Mormons On Intelligent Design

[Bikeemikey]

Mariner,

If you know of the natural law violation go ahead and cite it.

As for myself, and most scientists - even soft scientists of the Sociology kind - we know that the access to principles of natural law is dependent on our ability to observe such laws in action. We also know that human technology and science is not capable of observing all possible phenomenon that could be responsible for the generation of such natural laws. There are many things that are still in the theory stage.

No self-respecting scientist would ever claim that all natural laws that exist have been discovered/identified/observed. It is also true that for every natural law that has an observable effect (eg. gravity) we find there are other natural laws that can interact in such away as to present the appearance of other natural laws being violated (eg. suspending an object in space with magnetic forces thus creating an observable event contrary to the law of gravity that would be unexplainable to anyone but those with the exact equipment necessary to measure the event).

This combination creates a context where it is possible that the angel Moroni was either suspended in mid-air wearing some strange magnet suit that emitted light, or perhaps it was some kind of time-travelling worm-hole beam me up scotty kind of science that we do not currently have information to but would be able to measure, describe and replicate with the correct knowledge and tools.

No self-respecting scientist would bother to critique the potential violation of "natural law" as relating an event that was documented by a non-scientist and involving the potential interaction with alien extra-terrestrial life forms with potential technology far beyond our own. They wouldn't because they wouldn't have the relevant information. To claim skepticism and fundamentally disbelieve the account is fine and totally reasonable - to claim disbelief based on an apparent analysis of the facts and determining that the events in play present a violation of natural law is going far beyond the scope of the evidence and information provided.

Edited February 26, 2012 by Bikeemikey

[altersteve]

the Angel Nephi (later edited to the Angel Mormoni)

This is false:

http://en.fairmormon...Nephi_or_Moroni

As this page points out, Nephi was first mentioned as the angel who came to Joseph Smith by someone other than Joseph himself, and people later, citing this erroneous source, repeated this. Joseph had consistently mentioned that the angel's name was Moroni before this error occurred.

Edited February 26, 2012 by altersteve

[Mariner]

This is false:

http://en.fairmormon...Nephi_or_Moroni

As this page points out, Nephi was first mentioned as the angel who came to Joseph Smith by someone other than Joseph himself, and people later, citing this erroneous source, repeated this. Joseph had consistently mentioned that the angel's name was Moroni before this error occurred.

Altereteve,

For those who have left Mormonism and know something about how FAIR operates, referring to FAIR to defend Mormonism is like referring to Pravda to defend communism. Here are three facts that the FAIR apologetic to which you linked either missed or glossed over.

1. The name of the Angel who visited Joseph Smith was published in the 1851 edition of the Pearl of Great Price as "Nephi." (Pearl of Great Price, 1851 edition, page 41).

2. The original handwritten manuscript of the PofGP, dictated by Joseph Smith, reveals that the name of the visiting angel was originally written as "Nephi," but that someone at a later date had written the word " Moroni" above the line. All evidence indicates that this change was made after Joseph Smiths death in 1844.

3. In his thesis written at BYU, W Whipple stated that Orson Pratt "published The Pearl of Great Price in 1878, and removed the name of Nephi from the text entirely and inserted the name Moroni in its place" (Textual Changes in the Pearl of Great Price, typed copy, p.125).

[Rob Osborn]

If I were forced to select a deity for my creator among the hundreds or thousands of deities that have been worshipped by humankind through out history, I would select the Flying Spaghetti Monster. This is because the religion that has built up around this deity is much less violent, less racist, less homophobic, less misogynistic, less expensive, and makes more sense than the one built up around the Christian God, especially as this deity is described by the LDS Church.

You are conflicting what man has done, regardless of his avoance to this or that religion and philosophy and the true nature of the one and true God. God is not the type of being you suppose him to be. Satan lures people around telling them lies. My God is a god who is kind, patient, loving and wise. But he is also a god who is just and perfect with his ethics and dealings. So, I don't know what god you are speaking of- that sn't my god nor my religion.

[dtorge26]

Would it be heresy to suggest that God is something like Plato's Demiurge?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demiurge

This definition seems entirely consistent with the Mormon concept of God, leaves room for some personal or impersonal ontological first cause (of everything that exists), and doesn't entirely undermine the logic behind passages like 2 Nephi 2:13.

What do you think?

Yes, the comparison to the demiurge is valid in the sense of ontology. However, gnostic systems seem to paint him as malevolent, which is off the mark. I don't think they capture the character of God very accurately.

[inquiringmind]

Yes, the comparison to the demiurge is valid in the sense of ontology. However, gnostic systems seem to paint him as malevolent, which is off the mark. I don't think they capture the character of God very accurately.

Thank you (and I'm sure the gnostics were off the mark--but from what I've read they had a distorted view of the demiurge that had nothing to do with Plato.)

Edited February 27, 2012 by inquiringmind

[altersteve]

Altereteve,

For those who have left Mormonism and know something about how FAIR operates, referring to FAIR to defend Mormonism is like referring to Pravda to defend communism. Here are three facts that the FAIR apologetic to which you linked either missed or glossed over.

1. The name of the Angel who visited Joseph Smith was published in the 1851 edition of the Pearl of Great Price as "Nephi." (Pearl of Great Price, 1851 edition, page 41).

2. The original handwritten manuscript of the PofGP, dictated by Joseph Smith, reveals that the name of the visiting angel was originally written as "Nephi," but that someone at a later date had written the word " Moroni" above the line. All evidence indicates that this change was made after Joseph Smiths death in 1844.

3. In his thesis written at BYU, W Whipple stated that Orson Pratt "published The Pearl of Great Price in 1878, and removed the name of Nephi from the text entirely and inserted the name Moroni in its place" (Textual Changes in the Pearl of Great Price, typed copy, p.125).

Mariner,

The angel was referred to as Moroni long before 1844 -- as early as 1830, in fact. The angel was referred to as Moroni by Joseph Smith himself in the 1835 edition of Doctrine and Covenants 27:5, a revelation which was reportedly given in 1830; even the 1834 anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed refers to the angel as such. This by itself refutes your claim that the angel was not referred to as "Moroni" until after Joseph's death.

The first time the angel is referred to as "Nephi" was actually a few years later, in an 1838 document by George W. Robinson; a copy of this document was later added by James Mulholland to the 1839 manuscript of the History of the Church, and this was long before the first published mention of "Nephi" in a Times and Seasons article in 1842. This was entirely a mistake on Robinson's part, and it was later corrected upon reviewing earlier documents in which the angel was called "Moroni" by Joseph Smith and other Church leaders. There is simply no evidence that Joseph Smith ever used the name "Nephi" to refer to the angel who appeared to him in his bedroom in 1823, period.

Also, despite your absurd claim to the contrary, the fact that the angel is mistakenly referred to as "Nephi" in the 1851 edition of the Pearl of Great Price is, in fact, mentioned in the FAIR article, under the "Sources which mention Nephi" heading:

The Pearl of Great Price, published in England in 1851 (but not yet canonized), identified its source for the story as "Times & Seasons, vol. iii, p. 726, &c." On page 41 it is said, "He called me by name and said unto me, that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Nephi."

You were the one who "missed or glossed over" this information, if you even read the article at all. Your credibility is lowered even further. It's stuff like this that makes me think you being a professional "scientist" is a bunch of baloney.

Edited February 27, 2012 by altersteve

[wenglund]

For those who have left Mormonism and know something about how FAIR operates, referring to FAIR to defend Mormonism is like referring to Pravda to defend communism.

Question: What do call it when the least credible among us presume to judge the credibility of respected organizations like FAIR?

Answer: Unintelligent design. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Mariner]

Mariner,

If you know of the natural law violation go ahead and cite it.

As for myself, and most scientists - even soft scientists of the Sociology kind - we know that the access to principles of natural law is dependent on our ability to observe such laws in action. We also know that human technology and science is not capable of observing all possible phenomenon that could be responsible for the generation of such natural laws. There are many things that are still in the theory stage.

No self-respecting scientist would ever claim that all natural laws that exist have been discovered/identified/observed. It is also true that for every natural law that has an observable effect (eg. gravity) we find there are other natural laws that can interact in such away as to present the appearance of other natural laws being violated (eg. suspending an object in space with magnetic forces thus creating an observable event contrary to the law of gravity that would be unexplainable to anyone but those with the exact equipment necessary to measure the event).

This combination creates a context where it is possible that the angel Moroni was either suspended in mid-air wearing some strange magnet suit that emitted light, or perhaps it was some kind of time-travelling worm-hole beam me up scotty kind of science that we do not currently have information to but would be able to measure, describe and replicate with the correct knowledge and tools.

No self-respecting scientist would bother to critique the potential violation of "natural law" as relating an event that was documented by a non-scientist and involving the potential interaction with alien extra-terrestrial life forms with potential technology far beyond our own. They wouldn't because they wouldn't have the relevant information. To claim skepticism and fundamentally disbelieve the account is fine and totally reasonable - to claim disbelief based on an apparent analysis of the facts and determining that the events in play present a violation of natural law is going far beyond the scope of the evidence and information provided.

What you are saying is that Mormons are justified in believing every fantastical, illogical and demonstrably false thing said by Joseph Smith because he was not a scientifically or technically qualified to accurately describe what he claims to have observed. Well done. You should expect a call from FAIR at any moment.

Edited February 27, 2012 by Mariner

[Bikeemikey]

I am saying that it is able to be justified through faith alone.

However, it cannot be either proven or disproven through science as the data required for such analysis is not present.

It cannot be demonstrated to be false.

(null)

Edited February 27, 2012 by Bikeemikey

[altersteve]

What you are saying is that Mormons are justified in believing every fantastical, illogical and demonstrably false thing said by Joseph Smith because he was not a scientifically or technically qualified to accurately describe what he claims to have observed. Well done. You should expect a call from FAIR at any moment.

That's not even close to what Bikeemikey said, actually.

[Mariner]

That's not even close to what Bikeemikey said, actually.

If you will look at his post #60, you will see that it is exactly what BikeeMikey was saying. He claims that what Joseph Smith said may not have been true, but since (according to BikeeMikey) his claims cannot be falsified, members of the LDS Church should accept Joseph Smith's claims as true based on faith.

I can think of a number of falsifiable and falsified claims by Joseph Smith, including his public "-- I can only find one." statement.

This idea that, so long as a fantastical and outrageous claim cannot be falsified, they should be taken as true by faith is one of the pillars of the unfounded belief in intelligent design. Another is the requirement that one ignore or willfully misinterpret the overwhelming and internally consistent body of scientific evidence that stands as clear falsification of the ID version of creationism.

Edited February 27, 2012 by Mariner

[thesometimesaint]

Mariner:

"theometimesaint,

While I was not kidding about the relatively better internal logic and less harmful beliefs associated with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as compared to Christianity and especially Mormonism, I did not claim to believe in this version of a man-made deity.

Getting back to the main point, do you really believe that any of the science-fiction-to-science-fact examples you provided involved the violation of physical law?

Do you believe that shining anthropomorphic personages hovering in the air in a beam of light in a closed room as Joseph Smith first described the Angel Nephi (later edited to the Angel Mormoni) would violate any fundamental laws of physics?

Do you believe that human communication with God near Kolob with a turn-around time of less than a few years involves violation of the laws of physics?

What about an anthropomorphic God the Father and Jesus Christ traveling to Earth from near Kolob in less than 4 or 5 years time?

Or are you going to say that humankind really does not understand these basic laws of physics and therefore would not be able to determine if these laws have been broken or not?

I ask you these questions because it seems incredible to me that a college educated adult, who claims to be scientifically trained, could simply accept, without serious questioning, the kind of illogical, self-contradictory, undisciplined and unscientific beliefs that you and many on this board seem to hold about how the world works. This is especially true of one who belongs to a religion that claims to believe that God is bound by natural law. "

Answer the question. Use that "education" of yours. What is the fundamental difference in the bell shaped curves in the intelligence distribution and the bell shaped curve of the reaction rate of iron filings in Sulfuric Aciid?

If your worshipping in at the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster makes you a better person, more understanding of your fellow man. Knock yourself out. My belief is that you can believe anything silly thing you want as long as you allow me to believe in any silly thing I want.

As I don't claim to know all the physical laws that govern God. I have no way of knowing the answer to those questions. It is entirely possible that God uses some type of superconductivity to appear to float above the ground. Travel by some type of wormhole, or use some type of Star Trekian "Transporter". That he uses some type of interdimensional space skipping for prayer answering. But again I don't know. I take it as an article of faith that God knows a heck of a lot more than I, and you know.

I'm just thankfull for what little knowledge I do have. That it allows to serve my God, by serving by fellow man. I am also thankfull that you and I didn't live in ancient Greece where hubris was a capital crime.

Ps. As an "educated" person I am sure you know the diffference between that which is falsifiable, and which is not.

Edited February 27, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[Mariner]

I'm just thankfull for what little knowledge I do have. That it allows to serve my God, by serving by fellow man. I am also thankfull that you and I didn't live in ancient Greece where hubris was a capital crime..

Thank you for your concern regarding our common welfare were we to all of a sudden find ourselves in ancient Greece.

I understand your position on this issue. I hear it all the time, and it disturbs me greatly.

You and I have been on previous threads wherein FTL information transfer and the use of wormholes by anthropomorphic beings of flesh and bone were proposed by faithful members as possible means by which the Elohim could accomplish some of the more fantastical feats ascribed to him.

Now that the preliminary reports of possible FTL neutrinos have been sorted out and the loose cables(s) responsible for the timing errors have been found and fixed, and now that I have pointed out to folks on this board the near galactic scale energy production rate required to open and maintain a (still theoretical) man-sized ( 1 meter diameter) wormhole, are you still going to claim that FTL and wormhole travel are available as options to a god who is constrained by natural law?

If you are claiming that these fantastical feats (FTL and wormhole travel) do not violate natural physical law, then I have to ask you if you could give me an example of an event that you would consider to be a breach of natural law.

And if you cannot, then how would you recommend that one distinguish the natural from the supernatural?

It seems to me that if one cannot determine when natural law has been violated than one is pretty much obliged to believe every absurdity .

_____________

If you were serious about the question regarding the difference between a bell curve in psychology and one in chemistry, my response would be that the main difference lies in the risks taken to obtain the data upon which the values for mu and sigma are determined. (Sulfuric acid can burn holes in one's clothing and skin. Crunching data from surveys normally leaves one's clothing and skin intact.)

I assume that your reason for asking this question was to point out that the mathematics that underlie the soft sciences are, in some cases, the same as the mathematics that underlie the hard sciences. I would not disagree.

However, I would point out that, in quantum mechanics, for example, probability density functions are fundamental to our understanding of nature, and can be used to design experiments and predict their outcome.

I would claim that the understanding of the underlying mathematics and the insight needed to properly apply probability functions in quantum mechanics is likely to be deeper and more fundamental than that required for their application in psychology, where they are mainly used to analyze and describe acquired data sets.

(I make this anecdotal observation, in part, based on interactions over a many years with a number of psychology and social sciences students, including my wife, as they struggled to make it through their required statistics classes. Physics students and physicists I have interacted with seem to embrace and genuinely enjoy the math here, while the psych and social studies students seemed to consider it a necessary evil.)

Edited February 27, 2012 by Mariner

[cdowis]

Mariner, it is always a pleasure to have someone from the Newtonian universe to join us here on the forum.

Have you exhausted the possible explanations for travel? Some simple things seem to be missing from your list:

First, tell us == >> How far away does Moroni reside? Give us a simple estimate, such as in earth orbit, in the solar system, Kolob? Somewhere outside our space and time (the spirit world, for example). Once you have given us a distance, then we can discuss whether it is possible, under the laws of physics, for him to visit us.

Tell us==> Where do the spirits of men go after death? We call it the spirit world. And how do the laws of our physical universe compare to the laws in the spirit world.

Wormholes and other things you have suggested are probably irrelevant as a mode of transportation. If you can tell us about the physical laws (spirit is physical) in the spirit world, and perhaps QM can give us some clues. We can then give you suggestions on teleportation in that realm.

Edited February 27, 2012 by cdowis

[thesometimesaint]

Mariner:

I have already said that I don't know the method(s) by which God does those things. So any I have/will suggested are purely speculative in nature. Further until it is done we can not say that it can not be done. The first person to walk upright disproved the idea that it couldn't be done.

I already knew about the proposed FLT problem. I have consistantly qualified my statements about it with "If it pans out". So I don't know what your problem with my statements is.

As you undoubtably know creating a wormhole remains in the realm of possible but theorectical at this point. Requiring more energy than we know how to create, and safely handle. But again I'm not proposing that that is how God does it. Just that those are possibilities for man to do it. If man can do it I'm sure that God has already figured out how to do it even better.

Very simply that any sufficiently advanced civilization would appear to be magic to us. As a thought experiement try going back in time and place to Salem; Mass. of the early 17th Century and explain to them television.

I'm well aware of the difficulties of working with Sulfuric Acid. I had many years of chemistry before I opened my first sociology book. However that is not the question I asked. I asked about the difference in the bell shaped curves. The correct answer is that there is no difference.

Where ever Moroni resides it isn't here. For all I know, and I don't, it is in another dimension.

Quantum Mechanics is interesting. I'm not sure I buy into some of its more controversial ramifications such as its ability to put effect before cause. A hundred years from now neither one of us will be here. So I'm not going to lose any sleep over what my distant descendants may find out.

Statistics was hard, but I got through it. I wish you wife well. Calculus was hard but I got through that too. Inorganic chemistry was easy. Biology was a breeze. Understanding biochem took effort. But I haven't used any of them in so many years that I'd have to take a refresher course in them for any indepth discussion. Please don't project your individual experiences on me.

Edited February 27, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[Mariner]

Mariner, it is always a pleasure to have someone from the Newtonian universe to join us here on the forum.

Have you exhausted the possible explanations for travel? Some simple things seem to be missing from your list:

First, tell us == >> How far away does Moroni reside? Give us a simple estimate, such as in earth orbit, in the solar system, Kolob? Somewhere outside our space and time (the spirit world, for example). Once you have given us a distance, then we can discuss whether it is possible, under the laws of physics, for him to visit us.

Tell us==> Where do the spirits of men go after death? We call it the spirit world. And how do the laws of our physical universe compare to the laws in the spirit world.

Wormholes and other things you have suggested are probably irrelevant as a mode of transportation. If you can tell us about the physical laws (spirit is physical) in the spirit world, and perhaps QM can give us some clues. We can then give you suggestions on teleportation in that realm.

cdowis,

Before entering into a game of 20 questions with you about Mormonism, wormholes, teleportation, Moroni's home address and such, perhaps I should disclose (in case you do not already know) that, although I was BIC and a member for more than 30 years, I now see it as one of the monumental scams of the modern era.

I am mortified that I allowed my wife and the LDS Church to continued to teach my children the absurdities of Mormonism as truth (and she is now beginning to understand why this was a mistake, as well). So I hope you will excuse me if I don't provide answers to your unanswerable questions regarding the fictional Moroni's whereabouts, teleportation, etc.

My interest lies in trying to understand how someone like thesometimesaint, who is clearly educated and an adult, can simply accept as truth the fantastical and nonsensical claims made by Mormonism, and held by many Mormons as foundational, without demanding the smallest bit of physical supporting evidence for them.

I would like to understand how, when it comes to religion, any absurdity claimed by those with perceived authority is accepted as truth, essentially without question.

The body of claims that underlie Intelligent Design are a good example of absurdities that some will accept as truth. In the cases of both Mormonism and ID, some folks seem capable of completely ignoring mountains of contrary evidence in favor of unsupported claims made by someone else.

It would be greatly appreciated if you could provide some insight as to why, after an adult has been exposed to the truth about Mormonism and ID, this kind of unfounded belief can persist.

[cdowis]

cdowis,

Hello.

Before entering into a game of 20 questions with you about Mormonism, wormholes, teleportation, Moroni's home address and such, perhaps I should disclose (in case you do not already know) that, although I was BIC and a member for more than 30 years, I now see it as one of the monumental scams of the modern era.

There are many who hold that view, but it's irrevelant to our discussion.

I am mortified that I allowed my wife and the LDS Church to continued to teach my children the absurdities of Mormonism as truth (and she is now beginning to understand why this was a mistake, as well). So I hope you will excuse me if I don't provide answers to your unanswerable questions regarding the fictional Moroni's whereabouts, teleportation, etc.

I asked these questions in response to your post. If you are going to have a discussion on teleportation by wormhole, you should, at the very least, tell us where Moroni resides. I was asking the 20 questions to point out that your post was rather silly. Before talking about violating the laws of physics, you need to give us his address, a location before talking about FTL and wormholes. We would simply respond that there is no location in our space and time, and that the laws of the spirit world, like the laws in QM, banes, etc, are different from the laws of our reality.

My interest lies in trying to understand how someone like thesometimesaint, who is clearly educated and an adult, can simply accept as truth the fantastical and nonsensical claims made by Mormonism, and held by many Mormons as foundational, without demanding the smallest bit of physical supporting evidence for them.

We do not know Moroni's location. We do not know the physics of the Spirit World. I can be educated and intelligent, and admit I know little on how QM works, or string theory, for that matter. You can now declare a victory over the stupid Mormons for not knowing the physics of the supernatural.

Congratualtions on your achievement.

I would like to understand how, when it comes to religion, any absurdity claimed by those with perceived authority is accepted as truth, essentially without question.

As I quoted Feyneman in the prior post, QM is absurd. We are in good company. AS a Newtonian, you are above the fray.

The body of claims that underlie Intelligent Design are a good example of absurdities that some will accept as truth. In the cases of both Mormonism and ID, some folks seem capable of completely ignoring mountains of contrary evidence in favor of unsupported claims made by someone else.

QM is absurd, but I do not see Feyneman as a fool. I wish you best of luck as you take your victory lap.

It would be greatly appreciated if you could provide some insight as to why, after an adult has been exposed to the truth about Mormonism and ID, this kind of unfounded belief can persist.

I have always wondered how an intelligent individual can allow arrogance to overtake their intelligence. A Newtonian sense that they know everything, and there is nothing unknown to the mind of man, I guess.

Anyway, perhaps you can ask Dr. F your question. His answer may shock you.

Edited February 27, 2012 by cdowis

[bcuzbcuz]

Intelligent design is neither intelligent nor designed. It is a creationist answer to try and get around teaching religion in science classes. It is a fictive response to well defined arguments of separating church from education. Science should be taught as science. Religion should be left to seminary classes.

[DarkScythe]

I could bring up the old saying about assumptions but it would be bad idea. But Assuming that we know everything about the Universe is both stupid at worst and naive at best. FTL, Worm Hole and Time Travel are possible but not feasible with our current understanding of the universe.

Assuming that we are alone in the universe is stupid as well.

[Mariner]

I could bring up the old saying about assumptions but it would be bad idea. But Assuming that we know everything about the Universe is both stupid at worst and naive at best. FTL, Worm Hole and Time Travel are possible but not feasible with our current understanding of the universe.

Assuming that we are alone in the universe is stupid as well.

Nobody I know would say that humankind knows everything there is to know about the universe. However, every credible scientist I know would say that there are immutable laws of nature. No scientist I know would claim, as you have essentially done, that we do not know what any of these laws of nature happen to be.

If you are going to say that (local) FTL communication of usable information and time travel are possible, or that the use of wormholes to transport humans to other times or places is possible, then you should be willing to recognize that well understood laws of nature would be violated by FTL communication and backward time travel (to a point prior to the time of the invention of some future time machine) and stand ready to provide some physical evidence to support your claims.

The constraint on use of wormholes for transport of humans to other places or times in the universe is not theoretical, but practical. Generating the energy required at a sufficient rate to open and maintain such a wormhole, would simply not be possible unless one were able to concentrate a substantial portion of the energy available in the galaxy into a volume of a few cubic meters.

Edited February 28, 2012 by Mariner

[Mariner]

duplicate post

Edited February 28, 2012 by Mariner

[cdowis]

Nobody I know would say that humankind knows everything there is to know about the universe. However, every credible scientist I know would say that there are immutable laws of nature. No scientist I know would claim, as you have essentially done, that we do not know what any of these laws of nature happen to be.

Did Newton describe to us the laws of nature? Of course, but the world is very different from the one he described.

If you are going to say that (local) FTL communication of usable information and time travel are possible, or that the use of wormholes to transport humans to other times or places is possible, then you should be willing to recognize that well understood laws of nature would be violated by FTL communication and backward time travel (to a point prior to the time of the invention of some future time machine) and stand ready to provide some physical evidence to support your claims.

I know that this post is directed to someone else, but, as I said in my previous post, I don't think these two mechanisms are relevant -- we need to understand the physics of the spirit realm when we seek a mechanism for transportation.

[Mariner]

I know that this post is directed to someone else, but, as I said in my previous post, I don't think these two mechanisms are relevant -- we need to understand the physics of the spirit realm when we seek a mechanism for transportation.

cdowis,

One difference between a religionist and a scientist is that unless the latter can see physical evidence (or at least strong mathematical evidence) in support of a claim regarding some natural phenomenon, he or she is unlikely to believe it exists or spend much time worrying about it. Such things are a monumental waste of time and resources that could be better spent,

When you have some physical evidence for "spirit world physics" please let me know.

[mfbukowski]

So is it time for my customary caution for everyone about literalism?

Before I would even bother with Mariner, I would like to see his refutation of fideism

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fideism/

Edited February 28, 2012 by mfbukowski