KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
Erm, no. So it's been demonstrated by the failure of every controlled experiment to demonstrate telepathy.
Perhaps you are assuming that claims of telepathy are sufficient reason to believe it is real?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Arguments against polytheism against the people of that time and place in Quran (various types).
- Thread starter Link
- Start date
Perhaps you are assuming that claims of telepathy are sufficient reason to believe it is real?
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Eastern Orthodox Christianity is not polytheism. One God in three persons.
Salam
It's a paradox. From one view they acknowledge the absolute being from another they divide him and worship more then one while trying to keep true to oneness of God (trying to get best of both). It's insincerity to the truth and a type of disbelief.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
No. It is miracle. All is possible. How? Through miracle. Impossible miracle is miracle. Hence, possible.
Salam
Exalted beings exist but they derive their power from God. Miracles are proof they are of God's forces and of his trusted creation and because such power is provided by God and he is the Source directly. When claiming Prophethood or Authority from God, it proves they are truthful.
They are not impossible to do for chosen Angels or God's forces or his exalted holy ones from humans. They are impossible for those astray in darkness and far from God's kingdom to do.
God being One and three is a paradox. It's a contradiction in terms.
So the atheists claim.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
It is Miracle. And no. God is not one and three. God is one only.
God is One Person.
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
God is One Being.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
Ok. Show me a controlled, repeatable, verifiable experiment that demonstrated telepathy actually works.
(Don't worry, I'm not holding my breath
)
I use to research stuff into this and came across some websites claiming such research has been done and been proven. There is some sites I use to go on to into this stuff. I haven't for a long time. Depending how interested you are, I can go again researching this again.Ok. Show me a controlled, repeatable, verifiable experiment that demonstrated telepathy actually works.
(Don't worry, I'm not holding my breath
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
What part of "Show me a controlled, repeatable, verifiable experiment that demonstrated telepathy actually works." suggested to you that I don't want to see evidence of such a thing?
You claim that telepathy is real, I want you to provide evidence for your claim, or admit that it is just wishful thinking/making stuff up.
Telepathy I would say includes energy given off to water and influencing it through consciousness: Dr. Masaru Emoto and Water Consciousness | The Wellness Enterprise
I will quote also this site: Answers for Telepathy - IELTS reading practice test (mini-ielts.com)
Defenders of telepathy point out that demanding impressive evidence from every study ignores one basic statistical fact: it takes large samples to detect small effects. If, as current results suggest, telepathy produces hit-rates only marginally above the 25 per cent expected by chance, it's unlikely to be detected by a typical ganzfeld study involving around 40 people: the group is just not big enough. Only when many studies are combined in a meta-analysis will the faint signal of telepathy really become apparent. And that is what researchers do seem to be finding.
What they are certainly not finding, however, is any change in attitude of mainstream scientists: most still totally reject the very idea of telepathy. The problem stems at least in part from the lack of any plausible mechanism for telepathy.
My comment: You can see from this, there seems to be evidence stats wise, just since no "mechanism" is put in place scientifically to explain it, it's not taken seriously by scientists.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
Firstly, it is nothing of the sort. "Telepathy" is non-sensory communication between people.
Secondly, Emoto was a quack who refused to put his claims to proper, scientific testing.
I couldn't see anything that constituted evidence for non-sensory communication there. Can you quote the relevant part. Thanks.
Ah, I read that bit but it says that there is no conclusive evidence, and the experiments that are touted as showing something merely return results similar to random chance..
Unfortunately, what you are demonstrating here is extreme confirmation bias. An article says "no evidence", but you read it as "yes evidence".
Why am I not surprised?
We read things differently. Yes, it's a bias thing. No one said conclusive evidence, I was saying the evidence now that more is being collected, stats wise, seems to be pointing towards telepathy. However, scientists are not taking seriously because no scientific mechanism has been explained.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
No. The article you posted does not present data that suggests telepathy is real. It shows results little different from random chance.
Scientists (and anyone else with critical faculties) aren't taking it seriously because there is nothing to take seriously.
You have reading comprehension issues. Yes it's a bias thing.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
Mr Pot, may I introduce you to Mr Kettle?
Yes, that's what I have been trying to explain to you.
The article stated that the results showed little difference to random chance, and that there were flaws in the study.
You read that as "Telepathy is proved true!"
That was early studies and isolated ones, because of they not having enough people. They said as more collaboration and studies occurred, the stats were no longer random chance, but showing significance favor of telepathy. Then said but scientists are not changing their views, since no mechanism is shown for telepathy.
Of course it's not conclusive yet, which is why they are calling for more studies and type of studies.
And one person.