Miracles. Scientific Proof.

[Sheldon]

Physics does not know what is Effect Placebo and what is UFO.

It's placebo effect, and it has nothing to do with physics, and a UFO is again simply something we can't explain, that some people love to leap to unevidenced assumptions about.

 

[Sheldon]

What about your birth?

By definition that would be explicable by natural and scientific laws, do you even know what a dictionary is?

 

[Sheldon]

I disagree. It is miracle. There are many of them. Open your mind. What is Dark Energy, Dark Matter? Miracles.

How do you know those are not explicable by as yet unknown natural and scientific laws? It's pure assumption, and a logical fallacy to simply assume a claim is valid because it cannot be disproved.

 

[Sheldon]

Blaspheme!

So what? It's a victimless crime...

 

[Tiberius]

Sheldon: "I don't believe in miracles"

Thesis: Miracles Exist. Proof:
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. But latter is definition of a miracle.

ItSo: "That's a tautology".

No. I disagree. No tautology.

ItSo: "Therefore it IS a tautology."

No. Please explain. No tautology.
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. No logical error.

ItSo: "If miracles are impossible, they don't happen."

Do not modify text of my proof. It is corrupting it. If I would add a^3 to the Pythagorean theorem a^2+b^2=c^2, it will corrupt it.

F1fan: "How would you test whether miracles happen?"

Physics does not know what is Effect Placebo and what is UFO.

If a miracle is impossible, then it can not happen. Thus it can't be a valid miracle.

If a miracle CAN happen, then there is no need to invoke a God or other form of deity to explain it. It's just a very unlikely event. And thus there is no reason to refer to it as a miracle. (After all, we do lots of highly unlikely things all the time without calling them miracles. Go shuffle a deck of cards to be completely random. Odds are that no one in the entire history of the world has ever shuffled them into that exact order. No need to claim that an event is a miracle just because it's unlikely.)

So any productive discussion on evidence or proof of miracles is going to first need to define exactly what qualifies a particular event as miraculous.

 

[Truth in love]

Sheldon: "I don't believe in miracles"

Thesis: Miracles Exist. Proof:
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. But latter is definition of a miracle.

ItSo: "That's a tautology".

No. I disagree. No tautology.

ItSo: "Therefore it IS a tautology."

No. Please explain. No tautology.
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. No logical error.

ItSo: "If miracles are impossible, they don't happen."

Do not modify text of my proof. It is corrupting it. If I would add a^3 to the Pythagorean theorem a^2+b^2=c^2, it will corrupt it.

F1fan: "How would you test whether miracles happen?"

Physics does not know what is Effect Placebo and what is UFO.

Miracles being things happening that go well beyond what can be explained by our science do happen.

However proving them to someone who does not wish to see does not work.

 

[Tiberius]

Miracles being things happening that go well beyond what can be explained by our science do happen.

However proving them to someone who does not wish to see does not work.

Do you mean they go beyond what science can CURRENTLY explain (suggesting that it's possible that science may be able to explain it in the future), or do you mean that it is fundamentally beyond any capacity for science to explain (meaning that science will NEVER be able to explain it, no matter what)?

 

[Truth in love]

Do you mean they go beyond what science can CURRENTLY explain (suggesting that it's possible that science may be able to explain it in the future), or do you mean that it is fundamentally beyond any capacity for science to explain (meaning that science will NEVER be able to explain it, no matter what)?

The potential that science could someday understand something is almost limitless.
In theory science could someday predict the future, but it can’t now.

However if science now has not explanation for something how did it happen? Not by following sciences rules.

 

[Tiberius]

The potential that science could someday understand something is almost limitless.
In theory science could someday predict the future, but it can’t now.

However if science now has not explanation for something how did it happen? Not by following sciences rules.

This makes no sense.

Scientific principles will still operate even before we understand them. There was a time when humans didn't know what kept the sun burning because they had not figured out nuclear reactions. However, that doesn't mean that there was once a time when the sun's light wasn't caused by nuclear reactions.

In other words, even if science can not explain it NOW, that doesn't mean it's a miracle NOW.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

Miracles being things happening that go well beyond what can be explained by our science do happen.

Can you give your best example of one?

 

[Truth in love]

This makes no sense.

Scientific principles will still operate even before we understand them. There was a time when humans didn't know what kept the sun burning because they had not figured out nuclear reactions. However, that doesn't mean that there was once a time when the sun's light wasn't caused by nuclear reactions.

In other words, even if science can not explain it NOW, that doesn't mean it's a miracle NOW.

So how do some people heal vastly faster than they should?

what science allowed prophets many years back to predict the Jews return?

 

[Tiberius]

So how do some people heal vastly faster than they should?

Why do you think this is unexplainable by science?

what science allowed prophets many years back to predict the Jews return?

No science, just vague writing, and loose interpretations.

 

[Truth in love]

Why do you think this is unexplainable by science?



No science, just vague writing, and loose interpretations.

People healing way faster never seen science explain it. Same with people rising from the dead.



So in short if science does not cover it deny it?

 

[Tiberius]

People healing way faster never seen science explain it. Same with people rising from the dead.

And again I ask, why do you think science will NEVER be able to explain it?

And no one has ever come back from the dead.

So in short if science does not cover it deny it?

No. If you want us to accept something as a miracle, then you need to show some evidence that it is impossible that science will EVER explain it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

However proving them to someone who does not wish to see does not work.

Most atheists would like to see one, like God making an world-wide announcement. If there can be thunder, why it cannot be God's voice? So bring out one example and its proof.

 

[rational experiences]

If miracles happen then they happen arbitrarily and without intent.

I suggest miracles exist as mental phenomenon, as when there is a random close call and someone survives an incident by chance. Of course the religious will immediately fall back on their religious assumptions, and ignore all the tragedies that could have used divine intervention. Confirmation bias.

How would you test whether miracles happen? Drop babies off a building and see if God intervenes to save them? I have a prediction.

Oh do you work for the CIA?

 

[rational experiences]

I can't say whether they are possible, only that they are defined in such a way as to suggest an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. The claim itself appears to be irrational.

Miracle
noun

1. an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.

So that's an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, since it's asserting something is valid because it hasn't been disproved. It also is claiming no natural or scientific laws explain something, when what it means is we don't currently have such an explanation. It is course an appeal to mystery.

Natural wasn't ever any human scientific thesis about natural law.

As natural owned no law it only evolved as natural history no human intervention involved.

Cooling isn't a law it's an effect.

Scientists human. I theory by my human intent. I pretend I know everything first. Then I experiment only using machines. Which are only owned by a mass cooled position.

Not anywhere else. So I experiment claiming I will get to know everything.

He attacks natural as earth isn't his machine.

It survives. He says it's a miracle himself as he thesis uses zero nothing. He expected it to be totally removed.

Is his personal idea that natural survival never human sciences was a miracle.

As it was a scientist who preached it was. ....a Miracle life still lived after he used zero nothing in a calculus against it.

Knowing all intentions are expressed in human thoughts as human stories first.

A human didn't invent why anything existed is what he directly lies about. As he only pretends from position nothing. When everything and not nothing existed.

 

[Truth in love]

And again I ask, why do you think science will NEVER be able to explain it?

And no one has ever come back from the dead.



No. If you want us to accept something as a miracle, then you need to show some evidence that it is impossible that science will EVER explain it.

Many have. It’s well documented. Given that “science” is not looking how can they find the answer.

 

[Truth in love]

Most atheists would like to see one, like God making an world-wide announcement. If there can be thunder, why it cannot be God's voice? So bring out one example and its proof.

It’s been done tons of times and even documented well. But people dismiss the events and documentation.

 

[Tiberius]

Many have. It’s well documented. Given that “science” is not looking how can they find the answer.

Yes, it's "well documented" said the person who is unable to provide any documentation of it happening.