Time, death and the universe

[leo9]

One of the big problems of homeopathy (as well as other "mystical" explanations) is that they have never been able to demonstrate such memory, nor explain how this memory is retained. They simply state it as fact and expect people to accept it.

I agree, which is one of the reasons I don't believe it.

I have seen and heard of instances where certain items which were undergoing some kind of stress were able to act similar to a phonograph, recording sounds which occurred around them during that period of stress. I would guess that something similar could happen with electromagnetic impulses. But this is a physical process, not a spiritual one.

Leaving aside the fact that all attempts to explain telepathy and related effects elecromagnetically have failed, it's a moot point whether finding a physical explanation for hauntings would remove it from the realm of the spiritual.

This is the best reason in the world to suspect this idea. Without actually having objective, reproducible evidence, you can make up anything that feels or sounds good and claim it to be true. Can you envision a mechanism that allows some kind of memory of our consciousness to cling to atoms? Can you demonstrate it? Or can you at least come up with something that would show it to be false? Without those things, it's just speculation and wishful thinking.

The fact that I started the post by invoking a theory which I stated I didn't believe in, and then referenced an idea I put forward in a work of fiction, should have made it clear that I was playing with ideas and not putting forward hard theories.

[Thorne]

Leaving aside the fact that all attempts to explain telepathy and related effects elecromagnetically have failed, it's a moot point whether finding a physical explanation for hauntings would remove it from the realm of the spiritual.

All efforts to show that telepathy actually exists have also failed. Some people still believe in it. But developing a physical, measurable, reproducible explanation for anything automatically removes it from the spiritual or supernatural. By definition.

[thir]

All efforts to show that telepathy actually exists have also failed. Some people still believe in it. But developing a physical, measurable, reproducible explanation for anything automatically removes it from the spiritual or supernatural. By definition.

Ehm, I don't think so. What about the creationists?

[Thorne]

Ehm, I don't think so. What about the creationists?

What about them? They have no physical, measurable, reproducible evidence for creation. Only their holy books and wishful thinking. And even their books are contradictory and completely at odds with observable evidence. They rely on the supernatural explanation, without evidence.

[thir]

What about them? They have no physical, measurable, reproducible evidence for creation. Only their holy books and wishful thinking. And even their books are contradictory and completely at odds with observable evidence. They rely on the supernatural explanation, without evidence.

Well, that was what I meant. Science aside, they still have their own version, meaning proof does not make any difference.

Or are we at cross purposes here??

[Thorne]

Well, that was what I meant. Science aside, they still have their own version, meaning proof does not make any difference.

It doesn't make any difference to them, certainly. It does make a difference to science.

The group Answers in Genesis specifically states:
"The Bible—the “history book of the universe”—provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, and can be trusted to tell the truth in all areas it touches on. Therefore, we are able to use it to help us make sense of this present world. When properly understood, the “evidence” confirms the biblical account."

And in their Statement of Faith they specifically state:
"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information."
So any information which contradicts the biblical account must be wrong, because the "fallible people" at AiG have declared it to be so?