666...the Devils Moving Average

Shoeshine,

You commented that scientists wont even bother touching something like after death experiences with a 10 foot pole.

This is patently false.

MANY researches have studied the paranormal. But I have yet to see any studies that have provided solid evidence of anything paranormal. Some researchers have studied this for years, and then give up. I wonder why? :D

I myself took a paranormal psychology course in college and studied many many of the cases.

I even did my own experiments with almost everything you could think of.

Automatic handwriting, soul traveling, witchcraft, ouji boards, remote viewing... you name it... I probably dabbled in it.

I set up my own controlled experiments with friends or anyone who claimed they had any kind of paranormal ability.

Know what I came up with? Nada. Zippo. Ziltch.

My experiences matched what I saw in the data collected by other researchers. Zippo. The big fat ZERO.


Claiming that scientists won't even LOOK at this stuff is simply an excuse and a falsehood.


Sure, you can always find some closeminded scientists, but there are plenty of others willing to try.

I have yet to see any succeed with an experiment that can be replicated.

What paranormal experiments have you personally tried?

peace

axeman
 
"In additon, Axe you are always saying....PROVE IT...well I just gave you an example of sombody who levitates and has been video taped and does it in public.....Do you believe that David Blain can levitate??"


Of course not. Do you???

Thanks for bringing up my next point.

If an EYE WITNESS, video taped account, of a man levitating, on it's own, cannot be considered definitive evidence of the supernatural, THEN HOW, can a bunch of STORIES of eye witness accounts be accepted as true when it comes to Jesus?

Answer: THEY CANT BE.

I've used similar examples in past arguments.

If 50,000 people see Benny Hin HEAL someone on stage with their very own eyes, does this provide absolute PROOF that he has healing powers given to him by god? Of course not.


You just made my case that much stronger. People can easily be FOOLED by people.


David Blaine is an illusionist. He would probably freely admit this is an illusion, like many illusionists do.

The fact that what he does DEFIES our scientific and accumulated knowledge of the universe, is PRECISELY what makes this extraordinary. And we already know that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In this case, levitation is so extraordinary, that not even eye witnesses or a VIDEO TAPE is sufficient evidence to claim that he can in fact levitate.

This shows the complete double standard and hypocrisy of religion.

God - the greatest extraordinary claim imaginable, is forced upon us with a simple book of fairy tales.

What could be more absurd?

peace

axeman
 
Quote from stu:

Genesis has been exposed as NOT any of the things you stridently insisted it was. It does not match any comprehendable record of any kind. You simply saying it does will not make it so.

Go back and read what you posted on the subject! It is just bordering on the dishonest to wash your hands of all that by waving it away with "..I may have been off by a verse".

You see, this for me sums up the whole lack of integrity and honesty, enthusiastically encouraged by such nonsense bandied and thrown around by so called "theists".

The plain and simple fact is Genesis does not stand up to any straight forward honest understandings whatsoever, it has been shown not to . You must blindly accept all its obvious ridiculousness without any questions in any shape or form, for what purpose? There are far better fairy stories around if you are prepared to give up your rationality in that way.

When Genesis sounds like this....

Genesis 2: And the religions of the earth are without form, and void; and darkness is upon the face of them all. And the Spirit of Reason moved upon the coherence of the apologists and cleansed them all of their nonsense.

....it will start to make some sense at least in verse 2.
More...
This is getting too weird for me. I cannot see even one thing wrong with the interpretation that I posed below on p. 19:

1. Creation of the physical universe. (1:1)
2. Transformation of the earth's atmosphere from opaque to translucent. (1:3)
3. Formation of a stable water cycle. (1:7)
4. Establishment of continents/oceans. (1:9)
5. Transformation of the atmosphere from translucent to transparent, i.e. sun, moon and stars became visible on the earth for the first time. (1:14-16)
6. Production of small sea animals. (1:20)
7. Creation of sea mammals (nephesh as gms likes to point out). (1:21)
8. Creation of birds.
9. Making of land animals (nephesh). (1:24)
10. Creation of man. (1:26)

Yet you clearly seem to think I am from another planet. I guess we're going to have to just agree to disagree.

If nothing else, it's interesting to see how two people with different paradigms can see things so drastically diametrically opposite.
 
Uhmmm Axe, they didn't even have light bulbs at the time of jesus yet you are demanding video proof??? make sense...

re: Blain.....So even if you SAW him you would not believe because you have already decided it is impossible...so you are biased and no matter how much proff you are presented with , you are not going to beleive so its pointless to continue....you cliam to want proof but you have to admit you have preconcieved ideas of what is the natural laws of earth....so if you were shown a miracle, you will always find a reason or answere for it ...even if there is none...unless im not understanding your rationale...to sum it up....If Blain Levitated right in front of you and you saw it and could check out his legs and everything else...youprobably would remain skeptical correct?
 
Quote from axeman:

LOL...exactly.

Can you think of ANYTHING more easily proved or disproved than self levitation?

Yet we have ZERO evidence of it. Just claims.

How about a video tape? It would be SOOOO easy.... I mean COME ON! :D

And no.... hopping around the floor with legs crossed in NOT levitating.

No semantic games here. I want to see someone hover above the ground longer than Michael Jordan can stay in the air after a big jump :D

peace

axeman
More...
Puh-leez! That was just a joke to make a point!

The normal person that I know has one to maybe a dozen supernatural experiences in their lifetime that cannot be explained by natural means. Are the 5 billion persons on this earth that have had such experiences supposed to walk around with a camera strapped to the side of our heads? Be reasonable.

You have to use the camera you were born with: your eyes. And it ain't gonna happen as long as you don't seek it out. (I'm not of course encouraging you to seek the dark side of the spiritual realm. My point is simply that these things always occur by seeking or in some cases if the family has a history in spritual involvement.)

But just forget I said anything: I keep forgetting that you guys have a complete understanding of all spirtual, scientific and psychological truth and that anything else is a silly myth...
 
This site is quite funny. They claw around looking for any little excuse to dismiss the science that has already been done which proved them wrong.

The newer thread or gum arabic, or some combination of the two, may be enough to skew the date by enough centuries to make the Shroud a first century cloth. There is no way to calculate a revised age from the test records. Because carbon 14 testing destroys the samples, there is also no way to redo the tests. It is also unlikely – and reasonable – to doubt that the Vatican would allow new carbon 14 tests unless a clear, failsafe, and non-controversial testing protocol can be established. That is unlikely in the foreseeable future. But the clear evidence of substantial contamination is enough to call the carbon 14 results into question. They can no longer be thought of as definitive.


They claim the fiber was contaminated :D however we know that.....

The notion that contamination could alter the carbon date from the first to the fourteenth century is "ludicrous," McCrone says, adding: "A simple calculation shows that a weight of modern biological material necessary to raise the shroud date 1300 years would weigh twice as much as the shroud by itself."


Then they claim it is unlikely the church will ALLOW a NEW carbon test on the shroud because it will destroy some of the material.

Well no shit. I wouldn't want to be debunked a second time either :D

Their whole case rests on speculation.
The hard science proves it's a hoax.
The fact is, they got carbon tested, and they failed.


"On public television, the head of one of the laboratories that performed the carbon 14 testing suggested that anyone who did not believe the test results ought to belong to the "flat earth society." Given what we now know, it is not otherwise. "

Hehehe... exactly.


From the first article:

The Turin cloth first appeared in north-central France in the mid-fourteenth century. At that time the local bishop uncovered an artist who confessed he had “cunningly painted” the image. Subsequently, in 1389, Pope Clement VII officially declared the shroud to be only a painted “representation.”

Well gee... even the church dismissed it!!!

These findings are mutually supportive. The tempera paint indicates the image is the work of an artist, which in turn is supported by the bishop’s claim that an artist confessed, as well as by the prior lack of historical record. The radiocarbon date is consistent with the time of the reported artist’s confession. And so on.

The carbon dating matches the time of the confession documented by the church!!!


It's a hoax.


peace

axeman


Quote from TM_Direct:

Here...read this...science has once again proved its as bias as any religion.....the scientist in this even disagree wiht the carbo dating as i stated earlier.....Im not saying one way or another....Im saying NOBODY knows for sure...


http://www.shroudstory.com/
More...
 
Carbo 14 is what you are basing this on and this alone?????

How reliable is carbon 14 testing??????? also, read the WHOLE article.....the 'prankster' would have had to know that Kodak was going to invent a camera in 500 years....He also some how got the 3d image......and more importantly they have been unable to duplicate this prank.....as far as another C-14 test....there have been several and this web site is behind...NASA has a piece right now...the problem is the each want to take a chunk ( I inch by I inch).....this is a sacred garment and how many chunks are going to be taken.??


http://www.shroudstory.com/vp8.htm


Scientists using infrared, ultraviolet, X-ray fluorescence, and microchemistry analysis have clearly demonstrated that pigments, paints, dyes or any form of liquid or solid colorant are not used to create the image. There is no evidence of capillary action between fibers and no soaking in of any kind in the image area. In fact, it has been shown that the image is a direct result of a chemical change to the fiber -- dehydration and oxidation of the cellulose. Though chemical agents, such as acids, could alter the chemistry of the fiber, the lack of any capillary action and the abrupt delineation between image and non-image areas in individual fibers preclude this as a reasonable possibility.

The image is a 3-dimensional map in negative. This is totally uncharacteristic of any art form. To create the image, an artist would have needed to "apply" microscopic dots or pixels to the linen in a single color. Areas closer to the observer such as the tip of the nose would have required more pixels (or longer pixels along a fiber's length). Areas that are recessed such as the back of the knees would have required few or no pixels.

The image is anatomically consistent, to a modern day pathologist with 20th and 21st century technology, with someone who had been traumatized by scouring, wounded in the scalp as if by a cap or crown of thorns, and crucified. Death seems to have been by asphyxiation which is probable. The blood stains showing both artery and vein flow are pathologically correct. No medieval or pre-medieval artist would have had the knowledge to create such an image.

The image does not exist below blood stains. An artist would have needed to apply real blood first anticipating the exact placement of the image or to have created the image with reserved areas for the blood stains. The very idea of an artist doing so is preposterous.

Dr. Walter McCrone, for a time a member of STURP, examined some of the sticky tape samples and found particles of iron oxide, cinnabar and a thin film on some of the fibers which he determined to be a binder for paint. He concluded that this was adequate evidence to declare that the Shroud was a painting. More specific research by others, including Dr. Alan Adler, demonstrated that there were insufficient amounts of any iron oxide, cinnabar or any other artist pigment in the image areas to cause any visible image. That there were some particles of paint can probably be
explained as contaminants. As Dr. Adler stated: "He simply has never accepted the work of other investigators showing this was a hasty judgment on his part and that his observations have alternate interpretations." Ian Wilson has suggested that the thin film McCrone discovered, in fact, may be the same as the bioplastic coating discovered by
Dr. Garza-Valdez and not a binder.

 
You confuse the issues here.

1) I do not demand video proof of jesus.
I'm simply pointing out the fact that video proof of miracles IS NOT ENOUGH on it's own. Your Blaine example proves this.

2) If I saw Blaine levitate in front of me, NO I would NOT believe it on that ALONE. You would be a complete FOOL to believe in levitation just because you see it. ESPECIALLY since we know magicians do this ALL THE TIME in front of audiences.

FURTHER research and experimentation would be required to determine if he is really levitating.

If I got the Amazing Randi and his team of scientists to research Blaine's levitation, and they did what I considered a good job, and CONCLUDED that blaine was in FACT levitating. THEN I WOULD BELIEVE.

Anything less would be foolish.

Yet, this is exactly what religious people do. Did it ever occur to you that if Jesus existed, that MAYBE he was just a magician that easily fooled primitive people?

Surely, if we took a modern day Blaine and took him back in time, he would have nearly EVERYONE convinced that he had supernatural powers! But he doesn't. :D


This clearly shows how completely lacking peoples critical thinking and science skills truly are.

They are unaware of a good method of determining the truth when it comes to matters like these.


peace

axeman



Quote from TM_Direct:

Uhmmm Axe, they didn't even have light bulbs at the time of jesus yet you are demanding video proof??? make sense...

re: Blain.....So even if you SAW him you would not believe because you have already decided it is impossible...so you are biased and no matter how much proff you are presented with , you are not going to beleive so its pointless to continue....you cliam to want proof but you have to admit you have preconcieved ideas of what is the natural laws of earth....so if you were shown a miracle, you will always find a reason or answere for it ...even if there is none...unless im not understanding your rationale...to sum it up....If Blain Levitated right in front of you and you saw it and could check out his legs and everything else...youprobably would remain skeptical correct?
More...
 
The normal person?

I've NEVER had a supernatural experience, I must be very abnormal. In fact, none of my closest friends have made such claims either. Hmmmmmm..

By your logic, if many experience something, it must be true.

I guess magicians can really fly, and make the statue of liberty disappear because a BUNCH of people witnessed it?

Your WAY off base here.

You need to go back and reread my post. I ACTIVELY sought out the supernatural in my lifetime, and probably far more than the average person. I studied it for several years and ran actual experiments.

I found NADA. If it is SOOOO common, why could I not easily prove it?

Because what people BELIEVE they saw, or happened, is not necessarily what ACTUALLY happened.

I will explain a failed ouji board experiment if you wish.

I know I can convince MOST people that ouji boards really work. Then I can convince them why they are not supernatural.



peace

axeman




Quote from ShoeshineBoy:


Puh-leez! That was just a joke to make a point!

The normal person that I know has one to maybe a dozen supernatural experiences in their lifetime that cannot be explained by natural means. Are the 5 billion persons on this earth that have had such experiences supposed to walk around with a camera strapped to the side of our heads? Be reasonable.

You have to use the camera you were born with: your eyes. And it ain't gonna happen as long as you don't seek it out. (I'm not of course encouraging you to seek the dark side of the spiritual realm. My point is simply that these things always occur by seeking or in some cases if the family has a history in spritual involvement.)

But just forget I said anything: I keep forgetting that you guys have a complete understanding of all spirtual, scientific and psychological truth and that anything else is a silly myth...
More...
 
Quote from axeman:

You confuse the issues here.

1) I do not demand video proof of jesus.
I'm simply pointing out the fact that video proof of miracles IS NOT ENOUGH on it's own. Your Blaine example proves this.

2) If I saw Blaine levitate in front of me, NO I would NOT believe it on that ALONE. You would be a complete FOOL to believe in levitation just because you see it. ESPECIALLY since we know magicians do this ALL THE TIME in front of audiences.

FURTHER research and experimentation would be required to determine if he is really levitating.

If I got the Amazing Randi and his team of scientists to research Blaine's levitation, and they did what I considered a good job, and CONCLUDED that blaine was in FACT levitating. THEN I WOULD BELIEVE.

Anything less would be foolish.

Yet, this is exactly what religious people do. Did it ever occur to you that if Jesus existed, that MAYBE he was just a magician that easily fooled primitive people?

Surely, if we took a modern day Blaine and took him back in time, he would have nearly EVERYONE convinced that he had supernatural powers! But he doesn't. :D


This clearly shows how completely lacking peoples critical thinking and science skills truly are.

They are unaware of a good method of determining the truth when it comes to matters like these.


peace

axeman
More...



Have you ever seen a million dollars?????? do you accept it exists?
We have countless case after case of Science being wrong......yet even if you saw something with your own eyes ....you want to rely on flawed science to tell you what to believe......seems to me like you have a God of your own but don't even know it... you follow blindly what 'Science ' tells you.....you could see and touch and know the truth your self, but as you said you would wait until the team of Scientists told you it was true.....Thats very similar to our religion....Jesus once said Blessed are those who have not seen but believe.....see you in church on sunday Axe???:D

well this has been great and you all put forth super arguments but im off for a little Biz trip to Ft. Lauderdale....don't let me down Axe...Im expecting to come back on Friday and see a well thought out and insiteful response to my last post:)
peace
tm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top