Evidence for God from Science

Here ya go, Morny - a study on the impact of Christian prayer: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prayer.html The 1st mentioned study (cardiac patients in San Francisco General Medical Center) from 30 years ago has clear statistical problems. The researcher apparently didn't bother to first r...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That's a rather extraordinary claim. Please provide your extraordinary evidence to support it. Good one! The claim itself is ordinary, maybe even heterological. But mostly, the claim is useful - keeps me from believing that the Earth is flat, tha...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That's a rather extraordinary claim. Please provide your extraordinary evidence to support it. Good one! The claim itself is ordinary, maybe even heterological. But mostly, the claim is useful - keeps me from believing that the Earth is flat, tha...

Here ya go, Morny - a study on the impact of Christian prayer: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prayer.html The 1st mentioned study (cardiac patients in San Francisco General Medical Center) from 30 years ago has clear statistical problems. The researcher apparently didn't bother to first r...

[...] science IS NOT the tool to study the supernatural/spiritual [...] I interpret Kenny's statements in the sense that science might shed some light on a supernatural claim, for example, on the efficacy of prayer. Viz., does a controlled, double blind, randomized test show that prayed for patient...

This discussion with Kenny shows why religious issues are uninteresting to me. Equally intelligent people can say things like "I think God exists" and "I don't think the evidence shows that God exists", with centuries of debate making no progress resolving an answer. What I do fi...

But Morny, that you find the issue boring, tends to make me think that you've already decided there is no God, and thus, nothing whatsoever to worry about. I haven't decided anything for sure. I can only carefully weigh evidence against theories before making tentative judgments. Understanding that...

Regarding the topic title ... My reason doesn't appear to have come up yet, so I'll volunteer mine. And maybe I can take some heat off Kenny. Technically and pendantically, I'm agnostic, which means I may have as many disagreements with atheists as with religists (is that a word?). And as everyone s...

Exactly what I thought - you didn''t address the questions, you merely attack someone who disagrees [...] Spencer does not represent consensus climate change claims. Until you can clearly and concisely state one, you cannot argue against climate change. Please, there are more than a few scientists ...

READ: There certainly has been a lull, if not for the last two years - but you don't measure a theory with such long intervals by two years: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22315.epdf [...] Your own Nature article reference disagrees with your implication that the climate change trend is ambi...

The response of many is that warming has happened and is now in a lull. Climate scientists do not say that. You don't seem to know even what their claims actually are. Of course I understand it. And knowing what the other side's claims are is a pre-requisite for understanding how the other side thi...

Oops... Sorry about that, Rick.

My post was meant for Philip's most recent post.

RickD wrote: [... see previous post ...]

Again: Understand the other side's claims.

What is the climate scientists' response to your question?
Do you understand that response?
If yes, where specifically do you disagree?

Pay someone millions of dollars to make a study favorable to the desired results, and you'll get whatever results you want. Anyone who doesn't believe scientists, or anyone else, can be bought, is living with his head up his keister. The innate critical thinking skill of the average person is remar...

Morny I think you may have misunderstood my intent I don't think so. I've been an active climate change advocate for 2 decades. I interpreted your post that " scientists have no idea what they are talking about " as justified sarcasm, albeit directed at an unappreciative audience. Yes? My...