(August 5, 2014 at 8:38 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(August 5, 2014 at 8:18 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Hows this for critical thought. If I were to see a video for instance of a police officer robbing a bank, you're saying I am to conclude that all police officers are criminals?
This is an inapt comparison. Bank robberies are mundane things that do not require miracles. Faith healings, however, require miracles that are divorced from physical causes. Because of that, I am comfortable pointing out that faith healers have continually been dubunked (not just Christian faith-healers) and suggesting that a skeptical mindset would serve the thinking person better.
I can underestand your discomfort at my point, but your objection, being irrelevant, will be disregarded.
Faith healing has not been debunked, in fact it has been supported by scientific study of the "placebo effect".
this is part of an article from http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...-the-mind/
can read the free version here http://web.as.uky.edu/statistics/users/r...oStudy.pdf
Quote:As Mr. Wright’s experience illustrates, a patient’s expectations and beliefs can greatly affect the
course of an illness. When psychological factors tied to an inactive substance such as
Krebiozen lead to recovery, doctors call the improvement a placebo effect.
(August 5, 2014 at 8:38 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(August 5, 2014 at 8:18 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: No, but eyewitness testimony is accepted as evidence, would you like to see some?As anyone who has taken Psychology 101 knows, eyewitness testimony is some of the least-reliable evidence around.
Maybe so, but it's still admissible as evidence in any court.
(August 5, 2014 at 8:38 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Rather than that, I'd prefer to see medical records of the "healed", both before and after the alleged healing.
What you got for that?
I believe this would be called proof....