Thread: Supernatural Discussion

Because everyone can have different beliefs of course, also magnets actually have energies <.<
That and hallucinations tends to be the only explanation (apart from lies)

You´ve got a point there.

Thing is science does not account for everything... although we know a lot through science its hardly able to explain a lot of things and things that were "totally impossible" 20 years ago are now accepted by scientists.

Originally Posted by Nicholars

Thing is science does not account for everything... although we know a lot through science its hardly able to explain a lot of things and things that were "totally impossible" 20 years ago are now accepted by scientists.

Example?

I think you are pulling random things from your behind, I mean their profession is to test, observe, validate. Those ''things'' you talk about (if there are any) is now accepted probably because scientists tested it, scientist only accept through testing. So they accepted it because they were able to explain it.

All I mean is science cant explain everything for example parallel universes and beyond what we actually presently know about physics and quantum physics, we dont actually KNOW everything eg. the creation of the universe is only made up of theories no one was actually there to prove it (obviously) and i think its a bit of an assumption to say that science at this point can explain a lot of things that have been mentioned in this thread....

Maybe they dont have the apparatus to test these "things" successfully, the human mind far away from being understood as well although a lot is known about it....

As for an example just google for huuman magnetic/energy fields...

Originally Posted by Nicholars

All I mean is science cant explain everything for example parallel universes and beyond what we actually presently know about physics and quantum physics, we dont actually KNOW everything eg. the creation of the universe is only made up of theories no one was actually there to prove it (obviously) and i think its a bit of an assumption to say that science at this point can explain a lot of things that have been mentioned in this thread....

Maybe they dont have the apparatus to test these "things" successfully, the human mind far away from being understood as well although a lot is known about it....

As for an example just google for huuman magnetic/energy fields...

I agree, ofc we don`t know everything and only have logical theories on some parts. But Ì don`t understand what you mean by ''just accepted'' by scientists. Scientists don`t just accept things, they need to test to accept. And what was it scientist tought was impossible 20 years ago they now has accpeted?

The explination is magic = science, and science = magic. It's just that we have figured out how some of these things work on a more fundemental level than in the past. A scientist in our time would have for the most part been described as mage/wizard/alchemist in the past and vice verse, its just that we have much much better tools these days so a lot of the explinations seem mundane instead of magical and mysterious. It's possible in the future scientists will have developed much better tools than we have today so they may be able to perfectly explain astral projection, thought forms, and any other thing users of magic/psionics today cannot explain in a scientific fashion, in a mundane manner. That is my opinion anyway.

Originally Posted by Ghost94

It has been proven, that the rocks have no effect whatsoever to the human brain

*Bashes Ghost94 in the head with a large rock

Magnets affect the human brain, and are in essence just rocks. Many rocks have magnetic properties, it's possible some could have some sort of effect. Certainly radioactive rocks would. Those properties might have been considered magical at one time.

Not that I believe in magical rocks, or even pet rocks, just felt like being a pain.

You believe in God but doubt the ability for anything magical in the world...

Huh?

Forget what we're told
Before we get too old
Show me a garden that's bursting into life

Originally Posted by The Cusp

*Bashes Ghost94 in the head with a large rock

Magnets affect the human brain, and are in essence just rocks. Many rocks have magnetic properties, it's possible some could have some sort of effect. Certainly radioactive rocks would. Those properties might have been considered magical at one time.

Not that I believe in magical rocks, or even pet rocks, just felt like being a pain.

Well, ofc something like a magnet might have just a little effect, and radiation could kill you, but that is beside the point.

I've been on the forums a bit but only recently heard about 'dream sharing' or dreamwalkers/nightstalkers. I guess the proposed mechanism for it is something like telepathy.

It's my opinion that anything like this is completely impossible. I think that people might believe it's happened, but the much more likely explanation is that they have just had a very realistic dream character, and Occam's razor would tell us that this is the explanation to accept.

Originally Posted by Nicholars

Thing is science does not account for everything... although we know a lot through science its hardly able to explain a lot of things and things that were "totally impossible" 20 years ago are now accepted by scientists.

You're correct that science doesn't account for everything, and yes, there have been some surprising discoveries, but that doesn't mean that there aren't things we can categorically rule out. Scientists know an awful lot about a lot of different fields now. Neurologists can tell you without a doubt that there is no such thing as telepathy/telekinesis etc., and therefore no such thing as dream sharing.

Originally Posted by Nicholars

As for an example just google for huuman magnetic/energy fields...

Someone mentioned something about the different 'energies' that could be what enables this sort of thing. Well there are only 4 different types of forces in the universe, and we know about all of them. We know that there aren't any others, and we can measure all the ones that exist, so this doesn't leave any room to explain an 'energy' that could enable something like this, like two minds communicating while dreaming.

So I guess in summary, while dream sharing would be totally awesome, it's just not a real phenomenon. At least we have lucid dreaming, that's good enough for me.

Science can't even explain gravity next to a 3 word explanation of "bending of space-time". How do you suppose science will explain dreamsharing? Lol you're at a dead end there for sure.

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Science can't even explain gravity next to a 3 word explanation of "bending of space-time". How do you suppose science will explain dreamsharing? Lol you're at a dead end there for sure.

Well firstly gravity can be explained a great deal more than that. And there's also a fair bit of evidence for gravity.

Check out Occam's razor on wikipedia. It basically states "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."

Anyone can tell that gravity exists. We get pulled toward the Earth, and the Earth orbits the sun. Perhaps it is all just a dream, or an elaborate deception? Well Occam's razor would tell us to just accept that gravity exists.

For dream sharing to work, there would need to be some way for people to communicate, right? There must be some link between their minds.

But we know all the forces that exist in the universe. If this link existed we could measure it. But it doesn't. And we can't.

It sounds like you don't understand how science works. If science didn't have good explanation of gravity, then it wouldn't be a well established theory. Science can explain exactly how gravity acts upon objects.

Ok Mr Scientist, please feel free to explain exactly how gravity acts upon objects. (except for the 3 word explanation of "bending of space-time").

ChaybaChayba,

Firstly, I'm not an expert in the field.

From what I've read gravity is explained by the general theory of relativity. This is some pretty complicated stuff, and I think it would take you or I a long time good deal of reading to understand it.

The thing is though, this is 'good' science. And that means peer reviewed science. So even if neither of us understand it. Each scientist who has made contributions to this theory has had their work reviewed by their peers, i.e. other qualified scientists, to ensure that it's correct, and there are no mistakes. If their work doesn't stand up to review, it doesn't get accepted, and this is how we can have confidence in what scientists say.

Also, scientists will tell you how confident they are in their theories. If there is a new theory for something that is being investigated, then they won't be too sure about it yet, they well tell you. That theory might then get thrown out. But after a long time, and lots of reviewing, they can be very confident in a theory, like they are with general relativity.

The knowledge we have of the universe from these theories does explain gravity. It also provides a huge amount of evidence against things like telepathy or dream sharing.

jatoo

I can tell your not an expert.

But we know all the forces that exist in the universe. If this link existed we could measure it. But it doesn't. And we can't.

Hahaha. We know all the forces that exist in the universe. So you've been from one end to the other to confirm your suspicions???

The knowledge we have of the universe from these theories does explain gravity. It also provides a huge amount of evidence against things like telepathy or dream sharing.

Source, or bullshit.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

I can tell your not an expert.

You start your post with a personal attack. That doesn't really help your argument. This is ad hominem and it's a logical fallacy. Whether or not I'm an expert doesn't change the validity of what I am saying, as I'm not the one who researched it. I don't suppose you are an expert in these fields either, and you are arguing your side like I am arguing mine, which makes the attack hypocritical.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Hahaha. We know all the forces that exist in the universe. So you've been from one end to the other to confirm your suspicions???

I'm not really sure why you are laughing. This is a known fact. There are four and only four fundamental forces in the universe:

1. The gravitational force
2. The electromagnetic force
3. The strong nuclear force
4. The weak nuclear force

I quote you below as asking for sources. Well for this one you can see Physics for Scientists and Engineers by Paul A. Tipler fourth edition page 91, or any similar physics text book. Or just check out Wikipedia.

The fact that there are only four fundamental forces is not debated at all by anyone, it's universally accepted.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Source, or bullshit.

I think what you were requesting a source for was my assertion that there is a huge amount of evidence against telepathy and dream sharing.

Well this is a pretty general statement. I don't know of any scientific literature specifically addressing telepathy, but there's probably some around somewhere.

What I had in mind really was the following couple of points. Seeing as we know all the forces that exist in the universe, we would be able measure any wave or energy coming from someones brain that would enable something like this. Nothing like this has been measured, and before you ask for a source for that, let me just say this. The claim here would be that such forces do exist. The null hypothesis would be that they do not. So for the claim to be accepted, evidence needs to be provided to support it, and not the other way around. I'll leave it up to you to find a source for your claim if you like.

My next point was mainly that neurologists will tell you that such things are impossible. I'll quote a blog entry by Dr Steven Novella, an assistant professor of neurology at Yale:

There is no proposed mechanism for ESP that amounts to a reductionist model based upon established physics or biology. No one has even established any physical features to ESP - meaning that it displays consistent characteristics, such as decreasing with distance, or being blocked by dense substances, or anything. There has been zero progress in zeroing in on what ESP might be as a physical phenomenon.

The rest of the blog entry can be found here if you are interested.

And my final point would be this - extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence. Claiming that people could communicate telepathically is a very extraordinary claim, and because of this, the responsibility isn't for opponents to disprove it, it is for proponents to provide evidence to support it.

jatoo

Originally Posted by jatoo

You start your post with a personal attack. That doesn't really help your argument. This is ad hominem and it's a logical fallacy. Whether or not I'm an expert doesn't change the validity of what I am saying, as I'm not the one who researched it. I don't suppose you are an expert in these fields either, and you are arguing your side like I am arguing mine, which makes the attack hypocritical.



I'm not really sure why you are laughing. This is a known fact. There are four and only four fundamental forces in the universe:

1. The gravitational force
2. The electromagnetic force
3. The strong nuclear force
4. The weak nuclear force

I quote you below as asking for sources. Well for this one you can see Physics for Scientists and Engineers by Paul A. Tipler fourth edition page 91, or any similar physics text book. Or just check out Wikipedia.

The fact that there are only four fundamental forces is not debated at all by anyone, it's universally accepted.



I think what you were requesting a source for was my assertion that there is a huge amount of evidence against telepathy and dream sharing.

Well this is a pretty general statement. I don't know of any scientific literature specifically addressing telepathy, but there's probably some around somewhere.

What I had in mind really was the following couple of points. Seeing as we know all the forces that exist in the universe, we would be able measure any wave or energy coming from someones brain that would enable something like this. Nothing like this has been measured, and before you ask for a source for that, let me just say this. The claim here would be that such forces do exist. The null hypothesis would be that they do not. So for the claim to be accepted, evidence needs to be provided to support it, and not the other way around. I'll leave it up to you to find a source for your claim if you like.

My next point was mainly that neurologists will tell you that such things are impossible. I'll quote a blog entry by Dr Steven Novella, an assistant professor of neurology at Yale:



The rest of the blog entry can be found here if you are interested.

And my final point would be this - extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence. Claiming that people could communicate telepathically is a very extraordinary claim, and because of this, the responsibility isn't for opponents to disprove it, it is for proponents to provide evidence to support it.

jatoo

Not really an attack... more of a sarcastic jab, you said you weren't an expert first. I was asserting your claim.

So you've been billions of miles from earth to make sure their isn't any other kind of forces at work in the universe? I guess facts are different for me and you.

We don't know all the forces that exist in the world, we are an immature race that thinks it knows everything when it really knows next to nothing. We barely have control of the always changing technology that we have, if you think we understand and are able to pick up everything you are quite wrong.

I really don't care what it says on someones blog.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

So you've been billions of miles from earth to make sure their isn't any other kind of forces at work in the universe? I guess facts are different for me and you.

You keep asking that. Oddly enough, I haven't. It's really beside the point though. This is something which is known by physicists from the research they have done. It is widely agreed upon by physicists throughout the world. If you are willing to dismiss the vast body of scientific knowledge which has come from years of research by hundreds of highly qualified experts, and just go by what you reckon then there really is no reasoning with you and it's pointless debating anything with you at all.

You don't need to travel "billions of miles" to know things about the universe. There's an awful lot scientists can work out from right here on earth.

Fact's are different for me and you? What about you and what is scientific consensus?

Originally Posted by DeathCell

We don't know all the forces that exist in the world, we are an immature race that thinks it knows everything when it really knows next to nothing. We barely have control of the always changing technology that we have, if you think we understand and are able to pick up everything you are quite wrong.

The forces present in the universe don't depend on what technology we have. That is an irrelevant point.

You don't seem to understand what science is. We know some things but there are many things that we don't. Scientists don't pretend to know anything they don't. They tell you what they don't know. That is what science is all about, researching the things we don't know. I don't think we understand everything, in fact I know that we don't. No one would argue against that, it's an obvious point.

There are some thing however, that we are sure of. Scientists can build up their body of knowledge, and know some things to great degree of certainty. We know without a doubt that force is equal to mass times acceleration for example (unless you are travelling at a speed close the speed of light). Someone who disagreed with that point would not be taken seriously.

The fact that only four forces exist in the universe is not as commonly known as Newton's second law of motion, so people don't realise how ridiculous it is to disagree with it. Which is fair enough, I wouldn't expect everyone to know it. But once you find it out, then it IS silly to dismiss it or refute it.

Go read a physics text book. If you still don't believe it then you are disagreeing with the consensus of years of research by experts and there is absolutely no reasoning with you.

Originally Posted by DeathCell

I really don't care what it says on someones blog.

You asked for a source. That's not just "someones blog". It belongs to someone who is a doctor of medicine and an expert in neurology. There's your source.

jatoo

Originally Posted by jatoo

You keep asking that. Oddly enough, I haven't. It's really beside the point though. This is something which is known by physicists from the research they have done. It is widely agreed upon by physicists throughout the world. If you are willing to dismiss the vast body of scientific knowledge which has come from years of research by hundreds of highly qualified experts, and just go by what you reckon then there really is no reasoning with you and it's pointless debating anything with you at all.

You don't need to travel "billions of miles" to know things about the universe. There's an awful lot scientists can work out from right here on earth.

Fact's are different for me and you? What about you and what is scientific consensus?

It's known by physicists from the research they have done. Keyword in that sentence being HAVE DONE. Not research that hasn't been conducted yet.

I'm sure before the understanding of nuclear energy, everyone basically agreed the only forms of energy are the ones they are aware of. That's my point, theirs always more to discover. Just because that is what is known now doesn't mean that is all their is. Science thrives on finding the unknown, yet you do a disservice by claiming their could not be any potential forms of energy because it hasn't been discovered.

Years of researching can yield a lot and yield nothing, how many years have we been searching for a true cure to cancer? It's an infantile race syndrome to honestly think we truly understand all the building blocks and complexities of a neverending, constantly expanding universe that could someday stretch to far and bungee back where whence it came. The universe has been around for years a human could only imagine, to think we, after our short tenor of life to "UNDERSTAND" everything is maniacal. Time to rip down the chains, tear off the manacles that hold us back and just accept that in our search for everything we really know nothing.

The forces present in the universe don't depend on what technology we have. That is an irrelevant point.

You don't seem to understand what science is. We know some things but there are many things that we don't. Scientists don't pretend to know anything they don't. They tell you what they don't know. That is what science is all about, researching the things we don't know. I don't think we understand everything, in fact I know that we don't. No one would argue against that, it's an obvious point.

There are some thing however, that we are sure of. Scientists can build up their body of knowledge, and know some things to great degree of certainty. We know without a doubt that force is equal to mass times acceleration for example (unless you are travelling at a speed close the speed of light). Someone who disagreed with that point would not be taken seriously.

The fact that only four forces exist in the universe is not as commonly known as Newton's second law of motion, so people don't realise how ridiculous it is to disagree with it. Which is fair enough, I wouldn't expect everyone to know it. But once you find it out, then it IS silly to dismiss it or refute it.

Go read a physics text book. If you still don't believe it then you are disagreeing with the consensus of years of research by experts and there is absolutely no reasoning with you.

The forces present in the universe don't depend on what technology we have. But our ability to perceive and understand it is exponentially affected by our progress. Hundreds of years ago, half of our knowledge of how the world works would be viewed as insanity. Radio waves, Electricity, etc.. Seismic waves, or punishment from god?

"You don't seem to understand what science is." I've been told that only on these forums by so called science experts. What exactly did I say that showed you I don't understand science?

Discovering the unknown through the scientific method, is the most basic way to put it. Science is a very broad subject that can encompass many different things.. I understand science is in the search for what is unknown, not simply understand something and assume that is all their is to it. Which is why theories are very often invalidated, updated, or completely overhauled..

You said I don't understand science and then basically re-iterate what I just said.

The fact that only four forces exist in the universe is not as commonly known as Newton's second law of motion, so people don't realise how ridiculous it is to disagree with it. Which is fair enough, I wouldn't expect everyone to know it. But once you find it out, then it IS silly to dismiss it or refute it.

That is your opinion on the matter, I on the other hand find it silly to assume that the theory on physics is completely infallible and to contain everything relating to the subject matter.

Go read a physics text book. If you still don't believe it then you are disagreeing with the consensus of years of research by experts and there is absolutely no reasoning with you.

I guess I'll have to disagree with the consensus of years of research by experts. Or then again maybe I just leave wiggle room for error and updating.. Though their theory is quite good and full of some useful information, I highly doubt they truly understand everything even the energies that have been discovered.G et a time machine going, go back a hundred years and try telling everyone about Nuclear/atomic energy. And you can stop reasoning with me, doesn't bother me either way.

Fact's are different for me and you? What about you and what is scientific consensus?

Facts are not just something written in a book and researched by multiple people. People are corrupt, I'll trust my instincts.

Fact, I just stood up.
I don't need to run any experiment to prove to myself that I really did just that. To me that is fact.

If you need others to prove something to you, so be it. I'll trust myself. (I'll leave the scientific discoveries to people who find themselves on that path of life.)

Newtons laws in my opinion are lacking, they forget to take into account something pushing back on you the opposite direction.













I am everything, I am nothing.


BRAINBUSTER!!!! TIME!!!

Does Newtons second law of motion, still exist in a black hole?
Discuss.

P.S. I've dipped my head into many a subject, philosophical, mathematical, scientifical(I love inventing new words) and then my favorite language. I consider myself to be highly intelligent, regardless of your opinion on my knowledge or understanding of any subject. I am always open to change and new ideas, I despise tradition for the sake of a collective idea. I understand and read about science while constantly dismantling what is said and looking for alternate possibilities. I could be called a skeptic, I could be called a believer.

Has anyone of you ever heard of Schrödingers cat?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat

The thought here might be a bit difficult to understand, so I give an easier example:

I have a cat, a steel box where I can't see inside as soon as I shut it and a highly radioactive material.
If I put the cat into the box, then the radioactive material and then close the box. As I open the box again after some time, the cat is dead. When do you think did the cat die? As soon as the box was closed? Sometime while the box was shut? I say the cat died just as I opened the box. Prove me wrong

Originally Posted by ShadowmanX

Has anyone of you ever heard of Schr&#246;dingers cat?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr&#37;C3%B6dinger%27s_cat

The thought here might be a bit difficult to understand, so I give an easier example:

I have a cat, a steel box where I can't see inside as soon as I shut it and a highly radioactive material.
If I put the cat into the box, then the radioactive material and then close the box. As I open the box again after some time, the cat is dead. When do you think did the cat die? As soon as the box was closed? Sometime while the box was shut? I say the cat died just as I opened the box. Prove me wrong

That's not how it's done and that's not the point of the Schr&#246;dinger's cat thought experiment. Re-red the link you posted.

By the way, why are you still around here liar?




DeathCell, you're not making any sense.

That there are 4 fundamental forces is a fact, because they explain every interaction between matter.

You're saying that on other parts of the universe there may exist other forces, but that's completely irrelevant because there's no humans there to perform the supposed supernatural abilities.

If you want to stupidly assume the laws of physics vary across space, fine. But the fact is that everywhere man has been, no new forces or unexplainable interactions have been observed/detected.

To quote Sagan: "What counts is not what sounds plausible, not what we'd like to believe, not what one or two witnesses claim, but only what is supported by hard evidence, rigorously and skeptically examined. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Originally Posted by jatoo

You keep asking that. Oddly enough, I haven't. It's really beside the point though. This is something which is known by physicists from the research they have done. It is widely agreed upon by physicists throughout the world. If you are willing to dismiss the vast body of scientific knowledge which has come from years of research by hundreds of highly qualified experts, and just go by what you reckon then there really is no reasoning with you and it's pointless debating anything with you at all.

You don't need to travel "billions of miles" to know things about the universe. There's an awful lot scientists can work out from right here on earth.

Fact's are different for me and you? What about you and what is scientific consensus?



The forces present in the universe don't depend on what technology we have. That is an irrelevant point.

You don't seem to understand what science is. We know some things but there are many things that we don't. Scientists don't pretend to know anything they don't. They tell you what they don't know. That is what science is all about, researching the things we don't know. I don't think we understand everything, in fact I know that we don't. No one would argue against that, it's an obvious point.

There are some thing however, that we are sure of. Scientists can build up their body of knowledge, and know some things to great degree of certainty. We know without a doubt that force is equal to mass times acceleration for example (unless you are travelling at a speed close the speed of light). Someone who disagreed with that point would not be taken seriously.

The fact that only four forces exist in the universe is not as commonly known as Newton's second law of motion, so people don't realise how ridiculous it is to disagree with it. Which is fair enough, I wouldn't expect everyone to know it. But once you find it out, then it IS silly to dismiss it or refute it.

Go read a physics text book. If you still don't believe it then you are disagreeing with the consensus of years of research by experts and there is absolutely no reasoning with you.



You asked for a source. That's not just "someones blog". It belongs to someone who is a doctor of medicine and an expert in neurology. There's your source.

jatoo

Not taking any sides here or anything but do you not think its a bit narrow minded to think scientists know everything about energy and dimensions etc... it is quite a good point that we havn't travelled billions of miles and we dont even know where or if the universe ends..... How can anyone conceivably know for certain... its all theories... and taking them as total fact is a bit narrow minded dont you think?

DeathCell, you're not making any sense.

That there are 4 fundamental forces is a fact, because they explain every interaction between matter.

You're saying that on other parts of the universe there may exist other forces, but that's completely irrelevant because there's no humans there to perform the supposed supernatural abilities.

If you want to stupidly assume the laws of physics vary across space, fine. But the fact is that everywhere man has been, no new forces or unexplainable interactions have been observed/detected.

To quote Sagan: "What counts is not what sounds plausible, not what we'd like to believe, not what one or two witnesses claim, but only what is supported by hard evidence, rigorously and skeptically examined. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

I make plenty of sense, I never claim to know for a fact that more exist nor do I claim that four is really the only forces.

I find it silly to assume we understand everything about physics, when physics is such a recent study, we only recently understood how nuclear energy worked...(Recent means 50 + years to me)

I stupidly assume the laws of physics vary across the universe? Apart from your lame potshot, the universe is unbelievably big and half of the shit we see out in the stars is simply by telescope it would take multiple life times to even travel those distances.

That is my point, you can live in your bubble where once a theory is made that it is set in stone and unable to believe that something else might exist out their.

You know what really doesn't count, close-minded thinking. It leads to undiscovery.

You assume that I claim something, all I claim is the possibility... So Mr. Sagan and his quote can stay in your brain.