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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (736173)	4/10/2006 9:10:29 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Re: "there IS no way to "study" true prayer...." WHY???????????????????????????????????????? (Are you agreeing with my suggestion that God deliberately FRUSTRATES such efforts????? If not, then what is YOUR reasoning for saying that?) "I suggest you go back and read your post.....it really is amazingly stupid." LOL!!!!!!!! Apparently it was TOO MUCH for you to be able to come up with any cogent points, or criticism or anything, though! You seem tongue-tied! LOL!!!!! ======================================================== Well, like I said: maybe they need a BIGGER, BROADER study! Maybe a BIGGER study could be broken into sub-groups (you know: Sunni & Shiite Muslims, Orthodox & Reformed & Conservative Jews, Babists, Baptists (Southern & other), Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox, Vodun adherents, Jahnists, Confuscians, Hindus, Buddhists, Animists, Mithrites, Celtic followers of the Norse Gods or the old Celtic religion, followers of the mythological predecessors of the Jewish/Christian pantheon: Ahura Mazda (son of God) and Ahriman (Satan), etc., etc., etc. ---- AND THEN WE MIGHT GET SOME HARD EVIDENCE ABOUT JUST WHO'S PRAYERS ARE THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! COOL! (I notice that you didn't say anything about my OTHER THEORY for why the researchers didn't get statistically reliable and positive results: that MAYBE GOD DIDN'T WANT THEM TO!!!!!!!!!!): --- Actually though, I've got my own theory for why the non-positive results... God really likes to keep his secrets and so he DELIBERATELY DOESN'T ANSWER THE PRAYERS OF PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATE IN THESE TYPE OF STUDIES, just to CONFOUND the impertinent researchers! (WHY NOT? Don't 'cha think God might have a sense of humor?) It's 'cause he likes to keep an air of mystery going around the whole subject, and keep up the facade of 'Man's free will', and just 'cause he considers participating in these type of 'stunt' studies to be beneath him! But SERIOUSLY, Guy! The article you posted (seeking to explain away the non-positve results from the prayer trial) said: "Prayer is based upon a relationship, namely a relationship with God through Jesus Christ...." (So, maybe my first idea is the way to go: BROADEN & WIDEN the study, and bring in different religious groups and their different prayer types! Wouldn't it be cool if some other was actually using a form of prayer that had RELIABLY POSITIVE results?) The article you posted ALSO said: "And relationships cannot properly be evaluated by scientific methods." (Er... WHY NOT????????????????????? I'd SURE like to hear the argument, and seem some evidence, for that bald claim....) And it said this: "This study approaches prayer almost mechanically," Whitney said.... Well, DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OF COURSE, it approaches the test "mechanically" (LOL!), that's because it MUST! Ya can't have a double blind scientific test without following a strict design paradigm... after all, the test MUST be reproduceable in every aspect, and available for peer review. It ain't like debating 'how many invisible angels can dance on the head of a pin'. <GGG>