ScienceWhopper:Natural History According to Jeffrey Holland

[_Franktalk]

Abrahamic religions are the ones we have been considering and I think you would agree that Christians think Muslims are wrong and Jews think Muslims are wrong. Muslims overtly hate Jews in most parts of the world and are not too fond of Christians dating back to the Crusades. I have personally heard a GA of the LDS Church say that Jews represent the Anti-Christ, so no great amount of understanding evident between Jews and Mormons. Christians think Jews are wrong and blame them for killing Jesus.

All in all, quite a mess actually.

This was addressed to Hoops but I will add a comment.

I agree it is a total mess and getting worse by the day. But this is because of man and not of God. Many in religion seek happiness for them self and not a relationship with God. In this they stop when they feel good. The megachurches are an example of motivational speakers and not of any relationship with God. Money and a status symbol drive many to church. The following applies all to often:

Act 8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
Act 8:19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
Act 8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
Act 8:21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.

This is just one of many ways in which people can seek power in its many forms.

[_Darth J]

Franktalk and Hoops,

Michael Persinger is a colleague who still works in the area of bioelectromagnetics, a field I left in the late 1990's. Folks who have worked long in this area of research are aware that properly applied electromagnetic fields can have profound effects on human perception. For example, exposure to specifically designed electromagnetic fields can give humans the sensation that their skin in being severely burned by coupling to and stimulating specific nerve receptors near the surface of the skin. Not even the toughest trained soldiers are able to stay in this field for more than a 15 or 20 seconds. Of course, exposure such causes no actual burn damage to the skin. By coupling to and stimulating other components of the neurological system, other false perceptions can be induced as can a number of adverse biological reactions.

In terms of false perceptions, Dr. Persinger has shown that selective magnetic stimulation of the brain can give rise to religious experiences or perceptions that religionists describe as transcendent, oneness with God and the universe, and the clear presence of another, otherwise undetectable, being.

Skeptics and atheists report similar experiences or perceptions when undergoing this kind of magnetic stimulation. Persinger's device has been dubbed the God Helmet.

Since this device can induce, at will, perceptions indistinguishable from religious experiences reported by religionists as "the presence of God" or the presence of the Holy Spirit, how can you claim that such perceptions come from God?

The question becomes even more problematic when one considers that so-called deeply religious experiences such as visions and oneness with God can also be induced by drugs, or even the occasional production and release of endogenous compounds in the brain such as DMT.

Do you not see this as a problem for claim that confirmation of truth comes exclusively from God or the Holy Ghost?

DrW:

Since electromagnetic fields can simulate the pain of one's skin being severely burned, are you willing to infer from this that nobody ever really has their skin severely burned?

[_Hoops]

Abrahamic religions are the ones we have been considering and I think you would agree that Christians think Muslims are wrong and Jews think Muslims are wrong.

Yes. I would agree.

All in all, quite a mess actually.

Okay, I'll stipulate. But so what? what conclusions do you draw from this? How do you propose this gets unmessy?

[_DrW]

DrW:

Since electromagnetic fields can simulate the pain of one's skin being severely burned, are you willing to infer from this that nobody ever really has their skin severely burned?

Of course not. The physical evidence for burned skin is readily seen in hospitals around the country every day.

What I am saying is that electromagnetic field stimulation can give rise to prerceptions of things (heat, light, sound, the holy spirit, supernatural beings, etc.) that are not really there.

Before people decide to base their entire decision making process and worldview on such perceptions, it might be a good idea to look for some confirming physical evidence.

In religion, folks claim truth and knowledge based on their perceptions, and that is why there are so many conflicting religions in the world, and why real truth or belief based on reality is seldmon, if ever, found among their teachings.

[_DrW]

Abrahamic religions are the ones we have been considering and I think you would agree that Christians think Muslims are wrong and Jews think Muslims are wrong.

Yes. I would agree.

All in all, quite a mess actually.

Okay, I'll stipulate. But so what? what conclusions do you draw from this? How do you propose this gets unmessy?

By its very nature, I don't believe that religion can get "unmessy". I think that modern religion, the natural evolution of ancient superstitions, has outlived its utility to humankind and should, for the most part, be abandoned. Religion now does far more harm than good.

[_Hoops]

In religion, folks claim truth and knowledge based on their perceptions, and that is why there are so many conflicting religions in the world, and why real truth or belief based on reality is seldmon, if ever, found among their teachings.

B.S. For you to know this, you would first have to know all that reality has to offer. Which you don't.

[_sock puppet]

By its very nature, I don't believe that religion can get "unmessy". I think that modern religion, the natural evolution of ancient superstitions, has outlived its utility to humankind and should, for the most part, be abandoned. Religion now does far more harm than good.

Well said, Dr W, well said.

[_Hoops]

By its very nature, I don't believe that religion can get "unmessy". I think that modern religion, the natural evolution of ancient superstitions, has outlived its utility to humankind and should, for the most part, be abandoned. Religion now does far more harm than good.

Why hasn't evolution discarded religion by now? Why should we presume that ancient superstitions lead to modern religion?

Religion does far more harm than good? Ridiculous.

[_DrW]

By its very nature, I don't believe that religion can get "unmessy". I think that modern religion, the natural evolution of ancient superstitions, has outlived its utility to humankind and should, for the most part, be abandoned. Religion now does far more harm than good.

Why hasn't evolution discarded religion by now? Why should we presume that ancient superstitions lead to modern religion?

Religion does far more harm than good? Ridiculous.

Why hasn't evolution gotten rid of our vestigial appendix, a feature of human anatomy which clearly causes more harm than good?

There is no rule that says the evolution will always come up with the best solution in every case. For example, evolution resulted in a human eye in which the critical components are actually arranged in the wrong order, while in the octopus eye they are arranged properly. Evolution works with what it is given.

Sometimes humans can give evolution some help. That is why we have dogs, vaccines, food crops, farm animals, and a myriad of other things that are useful because they have been genetically altered (evolved) by humankind.

Humans can control evolution to some large extent, and we should do a better job of it starting with vestigial religion.

[_Franktalk]

Before people decide to base their entire decision making process and worldview on such perceptions, it might be a good idea to look for some confirming physical evidence.

So where is the physical evidence of dark matter and dark energy? Where is the physical evidence that objects smaller than a planck length lose locality? Are you sure you wish to open this can of worms?