Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.out-of-body    |    I guess everyone needs a self-vacation    |    7,897 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 6,867 of 7,897    |
|    David Mitchell to All    |
|    Re: Is it Real?    |
|    01 Oct 05 06:43:22    |
      From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk              On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:17:42 +0000, LH wrote:              > There's a lot worse spam than this. ;-) Being an Engineer myself, getting       > over my science background took several microseconds of mystical experience       > to              ...make me forget all my training.              >> Naturally, I was a big       >> fan of The Dancing Wu Li Masters, and The Tao of Physics              This doesn't look promising.              >> You see, it occurred to me that most educated people today have at least a       >> passing familiarity with the implications of science. We know, for       >> example (to our great sorrow) that atom bombs work, and hence, that       >> Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity is essentially accurate.              Uh?       We know that the essential equivalence of matter and energy is correct;       but I don't think nuclear weapons have much to do with SR.              > We know       >> that our computers work, and (whether we realize it or not) this implies       >> that crucial tenets of Quantum Mechanics are also 'real'. In a nutshell,       >> we don't really need help believing in science. On the contrary, the       >> undeniable evidence of science often makes belief in the spiritual or       >> paranormal difficult to sustain. Hence, my purpose in writing Science and       >> Spirit was to provide an APODICTIC series of argument that demonstrate       >> that belief in science not only supports, but actually DEMANDS acceptance       >> of spiritual and mystical phenomena.              Somehow, I doubt it.              > (The word apodictic comes from the       >> field of formal logic. It refers to an assertion that is incontrovertibly       >> or demonstrably true as a result of having been deduced systematically, in       >> a stepwise manner, from incontestable foundational principles, in such a       >> way that denying it leads to a contradiction.)              Given your shaky knowledge of physics, and the hidden shallows in your       research, I suspect your logical foundations aren't as secure as you think.              >> Once we see that       >> science proves the existence of this power, we will be able to utilize it       >> without reservation.              As you doubtless can?       No. Didn't think so.              >> Don't worry - I shall not continue hyping my book here,       >> although, of necessity, my posts and replies will undoubtedly contain       >> elements from the book, since it pretty much sums up all that I believe.       >> It is also a book that I was commanded to write, but that's a story for       >> another day ;^)              That whooshing sound is your remaining credibility flying out the window.              Here's a rough guide:       If you think you're talking to God, you're mistaken.       If you think God's talking to you, you're crazy.              HTH.              --       =======================================================================       = David --- If you use Microsoft products, you will, inevitably, get       = Mitchell --- viruses, so please don't add me to your address book.       =======================================================================              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca