His summary proposes a god that is totally disconnected from the physical world and then invokes a "multiverse" when the concept is total theory without evidence that it is so. This is not a debate about science, but a debate about philosophy, and the jaded philosopher simply doesn't know what to believe.
I do disagree with him when he says things like "science could not prove a god". Of course science could prove the existence of a god or the validity of a relgiion or the authenticity of magic if any of these were actually real. For example: "Double blind testing and extensive statistics indicate that prayers from Jehovah believers heal 800% more amputees than control group Thor believers."
The study WOULD exist if one religion actually was capable of producing results through prayer. As it stands the studies done on prayers for healing show no difference between religions.
There've been these studies and, obviously, they come up flat. I can't name the source but there was a PBS special on them (maybe Google: pbs + prayer + studies). I believe Daniel Dennette even made a bet with someone on the outcome. When these studies don't work, people say that we're not supposed to test God, he doesn't work like that, yada yada yada. It's a big yawn actually.
Google "prayer healing study" - you'll find several studies on prayer and healing. The results... Either no, trivial or bad results and it never matters who you pray to. If there really was a god hearing prayer we would have some evidence of it somewhere.
From what I've read and heard, almost every prayer study ever conducted comes out with null results. Even more revealing is that in some studies, when patients actually know they are being prayed for, they actually have a greater chance of perishing. This is due to the fact that they're relying on these prayers and a God to save them rather than relying on themselves. It's almost a form of giving up.
the world was discovered to be round in 18th century,columbus circumnavigated it, and 1969 when they landed the moon they saw from the moon that the world is round,but if only they read the bible before they would realize that it is round,
The Bible takes much of its theology from Babylonian mythology which states that the world is flat with a dome covering the "earth". You may be referring to "the circle of the Earth" from Job... that refers to the earth being circular - like a dinner plate - not spherical like a ball. There are many references in the Bible which indicate a flat earth such as Jesus seeing all the kingdoms from a tall mountain, "the ends of the earth", Daniel seeing a tree growing in the center of the earth etc.
@templarart lol...okay, stop and think about that for minute. You would subject the Architect of the known universe, an omnipresent, omniscient Being to a double blind scientific test to arrive at statistics for prayer??? WHAT??? lol God is NOT a mechanism! He is BEING of infinite intelligence by definition. I'm sorry, but not everything is tested empirically. This a category fallacy. God is not simply matter or energy that you can "test". He's the one sustaining your existence. :)
@dwheel39 Of course studies would work. The reason there's no difference is because your Architect Of The Known Universe and Existence Sustainer is like all other fictional Architects Of The Known Universe and Existence Sustainers: none of them exist. The Fallacy you should be looking up is 'Special Pleading' where you tell us that Jehovah doing nothing doesn't mean anything but Odin, Zeus, Ra, Mithra, Brahma, Baal etc (10,000x over) are obviously not real because they don't do anything.
@templarart Maybe you can help me out then. Can you prove to me you're not living in a dream? How would you go about that? i'm just curious.
What would a double blind study look like to prove, empirically, that you are loved by your family? How would you set that up? And you can't just say, because they told you. Their words are determined by brain chemistry through a natural selection process, are they not? And people can be dishonest. Tell me about your study, thank you.
> Can you prove to me you're not living in a dream?
Pointless. All logic and reason begins with accepting that reality is real. Questioning reality is a complete waste of time and thoroughly counterproductive. You might as well sit in a corner doing heroine.
> double blind study
Half prayed for. Half not. Even if not everyone was doing it right or well - there should be a significant difference. This study works great with medicine because medicine is real.
Why does is Dr Michael Shermer told he will have EIGHT minutes but the video is only 3:55? Jacoby's summary IS 8 minutes...
Dr Shermer won by logic. Jacoby just doesn't respond to his logical statements. He says you should NOT believe that there is NOT a God because you haven't looked everywhere in the universe yet. Isn't it arrogant to believe if you have NOT looked everywhere?
First, acknowledge that you do NOT know. And don't waste your time believing in God, UNTIL you have FOUND him?
I agree with you Jwedge. Jacoby's argument may as well be that we have not searched the whole universe and thus can't prove that there is not a band of Super Intelligent monkeys with feet for tongues controlling everything with invisible strings. They are outside physics after all and didn't COME INTO being. I belive it. It must be true! prove it isn't jacoby.
Ha look at the sheep giving the standing ovation. What a bunch of morons. It is the bell curve people. A good 50% of people have an IQ below 100. This explains the ubiquity of religion.
His summary proposes a god that is totally disconnected from the physical world and then invokes a "multiverse" when the concept is total theory without evidence that it is so. This is not a debate about science, but a debate about philosophy, and the jaded philosopher simply doesn't know what to believe.
MorganMarvinson 1 year ago
So much for an 8 minute conclusion.
Jrobes123 2 years ago
@Jrobes123 he didnt need 8 mins :P
alexhamster1134 1 year ago
well, it's much more comfortable position to say 'i don't know' than saying 'i know x' or 'i know y'
kombajndosalatek 2 years ago
15th century,i mean.sorry typographical error.thnx anyway.
busyutube 2 years ago
Shermer, i challenge you to write a book on what God would be like if he does exsist.
unworthy2BAslave 2 years ago
an evil genius
IconicFiber 2 years ago
Overall I believe Shermer did a great job.
I do disagree with him when he says things like "science could not prove a god". Of course science could prove the existence of a god or the validity of a relgiion or the authenticity of magic if any of these were actually real. For example: "Double blind testing and extensive statistics indicate that prayers from Jehovah believers heal 800% more amputees than control group Thor believers."
templarart 4 years ago 10
where can I see or read about this study?
dreaminginnoother 4 years ago
The study WOULD exist if one religion actually was capable of producing results through prayer. As it stands the studies done on prayers for healing show no difference between religions.
templarart 4 years ago
There've been these studies and, obviously, they come up flat. I can't name the source but there was a PBS special on them (maybe Google: pbs + prayer + studies). I believe Daniel Dennette even made a bet with someone on the outcome. When these studies don't work, people say that we're not supposed to test God, he doesn't work like that, yada yada yada. It's a big yawn actually.
dookdawg214 4 years ago
yea umm, can you cite some sources for this study. i seriously doubt its true
anishray 3 years ago
Google "prayer healing study" - you'll find several studies on prayer and healing. The results... Either no, trivial or bad results and it never matters who you pray to. If there really was a god hearing prayer we would have some evidence of it somewhere.
templarart 3 years ago
From what I've read and heard, almost every prayer study ever conducted comes out with null results. Even more revealing is that in some studies, when patients actually know they are being prayed for, they actually have a greater chance of perishing. This is due to the fact that they're relying on these prayers and a God to save them rather than relying on themselves. It's almost a form of giving up.
jnrosemas 3 years ago
the world was discovered to be round in 18th century,columbus circumnavigated it, and 1969 when they landed the moon they saw from the moon that the world is round,but if only they read the bible before they would realize that it is round,
busyutube 2 years ago
The Bible takes much of its theology from Babylonian mythology which states that the world is flat with a dome covering the "earth". You may be referring to "the circle of the Earth" from Job... that refers to the earth being circular - like a dinner plate - not spherical like a ball. There are many references in the Bible which indicate a flat earth such as Jesus seeing all the kingdoms from a tall mountain, "the ends of the earth", Daniel seeing a tree growing in the center of the earth etc.
templarart 2 years ago
Columbus made the trip in the 15th century, dolt, 1492.
I love creationist math.
KINGSHITTHROAT 2 years ago
@templarart lol...okay, stop and think about that for minute. You would subject the Architect of the known universe, an omnipresent, omniscient Being to a double blind scientific test to arrive at statistics for prayer??? WHAT??? lol God is NOT a mechanism! He is BEING of infinite intelligence by definition. I'm sorry, but not everything is tested empirically. This a category fallacy. God is not simply matter or energy that you can "test". He's the one sustaining your existence. :)
dwheel39 2 months ago
@dwheel39 Of course studies would work. The reason there's no difference is because your Architect Of The Known Universe and Existence Sustainer is like all other fictional Architects Of The Known Universe and Existence Sustainers: none of them exist. The Fallacy you should be looking up is 'Special Pleading' where you tell us that Jehovah doing nothing doesn't mean anything but Odin, Zeus, Ra, Mithra, Brahma, Baal etc (10,000x over) are obviously not real because they don't do anything.
templarart 2 months ago
@templarart Maybe you can help me out then. Can you prove to me you're not living in a dream? How would you go about that? i'm just curious.
What would a double blind study look like to prove, empirically, that you are loved by your family? How would you set that up? And you can't just say, because they told you. Their words are determined by brain chemistry through a natural selection process, are they not? And people can be dishonest. Tell me about your study, thank you.
dwheel39 2 months ago
@dwheel39
> Can you prove to me you're not living in a dream?
Pointless. All logic and reason begins with accepting that reality is real. Questioning reality is a complete waste of time and thoroughly counterproductive. You might as well sit in a corner doing heroine.
> double blind study
Half prayed for. Half not. Even if not everyone was doing it right or well - there should be a significant difference. This study works great with medicine because medicine is real.
templarart 2 months ago 2
Shermer wins via logic bomb.
superfisto 4 years ago 16
@superfisto nice sherman, ends the debate reading a book. lol. why not give a reference and the audience can stay home.
jamestrekky 1 year ago
Why does is Dr Michael Shermer told he will have EIGHT minutes but the video is only 3:55? Jacoby's summary IS 8 minutes...
Dr Shermer won by logic. Jacoby just doesn't respond to his logical statements. He says you should NOT believe that there is NOT a God because you haven't looked everywhere in the universe yet. Isn't it arrogant to believe if you have NOT looked everywhere?
First, acknowledge that you do NOT know. And don't waste your time believing in God, UNTIL you have FOUND him?
JWedg 4 years ago 4
I agree with you Jwedge. Jacoby's argument may as well be that we have not searched the whole universe and thus can't prove that there is not a band of Super Intelligent monkeys with feet for tongues controlling everything with invisible strings. They are outside physics after all and didn't COME INTO being. I belive it. It must be true! prove it isn't jacoby.
andrewcameron 4 years ago 2
Ha look at the sheep giving the standing ovation. What a bunch of morons. It is the bell curve people. A good 50% of people have an IQ below 100. This explains the ubiquity of religion.
happypantsman10 4 years ago
WOOHOO!
skinetx500 4 years ago