Posted on 11/17/2004 11:06:41 AM PST by ElkGroveDan
Then you would ignore the THOUSANDS of studies done by universities like Princeton about the efficacy of prayer on the recuperation and survival rates of surgery patients? (Blind, double blind studies over short distances, long distances, prayer for people you know, people you don't know, etc.)
Or maybe this isn't the kind of science that fits in with your preconceived answers, eh?
Are you saying you would stay in bed and pray rather than go to the doctor?
Really? I didn't know that. What's the max sustainable range for a horse? For a man, it's about 20 miles day. I would've thought a horse could do much better, and certainly in less time.
Contrariness does not become a dialogue.
If you want to answer a question, that's fine. But it would appear that you have all the genuineness of a Monty Python skit on Arguments.
Do you believe in the efficacy of prayer, as proven through Science, or not?
Yes is spelled YES, and no is spelled NO.
I can't believe that I haven't seen any jokes on this thread about this being the reason they call it the HUMAN RACE.
I can go to the doctor and also pray. Your position of only prayer prevents the use of modern drugs to fight infectuions.
Teddy Kennedy was 'born to swim'. Wonder how he does it? Guess he's pretty buoyant with that front yard.
Guess he was born to swim, then run...from the scene of the crime!!!!
I think you are making a big leap of faith to accept these studies as definitive. A much larger leap of faith than required for the evidence supporting evolution.
"Your position of only prayer prevents the use of modern drugs to fight infectuions."
You have assumed something I didn't say. Don't presume to understand an answer I didn't give.
Secondly, you haven't answered the question: Do you believe in the efficacy of prayer, as proven through SCIENCE, or not?
You put the choice as being between drugs and prayer, not me.
False premis as it has not been proven through science.
Do you believe in the evolution, as proven through SCIENCE, or not?
A few million years of divergent evolution would also get you a whole lotta intermediary fossils - where are they?
Would you like me to direct the flood of studies SINCE THE 1950's UP TO TODAY to your direct email? Then you could pick and choose which of the scientists you agree with, and which you disagree with.
A false premise is that which leads to an unsupportable conclusion, or a conclusion that is demonstrably incorrect.
Which exact false premise are you concerned about while trying to answer the question: Do you believe in the efficacy of prayer, as proven by SCIENCE, or not?
Oh, and by the way, answering a question is a time-dishonored tradition for those who have no interest in pursuing a line of inquiry in an honest and open-minded fashion (isn't that what scientists always criticize Creationists for ?).
False.
My religious beliefs have no bearing on the validity of the theory of evolution.
No. Just give me your best shot.
So as we conclude this *ahem* discussion, let me sum up:
You believe the thousands of scientific studies about the efficacy of prayer to be false, even though they point to the same conclusion.
Therefore, there is some Science with which you agree, based on evidence derived from the scientific method, and there is some Science with which you disagree, despite the evidence derived from the scientific method.
What, then, is it about the "evolutionist" scientific method that is so superior over other scientists and their scientific method?
You are ignoring what is inconvenient to your point of view, aren't you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.