Who won the Collins-Dawkins Debate?

Although there is little reason for your wife to go wrong (on this very obvious natural phenomenon) I don't see how her testimonial can be a scientific evidence.There is the issue of trust here. The only reason why you believe it rained outside is because you trust your spouse word. While scientific evidence isn't based on trust.I might be wrong....

But scientific methode does not at any point exclude the fact that you might find chocolate tasty or not.So your point is that with experience alone you can come up with a personal truth. (I agree)But personal experience doesn't shape the world around us.
If your colorblind, and you see the sky as green. Is it true ?

Hi MikeJust to add my 2 cents.You said in a previous post that you think you have witnessed a miracle (or a prayer being answered).I'd like to welcome you to the club of millions of people claiming the same thing. And when millions of people claim something, well, usually we analyse the claim scientifically.And it has been done. Now if any studies on the power of prayer is not satisfactory to you, you could maybe point out what (in your opionion) should of been taking in consideration, or what were the mistakes done by the people in charge of the study.Note that the simple fact that you think you were witness to a miracle makes your judgment biased.If you have a better, or more accurate way to study the power of prayer, please I would like to hear it.Because if all you're saying is that we can't study it and no study will ever be valid to your eyes because you witnessed a miracle yourself, well this discussion cannot go further, with you that is. Because no amount of evidence could ever make you doubt of what you saw.Here is a quote I found looking in double-blind studies

quote:

---

Although most people have heard of double-blind studies, few recognize their true significance. It’s not that double-blind studies are hard to understand; rather, that their consequences are difficult to accept. Why? Because double-blind studies tell us that we can’t trust our direct personal experience.

---

here's the full link

Sorry to butt in but I just want to say something.The reason most people do not believe in prayer is because JUST LIKE bigfoot, theses "evidences" have been tested and found wanting.Now you accept that bigfoot most probably doesn't exist, but if science says prayer have no effect your religious conditionning kicks in and you don't use the same judgment anymore.God want everyone to know about him, he wants to reach to all of us, so saying theses studies are worthless because GOD doesn't want us to "study" him is a cope out.If you agree that God created everything, then all science is doing is studying him (through his creation).Power of prayer have been studiedFor you to believe there is evidence for the power of prayer you would simply need to disregard every scientific studies.

Look at your assertion for just a second here.A bunch of scientist decided to test the power of prayer. Theses scientists used the best methode available to them for this studies.They came to an answer that doesn't fit your personal experience. And so, you decide to disregard (or simply say "they might be doing it wrong") the fact that you personally feel like your prayers are answered.Well whatever your prayers, whatever your reason, I can safly say that you are wrong. Century of science prove your method wrong.Don't you see that you only disagree with science when science disagree with your preconceived ideas ? Doesn't it give you a hint that MAYBE your the one that is wrong ? Instead of claiming that hundreds of people are wrong and you are right. Because claiming that there is evidence for the power of prayer is exactly doing that.You have to take into consideration that theses studies weren't done to disproof anything, but rather to see if by praying for someone we could somehow affect him/her. The conclusion is no.Now you could have wonderful experience of how prayer did work for you, but what you doing is simply putting together events and to you it seems like it could only could of happened because you prayed. And that's where you are wrong.we cannot trust our own experienceAnd that's why we have peer-reviewd, double blind studies etc.
It's not just "for fun".Now you choose personal experience over solid data. It is a choice you can make obviously but, it is not a rational choice. There are people who think they can fly, there are people who think they have invisible friends...personal experience has to be tested. And tested in a scientific manner.

Truthlover Here's a link that I found very interresting for double blind studies.You might want to read it.

How would that help us ? But we don't know what they all do. What are you talking about ? I thinkyou missed the point, wich was :FROM that study, nutritionnist started advising eating more vegies and more fruits to prevent cancer. Double blind study proved us wwrong yet again. Fruit and vegetables does NOT help prevent cancer. The whole point here, is that we cannot trust our own experience. And that double blind study are the most accurate form of study available to us. So when it doesn't agree with our preconceived ideas (like fruit preventing cancer) WE ADAPT. Because double blind studies give more accurate results.As for the 100% wrong, I don't know wher eyou get that. I'm just trying to say that double blind study have shown us that we cannot trust our own experience. Why is it so hard to understand.So each time you have to choose between personal experience and the result of a published double blind study...well I think I've said it enough now More beating around the bush...Doctors recommended estrogene based on a observational study. There is no % of being right. Just like fruits and vegies seemed to prevent cancer, estrogen seemed to be effective against heart disease.And double blind studies shown us how WRONG we were. And I agree with you. But there is one thing you might not yet grasp.
double blind studies are one level above other type of studies it's like the super study. And I never said not to trust any opther study, I said, double blind study is more accurate. So if a double blind study disagree with an observational study, the observational one is wrong. It's as simple as that.

And when Double blind studies find none to very little correlation between people that are prayed for and people that arent.When all the evidence (on a larger scale) show that christian (or any othe religious group) don't live longer then an atheist.You choose to think that prayer have an effect.So I think you DO disagree. Or if you don't you'r making a poor case for yourself

I can give you my version You : there is evidence for the power of prayer
Percy :No there is no evidence (scientific) for the power of prayer
You : Well Here's is my experience [examples given]
Percy : Humkay, well that's nice but your experience isn't proof of evidence
You : yes it is
Me : No it isn't, it isn't scientific proof anyways
everyone else who isn't a christian : No it isn'tAnd I think we explained many times.Basically whatever you did (your own personal calculation) the people who made the double blind studies did it better. So whatever conclusion you might find with your non scientific method doesn't even compare to the accuracy of the double blind studies.IE : You could claim that to you,. and all your community, the ground under your feet doesn't budge, and you refuse to believe people that say that the earth is rotating.

Well, you might think what you want, but it happens a lot that we get proven wrong about things we though almost 100% sure.And note that there is even MORE INCREDIBLE stories of prayer recovery, your storie isn't even out of the ordinary if I compare them to what I heard in the past. And they might be all true, though still, on the larger picture, tehre is no evidence for the power of prayer.As an analogy..A kid that sends a letter to santa clause every year with his wishlist, and everyyear at he gets all he wrote. To him evidence point strongly that santa clause exist.Well your that Kid. You do not understand all the variable in play, you do not consider everything, because your not perfect. And when differents teams of people carried on there study, better prepeared, better equiped, and better trained then you, you disagree with them based on what ? Personal experience...You would like to still believe that santa clause is bringing you thoses gifts....Edited by Kader, : No reason given.Edited by Kader, : No reason given.

I was reading some prayer studies when it strike me.IF there would be a positive correlation with prayer and patient health christian everywhere would be going crazy.But when all we find is a lack of evidence all we hear is :
"God doesn't want to be tested pfffttt"
"I will have to tell you that my God isn't prone to such investigation by mere mortal!!!"Can't you even see that it is a cop-out ?!?!?More like, "What I have been thaught all my life cannot be wrong, all thoses incredible experience, all thoses prayer answered cannot be purely chance, I refuse to believe so, there must be a reason why theses studies doens't agree with me............."That's when you create a cop-outEdited by Kader, : No reason given.

Agnosticism is not a church...
I hope it will never be called a church neither...A "movement" at best, but certainly not a church.

No offense taken at all