Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

pragmatic, There are supposed miracles that usually has another reason that "even" doctors are unable to explain. Doctors or scientists don't have all the answers, but that doesn't make it any more a miracle than many things man cannot still explain.

There have been studies done on prayers by the sick and their subsequent cure. Experiments have shown that prayers by third parties does not change the statistics of cures vs non-cures. What that says is that personal prayers has a benefit; it's not a "miracle."

Christians will call it a "miracle," because that's what they want to "believe."

As an unbiased observer, I see it as a benefit by the patient simply because the patient retains a positive outlook on improving their health.

There are many things we humans observe that cannot be explained by religion or science, but that doesn't mean it'll always remain a mystery. We still don't understand everything about our brains and its potential, nor is our science developed enough to understand everything about our environment. All I know is that we will learn more about our brains and our environment as time passes, and many so-called miracles will have an answer that isn't credited to a higher power.

Hi CI, I guess you didn't really read some of my last posts but that's okay - its a long thread. In my last posts I was saying that until this can be explained, I would regard it as more mystical than not. I understand what you mean by somethings cannot be explained but that doesn't mean its a miracle or has some supersition foundation - and I don't make such assumptions either, but to me, such health miracles as the one I described really do seem go outside mere "science". Having said that, if science can establish something credible or provide a theory, I would immediately adopt that explaination. I'm a practical person, I enjoy black and white but I also accept that not everything is black and white. I accept evolution over creationism, I accept "miracles" because there hasn't been any scientific foundation as yet.

If the Doctor's can't explain why, then it's a pretty big clue that the problem isn't physical. Hysterical malfunctions of the body are known to science, and are often solved through psychological means. So if the girl "believed" that prayer would work, then it did.

A miracle would be if the Doctors said, "look, both her legs have been amputated below the hip, so she can't walk", and then the next day they grew back and she could walk. THAT would be a miracle.

Hi, pragmatic!

Could you translate something into Chinese for a new poster?

The thread is here:
http://able2know.org/topic/126582-1#post-3500420

Well- I think she was pretending she couldn't walk and got fed up of it and went for the "with a bound Jack was free" procedure.

I wouldn't wish to speculate on possible motives but I would rule out hysteria. That's the last thing I would consider.

rosborne979, I guess I just don't have as high standards as you do when it comes to classifying what is or is not miracles.

pragmatic, Doctors do make mistakes; either a misdiagnosis or missing something pertinent to the supposed injury, disease, or illness. New research and a constant state of flux in the treatment of disease cannot possibly apply to all patients with the same diagnosis. Even doctors often guess what is the best solution towards a cure, but are limited by what other "experts" have concluded through their research (which often changes). Doctors are not god.

Hi CI

No I understand your point and I accept there are two sides to the story I have described above - I guess it depends on how convinced one is of the strength of the opposing argument. I guess I accept things abit easily than some other religious skeptics.

Ahem!!! ros rejects out of hand the psychosomatic realm and then he suggests hysteria as the explanation of the case.

I'm not sure there are any lower standards than that.

That's fine. But to me, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Especially when simpler explanations are available.

Evidence is evidence. There's nothing extraordinary about it.

Even rejecting the psychosomatic realm out of hand for years and then jumping in with hysteria as first choice is not extraordinary. It's quite normal for people who believe themselves to be well educated when the opposite is the case.

And youre gonna stick with that excuse. I dont think anyone , when referring to your case, has confused education with recitation.

Happy Christmas you old prancing cob.

http://helios.hampshire.edu/~sahCS/Hameed-Science-Creationism.pdf

Tony Perkins has some friends comin' round the mountain

All that's needed to prove your point is for you to look in the mirror.

Wow, this topic is still going, too!

Did I miss anything of interest?

No, you can go now...

Well, letsee now.

The main question has been resolved way back so all the discussion has been pretty much back and forth insults.


Every so often wandel comes in with a quote or a newsclip in order to "herd the cats", but we always get away and keep insulting each other.

Yeh, its been pretty much non stop insults.

Where you been grasshopper?

I would question the use of "cats". It's just trying to be clever and cool and getting it all wrong. Sheep would be more appropriate. They are easily herded and bleat a lot.

And no questions have been resolved either. Anti-IDers only play on their own ground. And a check of the thread will show clearly that insults are a feature of their input.

Anti-IDers try to play the scientific game but as soon as things get scientific they start making a virtue about being back row hooligans in the D stream.

Then try to consider complete phrases rather than parsing words dipshit. Otherwise just enjoy your posset and go sit under a bridge and contemplate individual "Rivets"



((((yawwwwnnnn))))).

Anything new to add? or are you still passing that mantra?

Well-- "go jump in the lake", " ((((yawwwwnnnn)))))." and "anything new to add" are tried and tested are they not.

And pointing out your literary error with "cats" must be new to you otherwise you would never have made such a silly comparison.