• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Supernatural

ashurbanipal said:
The conjunction of the last two statements works out to logical equivalence. I would read it as "nature iff detectable." In other words, nature is all and only what is detectable. I suppose on the one hand that's good epistemic advice: you shouldn't believe in what is, in principle, undetectable. But this is methodological advice only--I would also say that you shouldn't believe that everything that exists is detectable (especially to creatures like us).
Click to expand...

We have no reason to believe everything which exists is detectable. Anything which objectively exists outside of nature (the supernatural) may not be detectable. Everything which is natural to our particular universe is detectable.

For instance, we can not know the inside of a black hole or even if it really has an inside. The 'inside' of a black hole is cut off from our universe, and is not a part of our space-time. The singularity if there is such a thing has no size or dimensionality. It takes up zero space in zero time. If that seems to makes no sense that is because it does not make sense. It is irrational. The same things applies to the supernatural. It's irrational.....even if in some sense it objectively does exist, we simply can not know it. There is no possible means of communication much the same as is the case with the 'inside' of a black hole or a singularity, even if it were a naked singularity.

Not known by whom? I know that things considered supernatural are real. I have detected them. Plenty of other people have as well.
Click to expand...


Not known by anyone. You don't know the supernatural. You by necessity have presumed something not in evidence about whatever it is you are referring to.

I disagree. We can detect non-physical stuff--specifically, we can detect mental stuff
Click to expand...
.

You can not detect non-physical 'stuff'. You can detect matter and you can detect signals propagated by the force carrying particles. Mental 'stuff' is not supernatural, it's a real consequence of interactions between bits of matter and flowing energy. In science we term something like that an emergent characteristic, where the whole can be greater than the sum of the parts.
 
Russell797 said:
We have no reason to believe everything which exists is detectable. Anything which objectively exists outside of nature (the supernatural) may not be detectable. Everything which is natural to our particular universe is detectable.

For instance, we can not know the inside of a black hole or even if it really has an inside. The 'inside' of a black hole is cut off from our universe, and is not a part of our space-time. The singularity if there is such a thing has no size or dimensionality. It takes up zero space in zero time. If that seems to makes no sense that is because it does not make sense. It is irrational. The same things applies to the supernatural. It's irrational.....even if in some sense it objectively does exist, we simply can not know it. There is no possible means of communication much the same as is the case with the 'inside' of a black hole or a singularity, even if it were a naked singularity.




Not known by anyone. You don't know the supernatural. You by necessity have presumed something not in evidence about whatever it is you are referring to.

.

You can not detect non-physical 'stuff'. You can detect matter and you can detect signals propagated by the force carrying particles. Mental 'stuff' is not supernatural, it's a real consequence of interactions between bits of matter and flowing energy. In science we term something like that an emergent characteristic, where the whole can be greater than the sum of the parts.
Click to expand...

CIA releases Geller files
https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...psychic/amp/?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
 
Fenton said:
CIA releases Geller files
https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...psychic/amp/?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
Click to expand...

Well, let's look at what the CIA file about geller said directly, using the CIA web site itself, and not filtered through a journalism site that is.. hum.. not well respected???


https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000100450002-7

Geller a fake, says ex-manager
Yasha Katz, who brought Uri Geller to England, admits he helped Geller trick the press and public
Click to expand...
 
RAMOSS said:
Well, let's look at what the CIA file about geller said directly, using the CIA web site itself, and not filtered through a journalism site that is.. hum.. not well respected???


https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000100450002-7
Click to expand...

Knock youself out.....
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000100480003-3

Feel free to post anything that contradicts that site I linked to

Should be easy seeing that they're " not respected " and all
 
RAMOSS said:
Considering that the one says his manager helped fake things,that should suffice.
Click to expand...

You haven't considered anything, you have yet to even address the CIA's report.

Whats next ? Attack the source ? Oh thats right, youv'e already done that.

Your'e just trolling
 
Fenton said:
You haven't considered anything, you have yet to even address the CIA's report.

Whats next ? Attack the source ? Oh thats right, youv'e already done that.

Your'e just trolling
Click to expand...


No, actually you are. You see.. one thing that had been pointed out years ago that Uri was a fake, .. and it only proved that many scientists who tried to test him didn't know how to check for the kind of faking Uri used. James Randi demonstrated how they got faked out.
 
Fenton said:
CIA releases Geller files
https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...psychic/amp/?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
Click to expand...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Here we have a bunch of stories told by people. Anecdotal evidence. In science that is good enough to arouse suspicion and curiosity. Makes us want to investigate further, but we can't. We are left to "believe" or not to believe. My suspicion and curiosity are not satisfied.. I can't reproduce the results, even in principle. Sounds familiar doesn't it?
 
Russell797 said:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Here we have a bunch of stories told by people. Anecdotal evidence. In science that is good enough to arouse suspicion and curiosity. Makes us want to investigate further, but we can't. We are left to "believe" or not to believe. My suspicion and curiosity are not satisfied.. I can't reproduce the results, even in principle. Sounds familiar doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Here ya go......
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000100480003-3
 
Fenton said:
Here ya go......
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00791r000100480003-3
Click to expand...

What does that tell us? What can we do with it? Do you think your anecdotal evidence produces a high likelihood that Geller could do those things? What is the likelihood that he could versus the likelihood that he could not?

So, the CIA has documentation for certain events concerning Geller. I'm sure they have documentation for all sorts of unexplained events. What does that mean? Does it mean the events represent a supernatural event and ability, or could there be other explanations which don't go so far as to defy physics?

This is a very extraordinary claim in that Geller seemed to be able to defy common sense and indeed the very laws of nature as we understand them.

In science we look for a significance value when evaluating a discovery. To be highly certain we like to see the likelihood of an event not being just being a statistical anomaly at 3.5 million to 1. Are you so confident that this anecdotal report rises to anywhere near that level? I certainly am not.
 
Fenton said:
CIA releases Geller files
https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...psychic/amp/?client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uri_Geller#Paranormal_claims

Geller is an Israeli illusionist, magician, TV personality, self-proclaimed psychic...known for his trademark television performances of spoon bending and other Supposed psychic effects. Throughout the years, Geller has used conjuring Tricks to simulate the effects of psychokinesis and telepathy.
[.....]Geller has claimed his feats are the result of paranormal powers given to him by Extraterrestrials, but critics such as James Randi have shown that Geller's tricks can be replicated with stage magic techniques.
[.....]In the early 1970s.. Jerusalem Post reported that a court had ordered Geller to refund a customer's ticket price and pay court costs after finding that he had committed Fraud by claiming that his feats were telepathic.
[.....]Geller is well known for making predictions regarding sporting events. Skeptic James Randi and British tabloid newspaper 'The Sun' have demonstrated the teams and players he chooses to win most often lose....​
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom