GMTEvery single claimant - dowsers, spoon benders, mind readers - have failed when subjected to scientific conditions.
Have they all been proven to be fake, or (some) just not proven to be real? The "scientific conditions" of which you speak may themselves very well be proven to be misleading or otherwise incorrect, in due course. They're only 'correct' by our current understanding and (limited) knowledge.
Quote: DaButt @ February 23 2009, 2:17 PM GMTThere was really no point in bringing religion into this discussion in the first place. It's always better to prove your point with actions rather than pointing fingers and making excuses.
I have no idea what you're saying there.
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:16 PM GMTYou should've watched Christianity: A History last night.
Was extremely interesting. I assume it's on 4OD if not repeated during the week.
Maaaybe I will watch it.
If I am not washing my hair or owt. 
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:21 PM GMTHave they all been proven to be fake, or (some) just not proven to be real? The "scientific conditions" of which you speak may themselves very well be proven to be misleading or otherwise incorrect, in due course. They're only 'correct' by our current understanding and (limited) knowledge.
Every person who has applied for James Randi's million dollars has failed miserably. These are not obscure scientific controls we're talking about. If someone claims he can move an object with his mind, they make sure he can't touch it, blow on it, move it with a magnet, etc. Most give up when they realize their tricks won't work. Case in point, this famous clip of Uri Geller on Johnny Carson's show:
A contest offering one million dollars is hardly going to be even close to impartial. They don't want to part with their cash. Got anything from a source not so obviously open to bias?
Quote: zooo @ February 23 2009, 2:22 PM GMTI have no idea what you're saying there.
All I was trying to say is that it's better to prove your point by displaying your own strengths rather than pointing out the other guy's weaknesses.
Quote: sootyj @ February 23 2009, 1:50 PM GMTIf you took a religious person back in time and showed him Jesus with a van full of fish and bread or Moses in a motor boat it would make no diference. The essential truth of the story to the individual is the important thing. Religion is by it's very nature an irrational act of faith.
It'd surprise quite a few historians though.
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:33 PM GMTA contest offering one million dollars is hardly going to be even close to impartial. They don't want to part with their cash. Got anything from a source not so obviously open to bias?
Come on, do you really think it's a case of bias when you make sure a magician can't use sleight of hand or outright cheating?
Go to your university, find a physics professor who is wise to the common tricks and have him/her set up a test under scientific scrutiny. You'll probably get laughed off campus for even suggesting it, but I'm sure the result will be the same: utter failure to prove that someone can bend/move objects with his/her mind.
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:21 PM GMTHave they all been proven to be fake, or (some) just not proven to be real?
Well, you would think by now that at least one would have absolute proof of the ability. Unquestionable proof. Not that I'm against any of that stuff, mental powers and the like, but you'd think there would be some definite proof somewhere.
Quote: Matthew Stott @ February 23 2009, 2:46 PM GMTWell, you would think by now that at least one would have absolute proof of the ability. Unquestionable proof. Not that I'm against any of that stuff, mental powers and the like, but you'd think there would be some definite proof somewhere.
But is the point of half of the arguments being made over the last few pages that science is biased? One man's proof is another man's joke. Once we had "proof" that the Earth was flat. When "proof" was offered that it is in fact spherical, it was discounted for years. And some people still do.
Cue Ellie and her "we never went to the moon" speech.
Off on a tangent. Been watching the Geller vids on YT. I loved the moment he says "If you have a broken radio or TV, will it to start working." Now if my TV's broken, how am I going to be seeing him? Just made me smile... not a lot. 
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:50 PM GMTBut is the point of half of the arguments being made over the last few pages that science is biased? One man's proof is another man's joke. Once we had "proof" that the Earth was flat. When "proof" was offered that it is in fact spherical, it was discounted for years. And some people still do.
Cue Ellie and her "we never went to the moon" speech.
So Aaron, do you really believe that you and Ellie have been to the moon? I for one am a little sceptical. 
Quote: SlagA @ February 23 2009, 3:13 PM GMTOff on a tangent. Been watching the Geller vids on YT. I loved the moment he says "If you have a broken radio or TV, will it to start working." Now if my TV's broken, how am I going to be seeing him? Just made me smile... not a lot.
Well it rather depends on how broken it is!
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:50 PM GMTCue Ellie and her "we never went to the moon" speech.
Ahem! 
Quote: Aaron @ February 23 2009, 2:50 PM GMTOne man's proof is another man's joke.
But there has to be some sort of proof. They had evidence for the world being round, some people just chose to ignore it. I can't believe scientists would choose to ignore mental powers, more they would be interested in explaining exactly HOW those powers come to be/work.