Hare Krishna

[Akincana Krishna dasa]

I'm going to jump back a few pages here, out of necessity (since I don't have access a fully-functional time machine yet). Still, I'm in no Hare.

We're working on the premise that life is a product of dumb energy, right? So when someone dies, there's just been some type of chemical reaction. Someone should be able to reverse that, right?

Let's try a little experiment. We'll take some basic ingredients: eggs, flour, sugar, butter or margarine, dried fruit. We take those items and mix them together in the traditional manner, pour the mixture into a suitable tin and pop it into a hot oven for a prescribed lenght of time. Upon removal of the tin from the oven, what would we expect to find? After all, all we put in were eggs, flour, sugar etc and exposed them to dumb energy, so shouldn't we expect those same ingredients to come out instead of (hopefully) a nice fruit sponge cake?

Clearly, there has been some type of chemical reaction. Someone should be able to reverse that and reassemble the eggs etc, right? For a simpler example, see if you can come up with a method to recombine a pile of ashes into the paper it used to be before I put a match to it. (Protip: not all chemical eractions are reversible. )

Again. *theory*. Scientists develop *theories* then test their truth value through various experiments. If evidence is found during this process that increases the truth value of that theory then it is further studied and tested until they have enough evidence to reach a certainty level of sigma 7.

Whoa there, lest we give our new friend - hi, by the way - the wrong idea. Scientists develop hypotheses, which are then tested by experiment. Only when they've been tested to destruction by repeated experiments by rival scientists who would just love to tear into false or erroneous data does whatever remains get to be called a theory. Even then, it's not beyond experimental reach; as new and improved data comes along, together with more sophisticated and sensitive detecting method, the relevant theories may (or may not) be modified appropriately. It takes a fundamental paradigm shift to completely overturn a theory, however.

Thanks for a more polite response. With you, I can just respectfully agree to disagree. But with full respect.

I agree that it might be true. I just don't have to swallow it until there's proof. I think that's how a lot of atheists feel about God, right? Tend to be real skeptical, right? That's how I feel about the life comes from chemistry hypothesis.

Thanks for the distinction between theory and hypothesis.