[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 124 KB, 1300x1154, Prophecy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10330046 No.10330046 [Reply] [Original]

Any scienctific explanation for prophecies, except mental illnnes? I strongly believe mankind would benefit greatly, if science of the supernatural was taken serious.


Every prophecy, i felt the painfull heat of the spirit
The first trumpet was blown 9-10th January, i got a vision the earlier in the day of the impending blowing of the trumpets
I got hospitalized as i began to prophesy the same day, i thought we had time, but that is not the case. The last and most important vision is below.
First i saw the earth, and flaming objects falling rapidly, then i saw a construction made of steel, a ark of steel, with a white dome, alas parts of it blew off, and then i saw a great white silhouette, holding hands with smaller silhouettes, and as the comets fell, they dissapeared trough a field. The last thing i saw was the number 11

Pray, repent, labour and spread the message, this is the 14th day that i have been imprisoned in this hospital, they have not found brain damage, nor schizophrenia, nor drugs. This winter is not a normal one
>The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.
>And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth
> And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams

>> No.10330063

Random luck, vague "predictions", and sheer volume of prophecies (if you make enough guesses, one of them will be right). Remember, there is no evidence for the supernatural, and all claims that have ever been made about supernatural phenomena have been proven false. Everything is explainable through science and rationality.

>> No.10330072

>>10330063
Then explain how my MRI scan showed nothing abnormal, even though i have suffered concussions ever since childhood. I only prayed, and God delivered

>> No.10330075

>>10330063
And dont you believe that you can explain everything by randomness? Even the predictions given to us through Scientific discourse?

>> No.10330080

>>10330063
And how do you define evidence? When did witness testimony stop being taken seriously?

>> No.10330088

>>10330080
Witness testimony is never reliable. Our memories change every time we think back on them, and we are rarely able to remember the whole event properly.
>>10330075
No. All evidence suggests that the universe is not random. Things happen for reasons anon, the laws of physics, biology, and chemistry are the reason why things happen, not randomness or some sky fairy.
>>10330072
I suggest you watch "Concussion". The MRI of those football players also showed nothing abnormal, but they were still suffering from severe brain damage that didn't show up until after their autopsy.

>> No.10330094

>>10330088
Science only tells us how it happens, not why it happens.

But i have told the Doctor that they can do whatever they want with my body after it dies. But im not unhealthy, and how do you know that memory is unreliable? Sure, it is pretty bad compared to something measurable, empirically proven, or even simply repeatable. Still, to what scale, and does it matter much?

>> No.10330135

>>10330046
Cyclic Universe

>> No.10330139

>>10330135
Thats not a why, but how

>> No.10330165

>>10330139
Quantum shit

>> No.10330324

>>10330165
Still how, but quantum

>> No.10330336

>>10330046
None that would not violate the laws of physics. In order to receive a signal from the future, the signal would have to be traveling faster than light, which is known to be impossible.

>> No.10330363

>>10330336
Is abscense of evidence, evidence of absense?

>> No.10330402

>>10330363
No, but scientists aren't relying on absence of evidence when they say that the speed of light is the speed limit of the universe.

>> No.10330413

>>10330402
What makes you think that there arent Things that violate laws of nature? Ie, anomalies or exceptions to the rule?

>> No.10330431

>>10330413
There might be things which violate the laws of nature as currently written. But, supposing we found such things, we would re-write the laws to incorporate them.

Consider a hypothetical- suppose we lived in a world where people could cast spells. Clearly supernatural, right? But in such a world, scientists would not consider spells to be "off-limits" from their study. They would characterize spells with laws, and they would write these laws as a subset of their laws of nature, not contradictory to them.

>> No.10330446

>>10330431
Alright makes sense. But it still would be a how, not why

>> No.10330448

>>10330446
OP asked for a scientific explanation. if you are OP, idk what else you were expecting.

>> No.10330455
File: 2.97 MB, 720x404, hehehehe.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10330455

>>10330046
>science of the supernatural

>> No.10330463

>>10330455
What makes you think that you cant measure, classify and prove the supernatural, ie. by deducing natural explanations?

>> No.10330601

>>10330455
Stupid weeb doesn't know what he's making fun of. Again.

>>10330063
>Remember, there is no evidence for the supernatural, and all claims that have ever been made about supernatural phenomena have been proven false.
I know for a fact this is bs. There are tons of supernatural claims I can think of that skeptics simply overlook. Quick example: Masaru Emoto's rice experiment. Every time a skeptic "debunks" this, they simply say "physics dindu tell us that's how it be" when any serious person would do a methodical (i.e. not Mythbusters' handwavey woowoo) experiment with controlled variables, randomizing and double blind. I read James Randi proposed it for the rice experiment but of course he never did it and just went on to give a lazy appeal to incredulity instead.

>> No.10330623

>>10330601
>Masaru Emoto's rice experiment
Has been proved fake and false countless times

>> No.10330631

>>10330623
Show me the peer-reviewed meta-analysis.

>> No.10330634

>>10330631
The burden of proof is on you to provide proof that the experiment was a success.

>> No.10330643

>>10330634
I didn't say it was; I said it was a prime example of stuff skeptics overlook. You said it was proven fake countless times. Now post the meta-analysis.

>> No.10331003

Being smart enough to see the pattern in human behavior and the ability to extrapolate likeliest events to come.