We don't need any studies to see its bullshit.

Isn't this thread basically just an attempt by you to shift the burden of proof and claim we cannot prove prayers aren't real?

(May 17, 2014 at 4:52 am)jesus_wept Wrote: We don't need any studies to see its bullshit.

Isn't this thread basically just an attempt by you to shift the burden of proof and claim we cannot prove prayers aren't real?

You cannot show with a scientific study that prayer doesn't work. There is no shifting of the burden of proof....there is only the reality of the situation.

(May 17, 2014 at 4:57 am)Heywood Wrote:

(May 17, 2014 at 4:52 am)jesus_wept Wrote: We don't need any studies to see its bullshit.

Isn't this thread basically just an attempt by you to shift the burden of proof and claim we cannot prove prayers aren't real?

You cannot show with a scientific study that prayer doesn't work. There is no shifting of the burden of proof....there is only the reality of the situation.

I don't need to show any scientific studies to prove prayer doesn't work, you need to prove prayer does. And until you can I shall simply look at all the starving theist children and presume prayer is complete and utter nonsense. No studies are needed.

(May 17, 2014 at 5:09 am)jesus_wept Wrote:

(May 17, 2014 at 4:57 am)Heywood Wrote: You cannot show with a scientific study that prayer doesn't work. There is no shifting of the burden of proof....there is only the reality of the situation.

I don't need to show any scientific studies to prove prayer doesn't work, you need to prove prayer does. And until you can I shall simply look at all the starving theist children and presume prayer is complete and utter nonsense. No studies are needed.

Negative Jesus_Wept,

If I claimed that prayer worked....then yes I would need to show that it works. Since I do not make that claim, there is no need for me to show it to be true.

I am claiming prayer studies are fatally flawed. I gave reasons why they are fatally flawed. That's all that I am required to do.

(May 17, 2014 at 4:20 am)Heywood Wrote: This thread isn't about whether prayer works or if my God exists. It is about the prayer studies being fatally flawed.

But you didn't give reasons why the studies are fatally flawed, you gave ad hoc reasons why the concept being tested was unfalsifiable. You demonstrated that prayer is fatally flawed as a concept, not our attempts to study it.

(May 17, 2014 at 5:16 am)Heywood Wrote:

(May 17, 2014 at 5:09 am)jesus_wept Wrote: I don't need to show any scientific studies to prove prayer doesn't work, you need to prove prayer does. And until you can I shall simply look at all the starving theist children and presume prayer is complete and utter nonsense. No studies are needed.

Negative Jesus_Wept,

If I claimed that prayer worked....then yes I would need to show that it works. Since I do not make that claim, there is no need for me to show it to be true.

I am claiming prayer studies are fatally flawed. I gave reasons why they are fatally flawed. That's all that I am required to do.

And I'm saying the studies are also fatally flawed because praying is complete nonsense and none of them will work for that reason.

No scientific studies are needed to prove prayer doesn't work, instead you (or theism in general) needs to conduct some studies to prove they do... And then start praying for all the dying theist children..

Let's be honest here though. The only reason you're trying to say they're flawed is to argue from ignorance and claim we can't prove they don't work therefore they could work.

(May 17, 2014 at 5:34 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(May 17, 2014 at 4:20 am)Heywood Wrote: This thread isn't about whether prayer works or if my God exists. It is about the prayer studies being fatally flawed.

But you didn't give reasons why the studies are fatally flawed, you gave ad hoc reasons why the concept being tested was unfalsifiable. You demonstrated that prayer is fatally flawed as a concept, not our attempts to study it.

I did give reason....you just ignored them.

1. You cannot guarantee the control group(those to whom prayers are not offered) are not being prayed for by people not involved in the study.
2. You cannot guarantee God will treat "prayers" that are elements of a scientific study the same as genuine prayers.

In short, prayer studies are unreliable because you cannot isolate or control all the variables being studied. There is nothing ad hoc about these reasons. It is simply the reality of the situation.

---

(May 17, 2014 at 5:36 am)jesus_wept Wrote: Let's be honest here though. The only reason you're trying to say they're flawed is to argue from ignorance and claim we can't prove they don't work therefore they could work.

I said in post 1, sentence 1 of this thread that I don't believe in the power of prayer.....so why should I want to say they could work?

I could care less if you believe in prayer of if you don't. I am more interested in if you believe in prayer studies or you don't. If you believe prayer can be studied scientifically....you're a bit thick in the head in my opinion cause it is obvious such studies are flawed from the start.

(May 17, 2014 at 5:46 am)Heywood Wrote: 1. You cannot guarantee the control group(those to whom prayers are not offered) are not being prayed for by people not involved in the study.

Yes, you could: if you isolated the control group and administered their procedures (I seem to recall at least one of these studies being done in the lead up to and aftermath of heart surgery) without a publically available schedule, you could remove any reason for others to pray.

Or you could just, you know, have the control group ask the people they know not to pray for them.

Quote:2. You cannot guarantee God will treat "prayers" that are elements of a scientific study the same as genuine prayers.

This is actually the contention I'm raising: defaulting back to this "mysterious ways" nonsense whenever you don't get the results you want doesn't mean the study is flawed, it means the concept being tested is unfalsifiable.

Just because you move the goalposts doesn't mean the problem doesn't still lie with the thing you're seeking to defend.

Quote:In short, prayer studies are unreliable because you cannot isolate or control all the variables being studied. There is nothing ad hoc about these reasons. It is simply the reality of the situation.

You can't isolate or control every variable in any study, but you don't see anyone else seeking to invalidate other tests because "for all you know, god could have made that happen!" This is the issue: you are invoking something unfalsifiable to worm your way out of having to deal with a chink in your ideological armor, and it's the same thing we see a lot with theists, where they retract their god away from scientific investigation as much as possible in order to flee from the possibility that nothing will be found.

(May 17, 2014 at 5:46 am)Heywood Wrote:

(May 17, 2014 at 5:36 am)jesus_wept Wrote: Let's be honest here though. The only reason you're trying to say they're flawed is to argue from ignorance and claim we can't prove they don't work therefore they could work.

I said in post 1, sentence 1 of this thread that I don't believe in the power of prayer.....so why should I want to say they could work?

You said in post one, sentence one that you're not a big believer, which implies that you do believe. It certainly doesn't state you dont believe in prayer.

Quote:I could care less if you believe in prayer of if you don't. I am more interested in if you believe in prayer studies or you don't. If you believe prayer can be studied scientifically....you're a bit thick in the head in my opinion cause it is obvious such studies are flawed from the start.

I'm not the one who seems to think prayer studies prove anything, one way or the other, certainly not enough to start a thread on the subject...

Anyway, since you've shown you cannot comprehend what your own written words mean, have no interest in having an honest debate and have resorted to personal insults I dont think there is much point carrying on discussing your appeal to ignorance with you.

(May 16, 2014 at 9:09 pm)Heywood Wrote: Second, Prayer studies will contain a control group of people for whom prayers are not offered. But the researchers cannot guarantee that prayers are not offered for this group. A patient who is part of the not prayed for control group.....may mention he has a heart problem to a friend not part of or privy to the study....the friend then says a prayer for the patient. It is simply impossible to have an untainted control group. Somebody, outside the study is always going to know the patients condition.....and might pray for them.

Hang on, not so fast. What if a prayer study s done on people that don't believe in god. An experiment done on people that will indicate their religious affiliations among other information. That can ensure their friends don't pray for them. I'm talking about a study of this nature being done in a country with low religious statistics in their population like Norway and such.

The nature of your argument is evasive. It mirrors the nature of god himself. Perhaps you should ask yourself why all the cloak and dagger stuff?