Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
There are many many examples of individuals claiming to receive communication from non physical beings.
Because science cannot explain it, the views of these millions of eye witness accounts are dismissed as fraud or fantasy
|
They're primarily dismissed on a lack of evidence or the ability to study and reproduce the events. If science cannot even have a chance to even observe it, let alone explain it, there is no reason for it to invest time and money into it. Trust me, if there were a way to study paranormal activity in such a way that can be recorded and measured, it would be a scientific endeavour.
Quote:
|
Science does not evaluate things neutrally, it only accepts evidence that fits in with its own paradigm.
|
If the paradigm of science is that evidence can be studied, reproduced, tested, confirmed, observed, and otherwise depended upon to either negate or confirm a hypothesis (or potential fact), then that's not such a bad thing.
And you aren't implying that Creationists present their "data" with any neutrality, are you? Are they working from a peer-reviewed process? Are they open to scrutiny? Doubt? Verification?
Sorry, who's lacking in neutrality?
Strange, what's your opinion on empiricism?