cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: refigious question


@Nebrfarmr wrote:

Yes, his sample size was small, but it had 100% repeatability.

 

The scale was accurate enough to measure an ounce per hour weight loss due to evaporation, but somehow a 'sudden' loss is inaccurate?


Feel free to link to any study that proves this wrong, I promise I'll read through it.

 

So, what can you suggest the sudden weight loss came from?


Sorry NEB just catching up here and found yor reply.

I think from what I read it was an 'experiment' which was not done with enough care to make it reliable.

Now if I remember from the snopes article that he even threw out the results from some of his 'tests' because he did not get good results.

If it is 100% repeatable then why has it not been repeated in the past 100 years. Original tests were done a long time ago so someone could have repeated it by now.

Another thing for my reading list and I spent too long reading on ice ages the other night.

Have a great day, ours looks better than it could have since it only went down to 5C last night, no frost.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: refigious question

I would have thought someone else would have tried it, as well, to either prove or disprove it, yet I couldn't find any study other than this one. 

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: refigious question


@Nebrfarmr wrote:

I would have thought someone else would have tried it, as well, to either prove or disprove it, yet I couldn't find any study other than this one. 


I can make a guess why no one else has replicated it.

Most thinking people know there is no 'soul' at least nothing with weight to leave a body.

Perhaps those who think a 'soul' weighs something are afraid that they might be proven wrong.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: refigious question

If the thinking people 'know' the tests were wrong, why not just re-test, and prove it?
It wouldn't cost much of anything to do, if you could get permission from some terminally ill patients.

Perhaps both sides are afraid of the outcome?

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: refigious question


@Nebrfarmr wrote:

If the thinking people 'know' the tests were wrong, why not just re-test, and prove it?
It wouldn't cost much of anything to do, if you could get permission from some terminally ill patients.

Perhaps both sides are afraid of the outcome?


No I really think that scientists know the answer they would get and know it is a waste of time to try to prove to believers that something that does not exist, just does not exist.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: refigious question

Now my head is spinning.

To have before you a study that has results that may very well show evidence of a 'soul' (or not, we aren't sure) is dismissed as not being 'precise' enough.  However, there is no study at all that 'disproves' it.  However, you KNOW it is not true, so it must not be, so there is no probelm bothering science to prove it one way or the other.

 

However, when Al Gore says he has 'IRREFUTABLE' scientific proof the oceans will rise 20M, and they rise 20CM (an error rate of 99%) that is OK, because we all KNOW global warming is true, so even if it is scientifically proven to be 99% off, we still adhere to that 'belief'.  Can I say because this was proven to be inaccurate, I don't have to even bother looking at any other GW study?  After all, a 1% accuracy rate is far worse than the guy doing the weight tests on the terminally ill.

 

Seems to me, there is some 'faith' going around on both sides of the debate.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: refigious question

What - like the pied piper leading them all to oblivion? Get real comrade.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: refigious question


@Nebrfarmr wrote:

Now my head is spinning.

To have before you a study that has results that may very well show evidence of a 'soul' (or not, we aren't sure) is dismissed as not being 'precise' enough.  However, there is no study at all that 'disproves' it.  However, you KNOW it is not true, so it must not be, so there is no probelm bothering science to prove it one way or the other.

 

However, when Al Gore says he has 'IRREFUTABLE' scientific proof the oceans will rise 20M, and they rise 20CM (an error rate of 99%) that is OK, because we all KNOW global warming is true, so even if it is scientifically proven to be 99% off, we still adhere to that 'belief'.  Can I say because this was proven to be inaccurate, I don't have to even bother looking at any other GW study?  After all, a 1% accuracy rate is far worse than the guy doing the weight tests on the terminally ill.

 

Seems to me, there is some 'faith' going around on both sides of the debate.


Looking for a 'soul' would be like spending money to see if an apple will fall down when it falls off the tree. The answer is known so why bother spending the money.

Now if you want to repeat the faulty test of weighing a soul then go ahead and set it up so there is no doubt of the finding but as i said before I think most scientists have better things to do so do not waste their time on such a thing.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: refigious question

I think most scientists have better things to do so do not waste their time on such a thing.

 

I couldn't help myself.  I took that phrase of yours, and ran with it:


I found scientific studies like these:

Sick and elderly people have sex less often than younger, healthier people, paid for by the U. of Chicago & US Institute of health.

 

Australian scientists recently determined what happens when you give bees cocaine

 

 professor Yuki Sugiyama of Nagoya University, has determined the reason commuters are occasionally caught in jams for no obvious reason: It's that there are too many cars on the road.

 

 $1.2 million to study the breeding preferences of the woodchuck. Turns out they mostly prefer to breed with other woodchucks

 

The Macfarlane Burnet Institute for Medical Research and Public Health in Melbourne, Australia, recently launched an investigation into a strange phenomenon: They kept running out of teaspoons in the break room. (Or, as they put it, they conducted a "longitudinal cohort study of the displacement of teaspoons in an Australian research institute.")

In this controversial experiment, 70 teaspoons were placed in the break room and observed for five months, which had to be more exciting than just about anything except maybe watching a pair of woodchucks out on the town. At the end of the experiment, fully 80 percent of the spoons were missing, though they forgot to try to figure out why.

 

a team headed by Brian Wansink, director of Cornell University's Food and Brand Lab, has determined that people tend to eat more at all-you-can-eat buffets. In fact, they tend to eat all they can eat!

 

A study to see if elephants can recognize themselves in a mirror

 

Conducted By:The University of Pittsburgh and the University of California, Santa Barbara

Researchers looked at data from a study of more than 16,000 women and girls that detailed their body measurements, as well as their education level and scores on various cognitive tests. The women were measured by their waist-to-hip ratio or WHR. This is done by dividing your waist size by your hip size. The report indicated that women with waists that were about 70 percent of the diameter of their hips scored slightly better on intelligence tests and tended to have a slightly higher level of education than women with a higher waist-to-hip ratio.

 

The Study: Bra Support for Bouncing Breasts Study
Conducted By: University of Portsmouth, England

70 women were recruited including students at University of Portsmouth with bra sizes ranging from A-cup to extra-large (DD, E, FF, G, H, HH, J and JJ). Each woman walked, jogged and ran while wearing different bra types. During the exercise, biomechanical measurements were taken of breast movement in three directions: up-and-down, side-to-side and in-and-out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, scientists are just far too busy doing highly important research, to have time for this sort of thing.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: refigious question


@Nebrfarmr wrote:

I think most scientists have better things to do so do not waste their time on such a thing.

 

I couldn't help myself.  I took that phrase of yours, and ran with it:


I found scientific studies like these:

Sick and elderly people have sex less often than younger, healthier people, paid for by the U. of Chicago & US Institute of health.

 

Australian scientists recently determined what happens when you give bees cocaine

 

 professor Yuki Sugiyama of Nagoya University, has determined the reason commuters are occasionally caught in jams for no obvious reason: It's that there are too many cars on the road.

 

 $1.2 million to study the breeding preferences of the woodchuck. Turns out they mostly prefer to breed with other woodchucks

 

The Macfarlane Burnet Institute for Medical Research and Public Health in Melbourne, Australia, recently launched an investigation into a strange phenomenon: They kept running out of teaspoons in the break room. (Or, as they put it, they conducted a "longitudinal cohort study of the displacement of teaspoons in an Australian research institute.")

In this controversial experiment, 70 teaspoons were placed in the break room and observed for five months, which had to be more exciting than just about anything except maybe watching a pair of woodchucks out on the town. At the end of the experiment, fully 80 percent of the spoons were missing, though they forgot to try to figure out why.

 

a team headed by Brian Wansink, director of Cornell University's Food and Brand Lab, has determined that people tend to eat more at all-you-can-eat buffets. In fact, they tend to eat all they can eat!

 

A study to see if elephants can recognize themselves in a mirror

 

Conducted By:The University of Pittsburgh and the University of California, Santa Barbara

Researchers looked at data from a study of more than 16,000 women and girls that detailed their body measurements, as well as their education level and scores on various cognitive tests. The women were measured by their waist-to-hip ratio or WHR. This is done by dividing your waist size by your hip size. The report indicated that women with waists that were about 70 percent of the diameter of their hips scored slightly better on intelligence tests and tended to have a slightly higher level of education than women with a higher waist-to-hip ratio.

 

The Study: Bra Support for Bouncing Breasts Study
Conducted By: University of Portsmouth, England

70 women were recruited including students at University of Portsmouth with bra sizes ranging from A-cup to extra-large (DD, E, FF, G, H, HH, J and JJ). Each woman walked, jogged and ran while wearing different bra types. During the exercise, biomechanical measurements were taken of breast movement in three directions: up-and-down, side-to-side and in-and-out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup, scientists are just far too busy doing highly important research, to have time for this sort of thing.


So why do they not study the weight of a 'soul'?

Could be they figure it is even more frivolous.