Can you have out of body experiences?

[Janx]

You haven't clarified the circular logic, just dodged it by pointing out stuff a third of the way back in the thread.

This line of discussion is irritating. As you keep hitting it and getting the same response, can you please drop it.

Something that works has results.
Science has results.
Therefore Science Works.

I don't think it would be simple to outline the whole chain of scientific discovery and process that enabled the Transistor to be invented so we could have computers. Can we just accept that it happened because we're all on computers.

 

[Morrus]

This thread features multiple people being jerks to each other, people deliberately misrepresenting each others' positions, and more than one instance of hounding. If you can't be polite, don't post. It's really that simple.

 

[Kramodlog]

This line of discussion is irritating. As you keep hitting it and getting the same response, can you please drop it.

No. I think people should own the arguments they use in debates.

Something that works has results.
Science has results.
Therefore Science Works.

The Earth is round because it is round. While true, it is circular and should be avoided. Poor quality arguments won't help disprove Kingius's affirmations or convince him, if possible, that his arguments are ridiculus.

 

[sabrinathecat]

You FAILED to answer the question. I said "EXACTLY". "But if" doesn't qualify.

I did answer your question. Exactly.
Or as exactly as possible, given the undefined "psychic powers", which was really open and non-specific.

I imagine the discussions would be similar to "Which comic book super hero would you like to be?" with a bunch of kids and geeks dreaming of glory and grandure, wishing somehow they were special.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

This discussion has entered the realms of the farsical. Whatever happened to the goal of people thinking for themselves in an enlightened society? I seem to be encountering people who are unable to do a bit of research themselves and seem to want me to do it all for them.

We, as a global society, have got to do better than this. Having other people think for us is not going to get us any further forwards than we are now. We are always going to be targets for manipulation if we cannot seek out information for ourselves and make our own minds up about it. This is because any time we are removed from the source we can be deceived easily. And believe me, this is happening. Heck, don't believe me, but go look for yourself to prove me wrong. Whatever you do, go look.

Replacing one dogma with another is a trap. Merely repeating what others have you taught us to think does not make us clever, though it may fool some. We are an intelligent species, let us not squander that intelligence.

What you're encountering are people who refuse to do your work for you. If you make a statement and are asked to back it up, 'the truth is out there' fails as corroboration. You say there's proof, we say there's not. If there really is proof the easiest way to show that isn't to repeat 'it's there' over and over again, it's to simply post some. I gave you a chance and, to make it fair, I asked Umbran to perform the same task I asked of you. So far, he's the only one who's posted anything backing him up. I wonder why ...

 

[sabrinathecat]

The argument provided is the same as saying "Why don't scientists accept (my religion) as fact. Millions of people have believed in it for hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands of years. You don't need any more than that. The fact that they believed was enough." Without facts or sources or references to back it up, Out of Body Experiences (which do fall primarily under the category of Spiritual Experiences) is more of a religious belief. You need real logic. You need evidence. You need examples. Preferably ones that back up your claims, if you want to persuade people to join your side. And if you find more evidence to the contrary, you have to be prepared to change your own views, or recognize that maybe this is a spiritual matter more than a scientific one.


****Note: I am not bashing any religion, or religion in general (this time). I am simply providing a parallel example of the argument style, and some honest advice.

 

[kingius]

As predicted you have taken this tactic. I wonder why ;-)

You know that it's impossible to win this game from any position but your own because the game has already been rigged. The evidence for out of body experiences is not considered as evidence by the scientific community, so its game over before it ever begins isn't it? So excuse me if I don't take part in an exercise in futility.

If you are truly interested in the research that's been done then start looking for it, not a fight.

 

[kingius]

The argument provided is the same as saying "Why don't scientists accept (my religion) as fact.

Science is atheistic in nature and this is why religion is not accepted. Atheism is itself a belief system (the belief in the non-existence of something), no matter what underpins it, it could still be wrong. So be careful about confusing facts with beliefs. Agnostism accepts that questions about gods, spirits, souls and so on may be fundamentally unknowable and unprovable, but that doesn't preclude them from existing. This is now the domain of philosophy which science is ill equipped to deal with, especially considering the close minded nature of scientific debate over that which we do not know and consider to be 'paranormal'. In short, don't look to a scientist to understand these things because science simply (at this point in time) is too busy denying the existence of these things to get anywhere close to them.

Edit to expand - the very notion that people who do not agree with atheism are not somehow being rational is itself somewhat crazy. It is entirely possible to experience something and to come to the conclusion that the experience was 'paranomal'. Simple logic can lead one down this path when one considers all of the facts as known. Often scientists have to miss out on crucial facts in order to utilise reductionism and create a theory which spans multiple sources. You have to go back to the original sources to discover this, though, and until you do, you won't know that the theory is wrong.

 

[Kramodlog]

As predicted you have taken this tactic. I wonder why ;-)

You know that it's impossible to win this game from any position but your own because the game has already been rigged. The evidence for out of body experiences is not considered as evidence by the scientific community, so its game over before it ever begins isn't it? So excuse me if I don't take part in an exercise in futility.

If you are truly interested in the research that's been done then start looking for it, not a fight.

I've actually looked and didn't find anything that wasn't New Age.

 

[kingius]

Well I think we both know that I'm completely wasting my time here because right from the start people made their minds up to disregard what I was saying and portray every little bit in the worst possible light, truth of it be damned. At least you have looked, which is something. As for something being 'new age' might it be a good idea to look at something a bit more rigorous? Possibly the researcher you were looking at has become convinced of the existence of an afterlife (and so on) as a result of the research that's been done... I'm speculating here without knowing what it was you looked at, but it is entirely possible. Certainly what I have read on this has made it clear to me that there is much more going on than mainstream science (and the atheism that underpins it) can satisfactorily explain. However these issues are, for the most, about people's beliefs and you can bet that there are people salivating at the lips for a fight on this, just look at the reactions on the side, it seems that one thing the human race cannot get out of is fighting over beliefs. 'I'm right and you're wrong'. Science hasn't got us very far away from that, has it?