i am certainly allowed to ignore stupid witnesses. it takes more than a couple witnesses to convince me that the laws of physics, which hae stood for all of history, unviolated for billion of years, have suddenly been trashed and a person is levitating or walking on water. perhaps we could have a witness try a couple trillion times to levitate, see if it works? that would be some decent evidence eh? again, you dont seem to be listening. if you are willing to accept testimony as fact, then why do you not believe in alien abduction or bigfoot or any number of other things? can you answer that? there are virtually infinite things that many, many people report seeing that definitely do not exist. how have you sorted that out if you are so damn eager to listen to people's lies?
thats actually not true and there are a decent amount of people in prison that are innocent. almost all of them are there because of miserable eyewitness testimony. eyewitness testimony is absolute ****. seriously, it is terrible. nobody has any clue what they have seen and they are miserable at remembering what they saw. the unfortunate thing is that we cant do much about it. not sure why of these statements: 1. eyewitnesses are not particularly reliable 2. a person or thing has wizard powers that mysteriously cant be observed in any sort of scientific context. you find number 2 to be more likely. the reason is that you are delusional. but dont sweat it dude, most people are delusional.
Nor does it require any additional evidence to be wrong. Whatever is your point? One does not. I am not a court of law and this court business is a smokescreen. Courts seek to reach a decision involving a dispute. They do not produce truth. How many experts do you think have testified in court that the supernatural does not exist? Do you accept that they must be true? I mean . . . they testified, after all. Simply accepting peoples claims of demonic possession has never been acceptable evidence of the existence of demons. Not one disbeliever has ever been possessed by demons. Why do you think that is? Bullchit. If I'm a juryman, I can accept or dismiss any testimony based on its credibility because there is always contrary testimony. It what juries do, its why they exist. Are you kidding? Overwhelming testimony is still testimony, with all of its weaknesses. How many criminals do you think get away with testifying that "the devil made them do it" or "a supernatural power actually robbed the bank". No I don't, I just have to convince the jury that they are not credible. I could produce witnesses that testify to the contrary, I could produce experts testifying to the scientific alternative explanations. I could emphasize the physical evidence that does not exist. I only need make the reasonable doubt obvious. You are really caught up in this fantasy, but you are totally wrong. A psychiatrist is not an expert on the supernatural. He testified to his religious beliefs. I have no trouble at all documenting the existence of Katmandu through multiple lines of evidence. If I have to, I actually can go there and see for myself. When you can go to the supernatural world and bring me back a demon or get God to go on Larry King and set us all straight, then that would impress me. Which begs the question . . . why does a diety need to remain mysterious, supernatural, and incommunicado? Why let 2,000 religions exists that all contradict each other? Why allow billions of non-believers to disbelieve? Could it be that if God exists, we have no way of knowing it or what he expects from us, if anything? Yes, but its right on top of your head. :hihi: I do not maintain this, I maintain that somebody, anybody in the history of the planet must have evidence of it. Else it remains simply an intriguing concept. This is the way of the world, its not my system. Incredible statements receive little credibility. There is a reason for this and you should think about it. I have not demanded this. It is a straw man. I demand only evidence and I do not have to accept testimony that I think is not credible. Another erroneous conclusion, based on conjecture and using a sample size of zero. Podnuh, you and I have very different ideas about what erroneous decision making is.
Red: It's not a fantasy. Its an event that was documented. And the psychiatrist is an expert on mental illness. His judgement was that this was not a manifestation of mental illness. I am only aware of two explanations for cases like this, either possession or mental illness. If you have a third, let me know. But the actions that took place are unexplainable according to natural laws. You have to then determine that there is a supernatural element that caused the event. There is no other logical conclusion. As far as the fantasy comment, if you mean the courtroom thing....well, look I just couldn't come up with any other process. Do you have a better suggestion? martin: -the fact that people cannot defy the laws of physics is exactly the point I agree with you on. People cannot so if it happens then how do you explain it? That is the evidence that the supernatual exists. The laws of physics themselves are what lead me to believe the supernatural acted on the natural world. -the fact that you cannot walk on water doesn't mean that the Son of God couldn't. The question is only whether there was in fact a man here that was the Son of God. -as far as how do you determine what to believe and not believe, that's a good question. I don't believe in aliens so I think the abductions are either crap or hallucinations or some demonic manifestation to confuse people. I certainly don't believe that aliens exist in the natural world. I think we are alone in the universe as far as life goes. Bigfoot? Know nothing about it and really don't care....just doesn't seem very interesting to me. Red: This is an absurd thing to request. I don't know of any murders that have taken place in a fair and open evalutation subject to observation by serious critics. Murders do exist though. People been doin' that for years, now. Your requirements for existence can only be extended to natural process, not questions of Will. Maybe thats where you are running into a stumbling block.....just a thought, but questions of Will cannot be subject to the scientific method. People can want justice but justice is not a material thing. It is a concept and it exists. Why don't we have a scientific test for justice? Because its not testable. It does exist though. Red: There are no other witnesses. Everyone in the room agreed. There are not other scientific alternative explanations. People with no previous exposure to it speaking fluent ancient Aramaic is outside of a scientific explanation. Red: Well, if you can find a case of a dude levitating and speaking ancient aramaic while he was doing it, if I were his defense attorney I would certainly make the case that the devil made him do it. I'd be curious about the verdict there. I bet you would win that one. I know you are not a court of law. You are free to remain obstinate if you wish. My point is only it is unreasonable of you to maintain that your decision is based on anything more than what you want. It's not based on a reasonable decision making process. I would love to see some testimony by an expert that the supernatural does not exist. Who has done this? On what basis have they decided this? That God didn't show up on Larry King? You ask a good question about the non-believers never being possessed. That is interesting if true. Will have to look into it.... Well, your suggestion could be correct. Or it could be that there is an agent of evil that exists and tries to confuse mankind. Or do you not believe in the concept of evil, either? There is evidence all over....since the beginning of time, for God's sake. All cultures have a myth about the Fall of Man, or loss of Paradise, however you want to describe it. They all have description of a Great Flood, too. (I believe science has now discounted Flood geology, haven't they?) Don't you find it an odd twist of thinking that whenever all of humanity describes something scientist step in an say, "oh, no...that didn't happen." I think you guys may be on the payroll of the other side....:hihi:
no it isnt, you are claiming that a person levitated, which would mean she was violating the laws of physics. if something violates the laws of physics as we understand them, the we rethink those laws. like with quantum mechanics. unlike your retarded examples, this is something that actually happens and stumps scientists. so they sit around and rethink it, and maybe they cant reconcile it. maybe they are not sure why a certain particle can behave the way it does and it doesnt jibe with newtonian physics. so they head back to the lab and call in another einstein or hawking to think really hard about it. they dont say "ok boys, lets go to lunch, because what we have here is dadgum magic". of course none of that applies to your levitation example, which didnt happen. again, what is fascinating here is not what you are saying, because that is stupid and obviously false and a bit embarrassing. what is fascinating is what makes people like you so selectively credulous. perhaps you should take your evidence of this supernatural event and make a million dollars from it: Challenge Info
Originally Posted by flabengal God has nothing against the laws of physics, I'm sure he likes them....He made them. He is just not subject to them. Red: Well, first things first here.....I think the idea is that God is the best possible "being" conceivable. He is the "perfect being" or Supreme Being. That's what God means or is. I'm pretty sure on that....I mean that is what the concept of God is....there is no being better than God. That's why God has to be good. It is better to be a "good" God than a "bad" God or indifferent "God". But you do have to surmise that, yes. That is the working definition of God as far as I know. As far as my beliefs, I'm not interested in going through all that. I would defer to the Catholic Church for that. Pick up a catechism, it's quite interesting. By the way, I went through all this stuff when I was in college years ago, evolution/religion, etc. I took a course in anthropology that got me interested in it and spent tons of time in the library looking into evolution and anybody who has taken the time to look through that stuff will know that the scientists are constantly disagreeing with one another and saying this isn't valid and this isn't valid. Scientists are no great defender of the truth, they are just as clueless as the rest of us. This totally belongs in the other thread but I have to ask Red, is that "punctuated equilibrium" theory still being batted around? What a load of crap that theory is....good lord, talk about embarrassing. Those guys are shameless.
martin: martin, i'm sorry but just because you say it didn't happen doesn't help the situation. It was documented. It is unreasonable of you to expect them to do more. and somebody else said something about taping it.....apparently they taped a voice in another case....but you will simply dismiss the tape recording as doctored. Whatever level of evidence is supplied you will simply demand more until you say, "I don't believe it unless I see it". Ok, be that way. It's not getting you any closer to the truth, though. You guys remind me of John Travolta in "A Civil Action" when he refuses to settle the case. (great movie, if you never saw it) Anyway, he is a lawyer arguing with another guy who wants to accept the defendants settlement offer. Travolta: "If they are willing to pay $8 million, then it's not enough." Partner: "So the only thing you are willing to accept is an amount they are not willing to pay?" Travolta: "yes" Partner: "Listen to yourself!" It ridiculous.....
they have actual photographs of bigfoot, and hundreds if not thousands of sightings. same thing with alien abductions. which presumably is exactly what you say about my claims about martians. think about why that is for a moment, then apply that logic to my refusal to accept your claims. is that really so hard?
I know nothing about bigfoot. What the hell is he supposed to be anyway? Is he supposed to be a cave man or an animal? I always assumed he was a bear or something. Alien abductions I think, if they happen, are some sort of demonic manifestation to confuse people. The devil has appeared to saints as an angel or other figures. The can appear as a lot of things. You want to talk about something hard to explain try the Trinity. That's a tough one.