If seeing is believing.....(atheists and others)?

Question

How does electromagnetic/biofeedback cameras effect you perception on spirituality? You can't see an aura, but that camera can. Does this mean it doesn't exist? If this is one thing that is real, that can not be seen, then is it possible that there are other things that are real, but we can't see?

I respect all peoples spiritual journey (involving a Source, or not)....it is just a question.

just wanted to tell Ronnie that you don't have to be a christian to be spiritual, and I don't go to Church or follow Religion, just Spirit.

Answer 1

I am a Bible believing God fear Christian.

I don't know what to think about auras. Never heard of it till just a few years ago.

It's not mentioned in the bible other than Holy men such as Moses had a glory that he could not be looked upon, after he came down from the mountain.

I once took a picture of some white tail deer running across a field. When I got the picture back it also had a giant 100' tall turkey standing in it also.

It was called a double exposure. It was from a picture of a turkey I took in my yard, he was really only about 3' tall.

Answer 2

You're not portraying atheists the way we portray ourselves. You're portraying atheists the way many religious people portray atheists.

We just demand evidence, not "proof". The evidence does not have to be something seen, it can be evidence that comes from our other senses, or from scientific instruments that have been shown to make repeatable & verifiable measurements.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. As others have pointed out, the claims for auras not only don't have extraordinary evidence, they have been shown to be false.

No one has come up with conclusive evidence that there is no deity that created the universe. But no one has come up with conclusive evidence for that claim, either. Some people claim that our existence is enough to prove that a creator exists. This is a logical fallacy, because other explanations are possible, and there is no a priori reason to pick one explanation over the others.

Finally, suppose we found some evidence that the universe was created by a supernatural creator. That would still not be evidence for the Bible's claims of a God named Jehovah. And, the Bible makes claims about the natural world that are contradicted by evidence. If you take a step back and examine the Bible as literature, you see that it very similar to other mythologies from other cultures that we all now agree are just myths.

Answer 3

I am not a Christian, too, and im spiritual. I know there is an aura because i can see it if i concentrate on it. There are many things that exist and cannot be proven by science. Maybe science will be able to explain them in the near future.

Answer 4

I've seen schematics for them. The way they work is hardly supernatural. It's basically a cascade feedback loop that produces halos around any bright moving object.

Notice they will usually put you against a somewhat darkened background, "to better make the aura appear clearly." Also realize that it's impossible for the human to stand or sit 100% still... even if you can't see it or even feel it, we are continually making countless micromovements to maintain our balance, maintain posture, etc.

Also, Kirlian photography (where you put your hand or a leaf, etc... above electrically charged plates) is a well explained phenomenon that does not require supernatural explanation. The coronal discharges that are captured are caused by the massive voltages that permeate the area around the plates finding areas of varying capacitance.

So, no, these cameras and techniques are not evidence of the supernatural.

Answer 5

Actually, no, a camera CAN'T see an 'aura' - look up a skeptic site on kirilian photography to see how it works. Yeah, since you can't measure them and people who claim to see them can never seem to pass simple tests to see if they are telling the truth, that kinda means that they don't exist.

Hey, Mystery Me - we're living in the 'scientific dark ages'? Well, aren't you contributing to that with your computer and car and cell phone? Better give them all up now - you're just encouraging science by making us all think it works!

Answer 6

Centuries ago, there was a doctor who noticed that women in one ward of the hospital contracted "childbed fever" far more often than the other. He noticed that the deliveries were done by doctors who had just completed dissections of cadavers. He didn't know what microbes were, and didn't see them, but he proved they were real by conducting an experiment and having the doctors wash their hands before delivering babies. Viola! No more childbed fever. Science proved what couldn't be seen.

It's fine to say that there are things we don't understand yet, but to believe in something with no proof is unreasonable.

Answer 7

This is more of a statement than an answer to your question. I hope you don't mind my doing so.

How about the wind?

You can't see it - but you know it is there.

I don't doubt anyone would argue that point.

You can feel it, sense it and hear it, but you just can't see it and you can't really prove it is there except through your senses.

I don't need to see the wind in order to believe that it exists. Do you?

Answer 8

Interesting question. I suppose its just what ever you consider proof. The body is full of electro waves. The brain functions on it. So could an aura be simply that? Or is it more? There are always several explinations to just about everything. That's what makes it so interesting.

Answer 9

"Seeing is believing" is a cliche' -- it is not what people mean when they only believe things that can be proven.

Science not based exclusively on sight. Magnetism, for example, is a force - it can be measured. It can't be seen with the eyes, but it can be measured with other implements. Same thing with gravity, microwaves, etc.

The reason atheists don't believe in God is because God is not detectable scientifically.

Answer 10

Man, there's so much wrong with that it's hard to know where to begin.

"You can't see an aura, but that camera can."

False.

There are lots of things that we cannot see but that exist nonetheless. We know about those things because they leave some other evidence of their existence. For example, you can't see magnetic fields, but you can easily measure them other ways. I have a magnetic field sensor right here next to me.

Spirituality is simply a bunch of fancy-sounding vague words, and will remain so until and unless spiritualist claims can be backed up by measurements.

Of COURSE it is possible that there are things that we cannot measure - but if you claim to know about things that we cannot measure, you're contradicting yourself in the most arrogant possible way. You can either say "X cannot be measured" or "I know that X exists", but you cannot have it both ways.