Can the supernatural be detected by science?

[4gold]

Let's say you had me in a controlled laboratory environment, and every single blind person that I touched could instantly see, or that every amputee I touched would instantly grow limbs, or that every time I stepped on water I did not sink...what scientific evidence would suggest that the supernatural exists?

My argument is that science is only useful to disprove a philosophical claim, not to prove one. I have about a dozen arguments that I prefer for the existence of God, but none are scientific. All involve reason and philosophy, instead.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 69 by Bust Nak]


"They think it was the golden calf that parted the Rea Sea? They think golden calf is God's preferred way of being worshiped? Or maybe none of it happened at all."

Money is the root of all evil.

Even according to your preferred holy book, this is not true. It is the 'love of money' that is the root, not money itself.

It's false either way though. See any psychopath.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 66 by ThePainefulTruth]

Even if they were still polytheists, why would they abandon the pillar of fire and smoke for a inanimate golden calf? That was sort of the point of Exodus, Moses monotheistic model supplanting polytheism.

You're right, they're not idiots. The only way they'd do that is if there was no pillar of fire and smoke, but there was a golden calf.

[Kenisaw]

Let's say you had me in a controlled laboratory environment, and every single blind person that I touched could instantly see, or that every amputee I touched would instantly grow limbs, or that every time I stepped on water I did not sink...what scientific evidence would suggest that the supernatural exists?

My argument is that science is only useful to disprove a philosophical claim, not to prove one. I have about a dozen arguments that I prefer for the existence of God, but none are scientific. All involve reason and philosophy, instead.

If none of your arguments are scientific, then they do not involve reason.

And reason would dictate that God has designed the universe so that It (God) would be undetectable, so as not to influence the free will we have to make our moral choices. God's supernatural existence would then require that we'd be unable to detect or experience the supernatural as well.

O_o

Then what is the reason for that same god creature taking hundreds of years to write a book for everyone to read announcing it's existence? It makes the universe so it can't be detected, then writes a book (or influences it depending on what version of cultist is doing the claiming) and spends all its time doing things that allows it to be detected.

Apparently the god creature is living a lie. How fascinating...

[Monta]

So you think that theists will only agree to find God with non-specific or untestable features?

Yes. The moment they agree to testable feature, is the moment they open themselves up to falsification. Those who were careless enough to make specific, testable features will either back track, or start their journey to disbelief.

I would like to see some non-theists agree to some testable feature that they love their wife/husband. I would like to know the proof methods used, no brain stuff like feelings, knowing or being sure but don't know how to explain it.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 74 by Monta]

Facial features on recognition.
Body muscle tension/posture.
Behavior.
Level of chemicals in the blood stream when they are near by.

Now that this is done, what's your concession?