I have already explained... "evidence" is dependant upon the ruler or measuring stick you are using. Science has its own, religion another.
A simple example is Benoit Mandelbrot's question:
How long is the coastline of Britain?
The answer is of course infinite length. Why? because if you carry on measuring, we change the ruler...so that we can measure ever increasingly more accurate..and smaller, and smaller and smaller.... until we reach "planc length" and essentially the coast line opf britain is of infinite length.
SO we have addressed the ruler problem.
Of course there are other issues like the very nature of perception. One can argue quite validly, that the perceiver is a part of the perceived. Thus any "scientific" experiment is wholly changed by being perceived in the first place. We of course this in science and religion/philosophy.
Thus the idea that "evidence" (scientific) is the only valid expression of human conciousness to "prove" or to explore reality as a whole, is shaky at best. I find it ironic that those that cling to evidence have an unwavering belief akin to those that spout bible passages and tell us all that hell is real....
There are of course other problems such as goedel.... which shows a clear indication that logic itself is flawed. but then that really is plain logic, that there will always be something outside of logic, here is a simple story that illustrates this:
One day a young man full of much wisdom and knowledge decided to share his wisdom with the world.
He went out and travelled the world and met many people.
Try as he might he couldnt find anyone willing to listen to his special revelations.
He knew in his heart of hearts that he knew the secret to God, the universe and everything.
Finally after 40 years of travelling, he was now an old man. He had found no one who would simply listen to his revelations.
Then he found a dog. A faithful brown dog. As the man spoke the dog stood to attention and listend.
The man knew, at last, he had an audience.
Decades of spiritual revelations and insight poured forth from the mans lips, the dog listend and stood staring as the man spoke.
Finally the man had finished and excalimed Do you understand my friend!!????
The dog looked at him, sat down, begain licking himself and fell asleep.
..
Moral of the story:
no matter how you try to conceptualise things, there will always be something outside the realm of concept. Thus like the dog there will always be something you cannot coneptualize. The dog was told the secrets of the universe, but being a dog it was beyond his conceptualisation. Thus like the dog, there will always be something beyond the realm of modern science as science like the dog only deals with a very narrow set of parameters. To state that spiritual truths, realities can be relegated to science is to treat such realities as the conciousness of a dog. Of course that is not to say that secretly pink elephants are on mars
but that a yard stick is a yard stick and until it breaks free of itself, it is nothign more than a yard stick.
The other is not a person;
If you mistake it for another, you are already way off.
Your child has wandered outside -
Give it a call; when it sees your face it will follow its parent.
I'd like to know who the first speaking humans were and why they had absolutely nothing to say about their parents, grandparents and ancestors who didn't have vocal chords. :biglaugh:I would have love to have heard their stories about their ancestors who supposedly occupied the earth for billions of years which is of course, much longer than humans of recorded history have been here. So why haven't we heard about those people?
