Trembler49
Veteran
Know what you mean. It's annoying when these killjoys try to spoil all the fun.
Sorry, I can't work out whether you are agreeing with me, being patronising, or just showing how much cleverer you are than me!
Know what you mean. It's annoying when these killjoys try to spoil all the fun.
It bothers me that the scientific types are so bothered by the possibility that anything that can't be rigorously proved could possibly exist.
Quantum physics seems to suggest that anything is possible.
Either way, its the dogmatism that's the problem for me. If you believe in ghosts, so what, that's your prerogative.
That's my feeling. I'm agnostic, so to speak. I find rampant atheism, like Dawkins, as crazy as blind faith. You can't prove either way.
We were talking at work the other day and someone mentioned a friend who was a scientist and a Christian, and saying they found it hard to understand. But I can see how someone can want to see how creation works, while believing it was the work of an entity. Like wanting to understand how a clock works, though you know someone made it.
That's ridiculous.
That's my feeling. I'm agnostic, so to speak. I find rampant atheism, like Dawkins, as crazy as blind faith. You can't prove either way.
We were talking at work the other day and someone mentioned a friend who was a scientist and a Christian, and saying they found it hard to understand. But I can see how someone can want to see how creation works, while believing it was the work of an entity. Like wanting to understand how a clock works, though you know someone made it.
This is drivel, and a total misunderstanding of the scientific method.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
Otherwise you must accept any old bollocks as plausible, as it's impossible to prove a negative.
There is no reliable evidence that there is any supernatural phenomena, ghosts or otherwise. Until there is such evidence, we can safely file them along with alien abductions and psychokinesis in the "implausible and unproven" category and ignore them.
It bothers me that the scientific types are so bothered by the possibility that anything that can't be rigorously proved could possibly exist.
Quantum physics seems to suggest that anything is possible.
Either way, its the dogmatism that's the problem for me. If you believe in ghosts, so what, that's your prerogative.
It bothers me that the scientific types are so bothered by the possibility that anything that can't be rigorously proved could possibly exist.
Quantum physics seems to suggest that anything is possible.
Either way, its the dogmatism that's the problem for me.
That's fine, but let's not pretend that there is any reliable evidence suggesting they (or indeed any paranormal phenomena) exist.If you believe in ghosts, so what, that's your prerogative.
I thought that Christianity positively flies in the face of wanting to know how the universe really works. How does the Christain scientist rationalise eg the real age of the universe vs the 6000 years as per the bible, or evolution vs big man in the sky making a woman from ribs or the impossibility of an unfertilised human egg developing into a baby?