Cosmic Ordering - let's try again?

[SylviasSlippers]

Logically I know it "should" be a load of crap but every time I've tried it, I've received what I asked for. Way back as an 8 year old we were moving house and I so desperately wanted a garden with steps on the path (no idea why). I visualised it and "prayed" for it and the house we ended up with had two steps on the path which was very rare in that area.

More recently I stumbled across the concept of cosmic ordering and decided to "order" a money find. A few nights later we were walking through a graveyard and there on the ground wet through and covered in muck was a £10 note staring up at me. I put it down to co-incidence.

A couple of years later I met a guy, fell in love with him and looking back it was obvious that I liked him more than he liked me ... So out of desperation I "cosmically ordered" for him to tell me he loved me on one specific night. So there we are, camping in a field, messing around and I do something daft and he laughs and says "oh god, I love you!" - he was not being serious, he was being sarcy but he still said it.

So a few months later I placed a cosmic order for him to say he loved me and meant it. So there we are, great night out, we're back in the hotel, he'd not said it. I tried to prompt it by asking how he thought the relationship was going and he said "great, but let's take it slow eh? I mean, I don't want to say I love you ... We've not been together long ... But I do, I do love you ..." Wtf? Cosmic order granted but not quite in the way I'd hoped.

A year later, we're still together. I place a cosmic order for him to ask me to marry him on this specific night. So we're sat in a restraunt and I do not prompt the conversation at all. All of a sudden he laughs and says "let's run off and get married in Vegas?". I didn't know how to take it so didn't say anything .. He then added - "I'm joking ..."

A few days ago I "ordered" an iphone 5c in green for less than £300 - that same night dp told me he'd won me that same phone on ebay for £260 (almost impossible to get one so cheap in "like new" condition.

It just seems that I get everything I ask for when I try it but never in a way I expect it. Does anyone else have any stories about cosmic ordering?
If you're not into it, don't take the piss please :-)

Today, I'm going to try it again. I'm going to start small and order the sighting of a red balloon by the end of the day. I'll update tonight whether or not it appeared.

" Knowing God's will takes a lifetime in the learning. This not an escape clause."

But has absolutely no place in the scientific process.

I don't understand, capsicum. Could you give me an example?

Matorina Debatable. What about ethics?

What sort of example would you like Matorina?

Ethics can influence whether or not you do an experiment. They cannot influence the results should you go ahead.

Pseudoscience fails, Capsium, because it is unfalsifiable. This is a tremendously important part of the scientific method. If something is false, then must be some way of proving that. If there isn't, then science cannot test it.

I don't know, capsicum- as I said, I don't understand.

Maybe an example of a scientific investigation and a peer reviewing process where faith is a valid part of the process.

Matorina They can influence what results you perceive (if relying on human observation especially of things that cannot be easily quantified)) and how you interpret those results.

I have not an example to hand, but will think on it. This is something I have thought for a long time and I cannot remember the exact origins of this thought. Something I read in the Scientific press may have informed my belief.

What exactly is entanglement between cause and effect?

Is there where you bring up quantum theory again?

So, the results of an experiment are dependant on who is reading them?

That is utter rubbish, I'm afraid.

And peer review is not "inadequate". It's an extremely effective tool.

It's not perfect, but then no human endeavour is.

I am self-employed and very keen to get more work in. I thought if I got myself really busy with helping at school, exercise and other activities the work was bound to come in. It has. I don't call that cosmic ordering though, more like "Law of Sod".

Hettie Nothing as complicated as quantum theory. Can be quite mundane. For example random hypothetical question: Does high cholesterol cause heart attacks or does having heart disease mean you are already more predisposed to having high cholesterol?

It's not perfect, but then no human endeavour is.

There we have it Hettie. It's just a matter of scale. I simply would put the weighting on how imperfect purely human endeavour is and how much of what we do is determined subconsciously.

But the whole point of peer review is that a theory is looked at by many different people. Yes, there might be bias, but it will stand out a mile- that's what the process is for!

Capsicum- I simply don't understand what you are saying. Is there any way you can use different words so that I can have another go?

Matorina Does not mean that there will not be exceptions because there is bias. Those exceptions are equally as true, just statistically small. However the exceptions should never be ignored. Mob rule means the majority can be wrong and the minority be correct.

Which bit do you not understand Matorina?

I just don't understand what you are saying, capsicum. Any of it. You seem to be saying that peer review is ineffective because it does not allow for faith to be used as an experimental parameter. And that if 20 people peer review a theory, and 19 agree with the experimenter, as much weight should be given to the lone dissenter as to the 19 others. You're not, are you?

I have not the vaguest idea, Capsium. What does that have to do with quantum theory?

Bottom line here - let's say you're right, and science makes a basic assumption.....that phenomena occur as the result of natural processes. Yes, I think science does assume/ infer this because it has to.

How many times has this assumption been proved unreliable?

None.

With every single experience and experiment, this assumption has held true.

So I think it probably is. Looks like a duck etc.....

But your entire arguments boils down to one thing and one thing alone......

Science has not, cannot and never will prove your god for you. So science is untrustworthy and you scrape together frankly silly excuses for that.

Are you ready to launch into your misunderstanding of empiricism yet?

Having talked at length with Capsium before, Mantorana, I suspect this will all come down to empiricism = only personal experience gives us knowledge and since human beings are subject to bias, it's impossible to know what's true.

Sorry, Capsium, if that's not what you're saying on this occasion, but you usually are.

Matorina I am saying that, as much thought should be given to the opinion of the lone dissenter. I say this because truth exists regardless of people's realisation of it. If the lone dissenter sees the truth but the others do not it does not make the truth less true.

Hettie Now you're trying to psychoanalyze me? Dangerously superstitious activity! I'm not looking for scientific proof of God. I can just say that it feels very liberating to not hold Scientific conclusions as absolute truth, interesting though they may be.

It was a previous thread, not this one, where I sat on my hands.

Capsicum says Since prayers are only granted by God if it is His will and you can persevere in exercising strong enough Faith, that whatever prayed for, is His will.

I think that the only honest analysis is that prayer never works. Sometimes, prayer co-incides with the desired solution, but not more often than chance would dictate. Sometimes, confirmation bias leads people to think that prayer has worked. But in the very few blind trials that have been done on prayer, we know it has no effect whatsoever.

Not all the parents of severely disabled kids like mine are atheists, at least, they aren't when they first become parents. Their prayers were sincere and their need undeniable. The continued existence of our children's problems outght to be all the evidnce anyone should need that prayer has zero effect.

Nobody, but nobody holds scientific conclusions as absolute truth!

Science changes it's mind when the evidence changes. That is it's greatest strength.

How many times are we going to have to make this one basic point to you?

I'm not saying you're trying to prove god. But I think it's quite evident that your attempts to find flaws in scientific reasoning is all about the fact that science does not support your belief in god.

And you rather wish it did.

Beast Sorry to hear of your struggles.

However, personally speaking, my Faith is my rock. My DC 'had' (?) being given a diagnosis of severe, complex SEN - and has now been subsequently discharged, after a number of years, due to continued improvement.

It was my Faith that gave me the hope that this was going to happen. Maybe they were wrong in the first place?