Quote:
|
Originally Posted by asaris
All I'm trying to prove is that they're not logically impossible.
|
I'm not entirely sure how you're going to do that, but it seems like you're going to just talk about how you're right and everyone else is wrong.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by asaris
We just aren't sure about what the laws of nature are; we think we have some idea, but of course, people have thought that in the past and been shown to be wrong. Some things that were impossible under Newtonian physics are possible under Einsteinian physics, and so it might be the case that some things impossible under Einsteinian physics turn out to be possible under some new physical theory. In fact, if I understand the theory (and, not being a physicist, I could be wrong), walking on water is in fact possible. Sure, it's very, very, very unlikely. But it's possible.
|
It's not a case of something being impossible, but that they are not covered by the physics involved. Yes one day we might enter into some Star Trek-like age where we tunnel through subspace to reach far parts of the galaxy. But we aren't talking about something on the fringes of science, yet to be described by the foremost minds of tomorrow.
We're talking about a man in sandals and a robe skipping across the surface of a lake. For thousands of years people have observed gravity and it has become somewhat taken for granted, rightly so I would say.
Perhaps there is some phenomenon regarding the contact of a particular type of sandal material and israeli water, but I would have thought someone would have caught onto this in the ensuing 2000 years.
By your reasoning it is possible that I could wake up tomorrow morning and be able to fly using my mind.
The whole process of logical reasoning breaks down when you say "well there might be something we can't possibly think of or discover", and assume that this has to be factored in to every argument. It kind of defeats the whole purpose of arguing because noone could ever be proved right or wrong.