James Randi: Science Will Never Support Religion

James Randi has shunned faith since he was a kid spending collection plate money on ice cream. "If my dad and mom are up there someplace... I ask them to forgive me."

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• bigthink
• James
• Randi

[tabula123456]

@jthomaston

"There are some questions that rationality, logic, and evidence cannot answer."

Then nothing can answer those questions. Saying 'I believe it to be true without logic, evidence etc'... is NOT an answer. It's not even a calculated guess.

"...that he is completely correct"

How can you know that you're correct without comparing it to the acquired evidence?

Do you suggest we just guess our way through life? That has been tried and tested already....it's called the middle ages.

[DragonsREpic]

@Alkhoren i didnt become an atheist instantly eaither, i though about it over time, all religions have some sort of faith, you cant distinguish between any religion

[CaptainSpellingError]

@jerrydecaire1 Alright thanks!

[jerrydecaire1]

@CaptainSpellingError

Kelley's "IRREDUCIBLE MIND: A New Psychology for the 21st Century" is also a good read and proffers up virtually every evidential argument there is to support the mind is not equal to the brain hypothesis.

[jerrydecaire1]

@CaptainSpellingError

I tried to provide that link but I keep getting ERROR in BIG RED Letters. Simply C&P this in the Google search bar: physical review a 65, 033818

You will see the second link on that page which will take you to the PR PDF. It's strong evidence that consciousness is fundamnetal but how that's interpreted will vary depending on your worldview.

If it's a tough read, refer to chapter 8 in Robert Lanza's popular book, BIOCENTRISM. They spell it out in layman's terms.

[CaptainSpellingError]

@jerrydecaire1 Can you PM me those paper names or links etc? I have a database if you can't dig up actual links. The two-slit experiment has always fascinated me in the best kind of way

[jerrydecaire1]

@CaptainSpellingError There's a cap on the amount of words allowed so I tend to abbreviate my sentences. In other words, it's unfathomable the universal constants and complexity and conscious self-awareness is just an accident-far more likely some vague "bearer of intention" is in play. Call it God, call it what you will. The two-slit experiment shows that a conscious observer effects particle behavior (I can provide that paper-pub 2002 and 2012) suggesting a top-down theory-not the reverse

[aboyborninjune]

a whole minute later and I'm still waiting....

[CaptainSpellingError]

@jerrydecaire1 I don't understand the phrase "beggars description absent intentionality" I understand the words but I do not comprehend the phrase.

[aboyborninjune]

Damn right science will never support religion. Question is, when is (more) people going to stop support it?

[jerrydecaire1]

@CaptainSpellingError It has happened: The universal constants' improbability beggars description absent intentionality. Atheists say there is no evidence and then conjure up the multiverse theory to counter the constant's facts in an effort to eliminate what they claim isn't evidence. Peculiar, isn't it?

[mcnowski]

I dont need faith, Ive spent the last 15 years exploring with hallucinogenic plants. I don't need faith because I have been there and seen for myself. If you cant conceive of "God" because Christianity or any other religion has tainted this word for you, that's your problem. God is everything, the universe is an intelligence test