lol, thanks Joseph.
You really should practice what you preach on being decent towards people. I don't elude treating people poorly because of fear of where I will go after my energy leaves this vessel, it simply feels right to me to treat people kindly. On this matter the golden rule reigns supreme above all, "Treat others the way you would want to be treated" That saying above your picture of a revolver aiming at an eye seems to explain a lot about your character.
Way to go off topic and personal.
The signature relates to this game and the "persona" I played ingame. It is, after all, a game about shooting people, besieging forts, and robbing trains... doh!
As to real life, you clearly don't know me. I'm not going to bother listing the things I've done, the charities I've worked with, the people I've helped. In short, I'm real and this isn't a pissing contest. But, if it were, i'm quite confident I would wet more cookies.
Hehe there is far more to it than that as much as youd not like there to be. Governments have spent billions on this and its likely they wouldnt have if it were simple mumbo jumbo.
Would you care to present evidence to support your assertions? Maybe even a few of those checks you claim the government spent on researching this?
I don't pretend to understand it but then again nor do you my learned friend and neither do the scientists, yet it works regardless.
Actually, yes I do, at least as it pertains to quantum mechanics. The problem with quantum mechanics is that it is not intuitive, which I explained elsewhere. The other problem is that there are a multitude of hucksters out there making the same claims you just did, except doing so for profit, and having absolutely no actual background in physics.
Quantum mechanics is taught on or about the 6th year of university studies. It requires ample basis in study of math and physics to comprehend, let alone obtain sufficient comprehension to be able to communicate it to others. And yet there's these people out there, with parapsychology degrees and less, claiming "remote viewing" and other things are possible based on quantum mechanics. But, in truth, that's just a load of stink. It's absolute fabrication and an attempt by these hucksters to grab something they don't understand and apply it to things they do. Wala, magic!
Quantum mechanics is real, it's factual, it's tested and theorized in some areas. But quantum mechanics is a study on a subatomic level and is inapplicable on an atomic or super-atomic level. Attempting to make that leap is just plain dead wrong.
If you want, you can start a new thread on quantum mechanics and I could bore the crap out of you.
I found it amusing and entertaining which is why i threw it into the discussion and don't take it seriously but you obviously did enough to buy his book, whos the mug ?
Ah, I see, you're applying the
"throw everything and see what sticks" principle. How about posing the,
"here's evidence to substantiate my arguments" principle?
ahh but im not talking just about chemical changes and imbalances affecting things they can interact with directly, it's really ok if your not comfortable with alternative science and im sure the quantum and metaphysical areas upset your paradigm just as they did Einstein.
Let's get one thing clear. Quantum mechanics and metaphysics have absolutely nothing in common. Quantum mechanics is a fact-based scientific study, dependent upon a tremendous amount of math and computation. Metaphysics is a study in mental masturbation, with no actual valid studies, nor any computations. An appropriate definition for metaphysics would be,
"everything that isn't physics." I.e., leprechauns.
Yet he has been proven wrong and ive no doubt many other things thought of as scientific fact and white papers also will follow down the toilet.
Once again demonstrating a complete lack of comprehension on how the scientific community works. We work on the principle of, shall I say aspire to, being proven wrong. Nevertheless, Einstein has been not been proven "wrong" on many of his theories and some of them have been adopted as scientific laws, which in itself is an amazing feat. Of those theories in which errors were found, or in-applicability, additional studies based on his work were performed and greater insight was obtained. Do remember, Einstein's most influential work was almost a hundred years ago and he's been deceased now for over 50 years. Since then, we've developed biological and particle transistors, confirmed the existence of the higgs-boson, and performed quantum teleportation (entanglement-assisted), all of which I'm sure you have no understanding. Which is why it all sounds like "magic" to you and thus you and others proscribe fabricated notions alongside factual and evidence scientific principles that go right over your head.
Ah well... goes right back to that other debate about magic.
As much as religious dogma enslaves many the arrogance of demanding scientific evidence on something not even understood is naive.
But that's not the case here and your argument is invalidated by the mere effort you made to superimpose one argument over another.
Meh, let's try it this way. You cannot research something that does not exist. The hucksters have repeatedly, and for centuries, always tied it to the latest sciences. Back in the 1800's, they tied it to electricity and created contraptions to "identify" electrical impulses from "souls." Later, when it was identified there is an electromagnetic field surrounding people, they created contraptions to "identify" the soul disparate from the body. Now, the latest is to try and relate quantum physics to souls. Lucky for us it's a bit harder to create hadron colliders to identify "souls."
Believe whatever you want, but there is no evidence, there aren't even confirmations of instances. Watch Ghost Hunters on SyFy if you want see how hucksters ploy their craft.
Science pretends often to have all the answers once theres been a few papers and findings but this isnt strictly true, especially in the medical world.
Once again, an ignorant statement. Science is not an entity. Scientists are human beings and while there may on occasion present a pretentious scientist, the mere structure of the scientific community serves to ensure all valid studies are peer-reviewed. The scientific community thrives on proving each other wrong. Why? Because if you can't, then there's something new and fantastic to contemplate. Science is about finding questions, not about posing answers. Posing answers is the garden of religious zealots, tricksters, and engineers.
Yet youd be hard pushed to notice with the amount of false papers, findings and trials that are massaged to show what they wish.
You would be hard-pressed to present evidence to assert your claim. If papers and articles are not peer-reviewed, they aren't coming from the scientific community, they're coming from the hucksters. Your chore, as a lay person, is learning how to differentiate. An example of non-peer reviewed hucksterism would be that "snowflake" study.
You cant treat an illness successfully without scientific based drugs right ? wrong ...
Actually, right. There are a multitude of herbs that have been studied ages ago, by what was deemed scientists of the time. These herbs do work. You fail to understand that modern science has been able to identify and extract the beneficial properties of herbs, chemicals, etc and make them more effective, or more concentrated.
But yes, there are people who think standing still and chanting, "go away cancer" is going to work. And, when their cancer does go away, they attribute it to their chanting, rather than perhaps the cancer not being terminal (not all cancers are, even without treatment).
Scientifically produced Anti depressants are much more effective than a placebo right ? wrong
The field of psychiatry is the field of studying various drugs and seeing whether they produce any results. It's basically the study of pharmacology centered on mental disorders. For all intensive purposes, it's not a science. As to depression, you demonstrate the common misnomer. Depression is a symptom, not a cause. Determination of the causation is the first step to treatment.
You can't heal chronic arthritis simply by the patient believing they have had an operation yet nothing has been done, thats just mumbo jumbo right ? wrong
And here you demonstrate lack of knowledge on what is arthritis. There are different kinds of arthritis. Arthritis that results in the physical deterioration of the bone does not heal itself. Arthritis that results in inflammation of a joint can heal over time without medical intervention.
Belief is a huge part of how we influence ourselves, the medical world is slowly waking up to this fact, there is no reason to suppose it cannot affect the world around us.
Umm, the medical world is not comprised of scientists, it's comprised of technicians. You should really get your arguments straight...
What has this to do with the soul ? well nothing more than its just another wonder of what the human machine is possibly capable of and science dosnt even scratch the surface.
Thank you for pointing out what is abundantly obvious to anyone else who bothered to read your statements. You're way off topic. We could have a debate on each of those things separately, and they would have absolutely nothing to do with "souls."
The point is science has no answer for these anomalies but they exist, if you look closely there are plenty in the scientific community engaged on all kinds of research of what you would consider the kooky kind, nevertheless scientists far more intelligent than either you or I do so.
Once again, present evidence to your assertions. To stay on topic, present evidence to the assertion that legitimate scientists are researching "souls."
The truth is you do not have a clue anymore than I or anyone else does, youd like to believe you do but then again thats just another belief and no more real than a priest believing in god. The difference is that I don't fret about it nor have I replaced religion with science as a stick to try and beat people with.
lol, I came onto this thread asking,
"who cares?"
You claim not to fret about it, but indeed
"fretting about it" is exactly what you did.