talkmagic.co.uk

Gary Dickson wrote:I'm not denying the usefulness of science but having blind faith in an all powerful science is just as bad as having blind faith in an all powerful god.

Why?

One is believing in things that are testable, repeatable and measurable. Facts if you like. One is believing there is an invisible higher being that made the universe in 7 days.

I fail to see any connection? Could you expand your analogy?

mrgoat wrote:Most rational adults realise that fairytales are great fun, but they don't believe they are real. If one doesn't believe in ghosts and unicorns and spirits, I would suggest they wouldn't believe in god either. After all, it's just another fairytale.

Ok poor examples, I didn't specifically mean fairytales. I was talking about anything that science dismisses as not possible just because it hasn't walked up to a scientist and introduced itself. I couldn't be bothered making a huge list!

mrgoat wrote:Atheism and skepticism go hand in hand.

If you mean skepticism of the possibility that things exist that science denies, which is what I was talking about, I disagree. How many atheists read their horoscopes in the newspaper or visit Tarot readers? I know two personally. Just because someone doesn't believe in god or God, it doesn't mean they don't believe in something else that science hasn't managed to label yet!

mrgoat wrote:One is believing in things that are testable, repeatable and measurable. Facts if you like. One is believing there is an invisible higher being that made the universe in 7 days.

Rubbish. You are talking about Christianity and I'm happy to say this world isn't populated exclusively by them! Your bias is showing mrgoat. Have you tested and studied all other religions and spiritual paths? Until you do, I doubt you can answer that point with any measure of certainty.

Just to muddy the waters further, I consider myself a rational scientist and have a good-quality degree in biology, although as things have turned out I don't work in the field.

I also consider myself an occult philosopher, and have a roughly equivalent amount of knowledge and understanding of this field. In fact, I've been studying both the scientific and the esoteric in equal proportions all my life.

These two views of the world sit comfortably together within my psyche, with no need for doublethink or a split personality. Science is used to handle the hard and fast rules of reality. Occultism is used to handle the things that exist beyond the limits of what science can cope with.

In many ways it's a wonderful dual education. Looking up at the night sky, I can consider the astrophysics that light the fires of the stars and keep the planets in orbit. Or I can consider the ancient gods, the creation myths, and the deep meanings of astrology. Sometimes I can even consider both at once.

Wishmaster wrote:

mrgoat wrote:One is believing in things that are testable, repeatable and measurable. Facts if you like. One is believing there is an invisible higher being that made the universe in 7 days.

Rubbish. You are talking about Christianity and I'm happy to say this world isn't populated exclusively by them! Your bias is showing mrgoat. Have you tested and studied all other religions and spiritual paths? Until you do, I doubt you can answer that point with any measure of certainty.

Most of the major religions in the world share many of the same fairytales, actually.

* Many religions involve an initial Paradise preceding ordinary historical time.
* Many religions involve the story of a god who undergoes death and resurrection (see life-death-rebirth deity).
* The mythical geography of many religions involves an axis mundi, or Cosmic Center.
* Many myths feature a global flood.

OK, the 7 day example was snark, but the point remains.

Wishmaster wrote:

mrgoat wrote:Most rational adults realise that fairytales are great fun, but they don't believe they are real. If one doesn't believe in ghosts and unicorns and spirits, I would suggest they wouldn't believe in god either. After all, it's just another fairytale.

Ok poor examples, I didn't specifically mean fairytales. I was talking about anything that science dismisses as not possible just because it hasn't walked up to a scientist and introduced itself. I couldn't be bothered making a huge list!

No need for a huge list, just a couple of things you think exist that science doesn't will do.

mrgoat wrote:

Wishmaster wrote:Very good point! I often wonder how many of these people who mock those who believe in ghosts or unicorns or spirits or fairies or whatever, go to church and pray each Sunday to this theoretical spirit creature they call god?

I would guess none.

Most rational adults realise that fairytales are great fun, but they don't believe they are real. If one doesn't believe in ghosts and unicorns and spirits, I would suggest they wouldn't believe in god either. After all, it's just another fairytale.

Atheism and skepticism go hand in hand.

Not really... that is a present day delusion or "assumption" as it were. The world has known hundreds if not thousands of skeptical geniuses who were very much religious patrons. The difference is, they were actual SKEPTICS and not CYNICS such as we have today; there's a huge difference.

I am a Skeptic on many levels, but I refuse to become a dyed in the wool anything that is shut-off and essentially shut-down -- disconnected from what it means to be Human.

Most of the major religions in the world share many of the same fairytales, actually.

* Many religions involve an initial Paradise preceding ordinary historical time.
* Many religions involve the story of a god who undergoes death and resurrection (see life-death-rebirth deity).
* The mythical geography of many religions involves an axis mundi, or Cosmic Center.
* Many myths feature a global flood.

OK, the 7 day example was snark, but the point remains.

Thankfully, the 7-day tale IS NOT originally biblical but an adopted and far older bit of lore that came out of the Indus Valley rather than the supposed Navel of Society a.k.a. the Nile Delta & Iraq (where Eden supposedly existed)... But that's beside the point.

In viewing your horrid videos Goat it became quite apparent that you aren't just very young chronologically but more so at the mental and emotional levels of development and your ability to socialize. I honestly do feel sorry for you, but then I feel for all lost souls...

I bring up these facts about yourself because of the list you offer above and how such can be readily found on line these days as well as in several books on the topics of theology, religious history, and anthropology let alone comparison studies. Then again I have a Doctorates Degree in religion so this is something I'd be familiar with (and no, I'm not some born again "blind faith" clone... I'm not even a "Christian" by the common understanding of such).

Yes, there are many religious traditions that fit exactly what you have listed but that is not the whole of the issue, in that there are just as many traditions (if not more) that don't come close to the commonalities noted on your list. Too, a good majority of those that would fit that listing no longer exist or if they do it is only as either a very small remnant or contemporary (New Age) re-invention of the same. My point being that you simply don't know what you are saying outside of regurgitating bullet points you've been taught to rely on... I'd assume that comes from some Skeptic's group or even an Atheist's organization but can't say for certain, just a hunch given the common flow of things.

The other thing you are (conveniently) ignoring that most legit researchers do not, is the fact that all folklore/myth has a foundation in fact, you just need to follow the trail, so to speak. The the "World Deluge" is a great example in that many cultures have similar stories that all fit the same basic point in time; one that science has recently narrowed down to a quite literal cosmic event -- an Asteroid impact (probably in the ocean, hence all the rain and flooding).

Another fact that you have ignored is how, just like the Creation tale, the peoples of differing sects would adapt older legends and "personalize" them so as to fit their own people. This is a common practice throughout history but most especially during the time of oral tradition when such knowledge was passed from master to student for generations. But there is one other reason for these parallels, especially when it comes to the biblical situation (Old Testament); secrecy & sanctity.

As the famed library of Alexandria was being built the ruler of the region asked Jewish leaders to put their people's history onto paper so it could be retained in this amazing vault of knowledge. Fearful of disclosing some of the more mystical aspects of their traditions, the Essene scribes that penned this composition (what eventually becomes the Septangent) deliberately superimpose older tales from around the Holy Lands (remember that much of Asian proper falls into this category during ancient times, especially India & Persia (Iraq)), presenting these common tales as their own while likewise weaving a tremendous amount of "occult" knowledge within the text "for those with eyes with which to see" a.k.a. those initiated in the traditions of that particular priesthood who could understand the difference between Exoteric and Esoteric detail.

The Moral of the Story Is that you do not have all the facts and given the profile you seem to fall into as the result of your various on-line shenanigans and identities, there is serious reason to doubt you have the discipline required for anything more than a cursory look at this kind of thing. Which brings me back to the probability that your comment is based on what you found somewhere else rather by someone else, rather than your own act of study & research. It is an action that is most akin to bringing a knife to a gun fight...you're ill-equipped!


We have touched on the Fey and a belief in Fairies... isn't it ironic that every major culture has stories about something similar as well as "little people" that reside in obscurity?

There have been some very fantastical theories put forth about such entities, my favorite being the Catholic Church's claim that they were that aspect of the angelic forces who sided with Lucifer against God who did not return to heaven on time to gain a "pardon" of sorts. But then facts tend to speak much louder and the fact that an actual Race not only existed but on a more limited level, still exists that could be easily fit into such lore; the present day remnant being the pygmy race who are spoken of in myth, as "The Dancers to the Gods" who had some very unique understanding when it came to metallurgy, the art of war, and the preservation of history.

Elves are another interesting reality in that their appearance in the Northern Europe and the present day UK coincides with the first mass exodus of Orientals (Chinese and what we'd now class as Japanese); a people that wrote in a unique style of symbols, who had unusual understanding in how to make weapons, longevity (and on-going vitality and youthful presence) and again, they were masters of war as well as wisdom. The fantasiful image of the Elven race seems to match perfectly with the historic data which more or less confirms the fact that Elves really did exist... sort of.

The obligation of science is to look at ALL possibilities and not constrict or edit perspective if the final analysis is to be pure and untainted by human bias. As I explained previously, this is practically as impossible to know as would be the Holy Grail itself (the Cup). When however, science is used as a bludgeon and takes on a dogmatic mantel, it no longer serves humanity but rather "man" -- the carnal beast that has intent of conquest and near perpetual courses of social manipulation be it through religion, social-political philosophy, or cult-mind (such as we find with present day "Skeptics")

So, now that you have managed to pull this thread completely off course from it's intent and the more positive flow that had existed, maybe we can get back to discussing Dowsing rather than continuing a game of wits that is more than redundant.

here's one for you...

how come there are naturally gifted singers? people who can just open their traps and vocal beauty come out? they dont need training, practice or anything else..they can just "do it"...

IAIN wrote:here's one for you...

how come there are naturally gifted singers? people who can just open their traps and vocal beauty come out? they dont need training, practice or anything else..they can just "do it"...

hahaha My mother used to get so peeved over the fact that she can't carry a tune to save her life and yet my dad, my brother and I can harmonize off one another at the blink of an eye. The real irony being that she's been in and out of so many church choirs on the ground that scripture states "Go forth and make a joyful song..."

Sadly, those holy writings never explained that it should be joyful for those that hear such tones

Craig Browning wrote:

mrgoat wrote:
Atheism and skepticism go hand in hand.

Not really... that is a present day delusion or "assumption" as it were. The world has known hundreds if not thousands of skeptical geniuses who were very much religious patrons. The difference is, they were actual SKEPTICS and not CYNICS such as we have today; there's a huge difference.

Could you name three?