Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (1255)	3/5/2002 11:42:02 AM
From: thames_sider	Respond to of 21057

A key point: There may be mysteries we are forced to live with. Is that so bad? Absolutely not. I'm not the one inventing answers, or uncomfortable with my existence in and of itself. I probably missed your links. I'd agree that if payer can be proven to be efficacious, then let it be used. I'd like to see a properly scientific study - controlled, double-blind, and objective. All the studies have seen have been weak on the first two, but hopeless on the third - it is not scientific to collect opinions on whether patient 'X' felt better than patient 'Y', or recovered faster from a 'similar' ailment, or might have been in less pain... test remission rates: blood cell counts, or similar indicators: volume of painkillers required: things that can be measured. Much though I'd love to believe in ESP, I can't see it working. I certainly would be very surprised if statistically significant effects were to be sustained. Until such time as there is a theory that seems to account for the matter, the spiritual hypothesis might be a viable alternative. But on its own terms it can always be an 'alternative', because - however absurd - it cannot be disproven. (e.g., my Pixie: your 'Intelligent Designer'). And, of course, if there is nothing else that could account for a given phenomenon, or the overwhelming preponderance of evidence was on one side, then the existence of spiritual phenomena would be proven. Firstly, I'll accept that if you accept the reverse. IMO there's pretty overwhelming evidence for science being right and religion wrong whenever the two are in opposition, the remainder being TBD... in fact, can you quote any PROVEN case otherwise? Come, that's not much to ask - a single, proven case where science cannot account for a genuine happening, where genuine, non-anecdotal evidence (e.g., confirmed archaeological relics: fossils: lake-bad evidence: photography: eye-witnesses who were not believers in or shills of the religion: whatever) shows that the event occurred, and only the supernatural can explain it... BTW a religious tract is not evidence unless you can prove that the events depicted took place as described: otherwise it's anecdotal fable. Or show that every single religion agrees on said case (since otherwise it's easy to pick an opinion somewhere), and there is no scientific case otherwise. Secondly, science changes. 'Nothing else that can account' is then - not now. e.g., Hephaestos's hammering was the only thing the Greeks had to account for earthquakes... so is that proven?? So I'll need the proviso that later scientific discoveries may disprove the accepted supernatural after all, and that such will be accepted. Thirdly, and back to the point of this case - do you really believe we have such insufficient evidence for evolution, genetic inheritance and change that we need to invent some unprovable influencing force acting in ineffable ways or a purpose only it knows...?