The God Hypothesis according to New Scientist

[Blind groper]

In the 17 March issue of New Scientist magazine, is an item by Prof. Victor Stenger about looking at the idea of a deity from a science viewpoint. In other words : "Can science carry out research work to determine the truth or otherwise of the belief in deity?"

Stenger firmly believes that this lies well inside the bailiwick of science, and there is no reason why scientists should not carry out suitable investigations. The major flaw in this, is that while science can test the reality of a specific model of deity, like the Christian god, it cannot test all possible versions.

Some tests have already been done. A proper double blind study of the power of prayor in helping sick people get better showed no effect. other studies looked at the Near Death Experience, in which a secret note was left on a high shelf in an operating theatre, where the 'out of body' spirit could read it, but the surgeons could not see it. None of those reporting this experience could relate the contents of the note.

Stenger is definitely an atheist and the author of a book on the subject.
http://www.amazon.com/God-Failed-Hypoth ... 1591024811

Any further ideas on how we can scientifically test the God Hypothesis?

[Thinking Aloud]

None of those reporting this experience could relate the contents of the note.

When you're floating above your own body, who's going to want to read a note on a high shelf?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Merged 2 threads on the same topic, by the same poster!

[Thinking Aloud]

Merged 2 threads on the same topic, by the same poster!

He was posting about a separate article in the same magazine.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Merged 2 threads on the same topic, by the same poster!

He was posting about a separate article in the same magazine.

OK. Looked the same to me - and to whoever reported it as a dupe.

Never mind - the two are close enough to share a thread.

[Thinking Aloud]

Fair enough - I'll re-quote the second OP, since it became buried in the other thread's responses.

In the 17 March issue of New Scientist magazine, is an item by Prof. Victor Stenger about looking at the idea of a deity from a science viewpoint. In other words : "Can science carry out research work to determine the truth or otherwise of the belief in deity?"

Stenger firmly believes that this lies well inside the bailiwick of science, and there is no reason why scientists should not carry out suitable investigations. The major flaw in this, is that while science can test the reality of a specific model of deity, like the Christian god, it cannot test all possible versions.

Some tests have already been done. A proper double blind study of the power of prayor in helping sick people get better showed no effect. other studies looked at the Near Death Experience, in which a secret note was left on a high shelf in an operating theatre, where the 'out of body' spirit could read it, but the surgeons could not see it. None of those reporting this experience could relate the contents of the note.

Stenger is definitely an atheist and the author of a book on the subject.
http://www.amazon.com/God-Failed-Hypoth ... 1591024811

Any further ideas on how we can scientifically test the God Hypothesis?

None of those reporting this experience could relate the contents of the note.

When you're floating above your own body, who's going to want to read a note on a high shelf?

[Svartalf]

Merged 2 threads on the same topic, by the same poster!

He was posting about a separate article in the same magazine.

OK. Looked the same to me - and to whoever reported it as a dupe.

Never mind - the two are close enough to share a thread.

you're the one that got duped.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Merged 2 threads on the same topic, by the same poster!

He was posting about a separate article in the same magazine.

OK. Looked the same to me - and to whoever reported it as a dupe.

Never mind - the two are close enough to share a thread.

you're the one that got duped.

[Blind groper]

I am a bit bemused about this.
I intended two threads, since the subject is somewhat different one to the other. I guess the titles were too similar and someone in administration got fooled by that.

Can they be separated again?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Stenger spoke at Skepticon III.

http://rationalia.com/gawdzilla/SkepticonIII.html

[Xamonas Chegwé]

OK - split the two topics again. Sorry for the confusion.


I blame... some people!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

That would be me.

[klr]

In the 17 March issue of New Scientist magazine, is an item by Prof. Victor Stenger about looking at the idea of a deity from a science viewpoint. In other words : "Can science carry out research work to determine the truth or otherwise of the belief in deity?"

Stenger firmly believes that this lies well inside the bailiwick of science, and there is no reason why scientists should not carry out suitable investigations. The major flaw in this, is that while science can test the reality of a specific model of deity, like the Christian god, it cannot test all possible versions.

...

Let religious people keep on coming up with versions of "God", and science can keep on knocking them down like ducks in a shooting gallery. They've had thousands of years, and still nothing that will stand up.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

How would religion be different today if there was a strict prohibition against any clergy higher than village priest or monk?

[apophenia]

Oddly enough, earlier today I came to the conclusion that 'real' and 'reality' aren't valid properties. This might make the notion of God being real somewhat problematic. Still much to be explored.

However, I don't think anyone here would care for me to keep them updated on my progress on this front. Or for that matter even keep speaking.




It's them hooonky tonk wimmen, Gimme, gimme, gimme the honky tonk blues.