« Grace & mercy or cause & effect? | Main | Another RSSB initiate bites the dust »

November 25, 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

brian: I dont think we can ever know what knowledge we can attain at some future date.

lots of well intentioned very well educated people claimed flight as we know it today was impossible.

even on this blog when I introduce some information that is outside the bloggers paradigm they state such things as it is impossible and can even get nasty about it. and of course claim to understand the scientific method and science.

it is not about accepting the information it is the certainty of the rejection that displays these closed minds in action.

how can anyone know what we can or cannot know?

as far as paul davies I have read his books and he is a materialist at heart and believes that cosciousness survives only in the brain.

but the world and life is so complex he doubts that we exist just do to chance.

another materialist physics phd that refuses to look at the evidence of consciousness surviving outside the brain.

again having a phd is no guarantee of a person understanding the scientific method.

nothing should be off limits to science but most scientists make everything off limits that does not agree with their materialistic paradigm.

hey he is doing something right he has been hired for big bucks at the largest university in america.

of course stanford just hired rummy and about to hire condi. those two have been so successful in government I could see how a university would want them to teach their students. got to love those elitist's schools and thier hiring practices.

Hi Brian:

Actually, I have read the book and I think you might find it a very fun read.

Indeed, even while parts of it are highly speculative.... it raises all sorts of intriguing questions, including the idea of a fake universe, etc.

I think the reviews are misleading, given how he quite honestly summarizes varying positions and possibilties.

“In January 1905, more than a year after the Wrights had first flown, Scientific American carried an article ridiculing the 'alleged' flights that the Wrights claimed to have made. Without a trace of irony, the magazine gave as its main reason for not believing the Wrights the fact that the American press had failed to write anything about them.”

http://www.alternativescience.com/skeptics.htm

Interesting website about the wisdom of scientists that accept the prevailing scientific paradigms as fact and how most scientists cannot see outside this existing accepted paradigm. The head of the patent office in 1899 went before congress and stated the patent office should be shut down because everything that can be invented has been invented so no need for a patent office.

When it comes to the paranormal the scientific American is still in a state of accepting the existing paradigm of materialism.

Dave, I should buy the book and read it. I've no doubt that Davies discusses intriguing possibilities.

My point is just that so does religion. And philosophies of all sorts. There's a point where Mystery begins, and human experience can't enter.

I'm attracted to that point, as scary as it is (death and mystery are brothers). But I don't believe it's possible to go over the edge into Mystery and come back again.

Davies considers that science can fathom ultimate whys and wherefores of the laws of nature. That would require a god's-eye perspective.

Existence exists. In my opinion we get to a point where that's all that can be said. Which is fine by me, now that I'm in my churchless years.

brian may want to check out this site as it is not an NDE but an OBE in a univeristy lab condition that a women was able to leave her body and read a 5 digit number correctly in another room.

http://www.near-death.com/tart.html

one does not have to look at all the crows in the world to see if a crow can be white but only find one white crow to validate that a crow can be white.

this may be the white crow.

upon further review of this OBE we cannot rule out telepathy as the professor knew the 5 digit number. this experiment was done years ago. a random generator would have been a nice touch to rule out telepathy.
I do like his discription between the difference between science and scientism.

for the most part what I see in the world is scientism defending its materialistic paradigm.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Welcome


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.