A new discovery about evolution

[Sriram]

Except that some of them 'know' from their experience that it's definitively God and not Allah, and vice versa. Some of them 'know' definitively that it's a creator deity, whilst others 'know' that it's a nature spirit, or a contacting alien intelligence. What they believe they know is questionable, just as your sense of a biofield is questionable.

Actually it can be disputed. They have a sensation, whether they are sensing something or that sensory impression is being spontaneously created by a 'malfunction' of the brain is open to question.

No, that's exactly what we're doing - first you have to demonstrate a reason to think that there actually is a phenomenon. At the moment, you've not done that.

Why? If the 'sensation' can only occur on a living thing, how do you determine whether it's reality impinging on the person or a creation of the person impinging on their sense of reality - especially when only certain people claim to be susceptible to sensing it?

Given that we've not explained what the causal mechanisms of those phenomena are, we've no definitive way of knowing.

O.

Outrider,

So...you are willing to accept Dark Matter existing all around us as a fact and also include it in all further theories of the universe, even though there is absolutely no sensory evidence at all of its existence.....but the experiences of billions of people (along with significant objective evidence such as I have stated in some other posts), you will insist on dismissing as a figment of the imagination, not worthy of investigation?



 

[Outrider]

So...you are willing to accept Dark Matter existing all around us as a fact and also include it in all further theories of the universe, even though there is absolutely no sensory evidence at all of its existence.....

No. Dark matter is an hypothesis which explains the observed, and otherwise unexplained, phenomenon of the continued acceleration of the expansion of the visible universe. It's not 'fact', nor is it treated as such, and various hypotheses that branch off from it are part of the ongoing work to either validate or refute it.

but the experiences of billions of people (along with significant objective evidence such as I have stated in some other posts), you will insist on dismissing as a figment of the imagination, not worthy of investigation?

Again, no. The 'evidence' you've cited is personal testimony - your own admission was that this can't be objectively measured, which makes it questionable whether it's a phenomenon at all. Neither of those makes it unworthy of investigation, quite the opposite. However, the investigations have been done, and there's no evidence for a 'biofield'.

This is not some ideological drawing of a line in the sand - if you have something that you think is real, suggest how it could be tested. 'x number of people think it's real' is not a test, millions upon millions of people are already demonstrably wrong on a number of issues, why should this one be any different?

It's entirely plausible that Dark Matter/Energy will prove not to be real - they're the best explanation we've currently come up with, but that's not saying a great deal yet - but they remain only hypotheses awaiting confirmation or repudiation, they are far from a scientific theory yet.

O.

[jeremyp]

No. Dark matter is an hypothesis which explains the observed, and otherwise unexplained, phenomenon of the continued acceleration of the expansion of the visible universe.

That's Dark Energy. Dark Matter is the stuff that explains why stars in galaxies orbit the centre faster than expected.