Is there really scientific evidence for the supernatural?

Question

According to the world, no. But if so, are people trying to hide it, and why? And why are there so many frauds? I think the supernatural exists (based on some experiences) even though I am naturally sceptic (being scientifically educated). Maybe many people will never accept it, even if there is clear evidence, because they made up their minds. I also think peoples' perception of what "evidence" is can vary drastically. What do you think?

Answer 1

Science is a tool that, as far as I can tell, can only measure the natural. In order to test something, the thing has to be capable of objective, empirical observation. It has to be tested in such a way that the results will be clear and can be examined and replicated by others. The idea being tested has to be very specifically defined and it has to be falsifiable. For those unfamiliar with the term, that means that if the idea is false there has to be a way that we could test it, at least theoretically, that would show it is false.
Supernatural claims fail one or all of the above. Supernatural claims can't be falsified, usually. In fact, they can't usually be precisely defined. I don't know what you consider to be a supernatural claim. One person's supernatural is the next's natural. But I think of supernatural as something not bound by the laws of nature- things like the speed of light, time, gravity. Something that exists, perhaps, out of this universe but can influence this universe. If we could explain it and come up with new scientific laws that would allow us to understand it then it would be natural.
But let's take something like Ghosts. There's no test that could be done that would prove that ghosts don't exist. First of all we can't define them or say exactly what they are or what they are made of. Is there any test we could even theoretically do to say there's no ghosts in the room? Nope. they might be hiding and they might have no measurable physical qualities whatsoever. If we can't falsify the idea then there's no way a test could prove they are there either- any result might be seen as evidence that the ghost is there so no result will really prove that it is.
If we get some reading like a chill, does that really show that it's a ghost? there are any number of other possibilities and even if we ruled out all that we could think of that still wouldn't show that it was a ghost that caused it, just that an unknown factor did.
Science can't test for the supernatural (though it has shown some claims to be unlikely. Like that famous published study where a ten year old girl had people that said they could read auras or something from holding their hands over others' hands put their hands through a hole and they couldn't even tell better than average whether there was even another person's hand there. so how could they have special detection abilities.) The girl's test didn't prove there are no psychic healing powers, just that there was no evidence for them. Supernatural fans would say that they powers don't work when skeptics are around or when the psychic energy of doubt and uncertainty clouds the psychic receptors or some such excuse.
Science can't prove or disprove the supernatural. That doesn't mean the supernatural doesn't exist. it just means that you have to use standards other than scientific ones to make up your mind. The more a claim insists that you turn off your reason to accept it the less I'm inclined to believe it.

Answer 2

I think that 'supernatural' is a cop-out word, used when something occurs for which there is no available scientific/ natural explanation at hand. In other words, when there is no apparent explanation in nature, a 'supernatural' explanation is declared, and accepted as a matter of 'faith'. This is done to quell 'cognitive dissonance' by means of delusion, rather than by means of knowledge.

I have also had profound experiences for which there is no apparent 'natural' explanation. However, it is the experience that matters... not our explanation of them. We are driven to interpret such experiences in terms of our 'beliefs'... beliefs being a substitute for knowledge. this leads one further down the path of delusion.

In my own case, I only rely on what my experiences have told me directly... that we are connected in some fashion, independent of the senses, that is not presently understood. A religious person having an experience such as mine would be saying things such as "God told me...", or "an angel whispered to me...". That sort of thing is nonsense... a product of our delusions.

Answer 3

I think that there are some things out there that science just can't explain, no matter how hard it tries. I'm a little skeptical of some things also but at the same time I've seen way too much to discount everything completely.

Answer 4

Read "Cosmic Codes - Hidden Messages From The Edge of Eternity" by Dr. Chuck Missler. You will see that there is.

Answer 5

is there scientific evidence that I have that you have say an arm? Or is there scientific proof that that guy on tv has a brain? No.

Answer 6

it is all natural... the only thing that makes it super is we haven't figured it out yet... i believe in it, i've also had experiences. But there are things that can indicate spirits and such but its not considered hard proof. For example, electromagnetic fields.... that kind of thing.

Answer 7

I think thoughts.

Science is the evidence for the supernatural. I. Newton seemed to think so, as many of his predessors.

Answer 8

When scientific evidence is uncovered it is no longer supernatural.