Haunted country XNUMX: Everything is not honey

40 תגובות

1. Oh sorry, the comment was published only after a long time...and another one...and another one...and another one...

2. Thank you son. At the next opportunity I will give him a link on the right so that everyone can enter.
   Google kept their promise but forgot to tell me. Not bad.

3. It is not clear why. I would appreciate an answer to the website's email that appears at the bottom of each page

4. Hi.
   It is interesting, but not many know the method.
   I am connected to GPRS cellular internet, which is quite basic, at a cost of NIS 19 per month, for 25M which is more than is needed per month.
   My mobile is neither generation 3.5 nor generation 3 nor any generation, just a basic Nokia 3120.
   The method:
   connect to the internet.
   Go to "Move to the address" and browse to the magic page:
   www .google.com/xhtml
   Now you get a Google search page specially adapted for a mobile phone.
   It is recommended to save in favorites.
   Through it, the desired site is searched for, and Google displays it adapted to the tiny screen of the mobile, with or without images of your choice.
   Websites that do not appear in Google yet, are not available for viewing.
   Tested in Orange and Cellcom.
   Successfully!
   I am 55 years old,
   An optics and vision site, all main stream physics and non-commercial information
   http://www.optometry.co.il

   By the way: on the alternative page I have a nice video about quantum theory, if by chance you are not familiar with it.

5. Hi.
   It is interesting, but not many know the method.
   I am connected to GPRS cellular internet, which is quite basic, at a cost of NIS 19 per month, for 25M which is more than is needed per month.
   My mobile is neither generation 3.5 nor generation 3 nor any generation, just a basic Nokia 3120.
   The method:
   connect to the internet.
   Go to "Move to the address" and browse to the magic page:
   http://www.google.com/xhtml
   Now you get a Google search page specially adapted for a mobile phone.
   It is recommended to save in favorites.
   Through it, the desired site is searched for, and Google displays it adapted to the tiny screen of the mobile, with or without images of your choice.

   Websites that do not appear in Google yet, are not available for viewing.
   Tested in Orange and Cellcom.
   Successfully!
   I am 55 years old,
   An optics and vision site, all main stream physics and non-commercial information
   http://www.optometry.co.il

   By the way: on the alternative page I have a nice video about quantum theory, if by chance you are not familiar with it.

   http://www.optometry.co.il

6. Answering your question but it doesn't appear...

7. Hi.
   It is interesting, but not many know the method.
   I am connected to GPRS cellular internet, which is quite basic, at a cost of NIS 19 per month, for 25M which is more than is needed per month.
   My mobile is neither generation 3.5 nor generation 3 nor any generation, just a basic Nokia 3120.
   The method:
   connect to the internet.
   Go to "Move to the address" and browse to the magic page:
   http://www.google.com/xhtml
   Now you get a Google search page specially adapted for a mobile phone.
   It is recommended to save in favorites.
   Through it, the desired site is searched for, and Google displays it adapted to the tiny screen of the mobile, with or without images of your choice.
   In your case, the link is: http://www.google.com/gwt/n?mrestrict=xhtml&site=search&q=%D7%94%D7%99%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%9F&source=m&hl=iw&ei=0jTfRvi0C4KMngPLuYK3AQ&ct=res&cd=2&rd=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hayadan.org.il%2Fwp%2F
   It is recommended to keep it in your favorites as well, of course after it appeared on Google, and not to write down this string.

   Websites that do not appear in Google yet, are not available for viewing.
   Tested in Orange and Cellcom.
   Successfully!
   I am 55 years old,
   An optics and vision site, all main stream physics and non-commercial information
   http://www.optometry.co.il

   By the way: on the alternative page I have a nice video about quantum theory, if by chance you are not familiar with it.

   http://www.optometry.co.il

8. Hi.
   It is interesting, but not many know the method.
   I am connected to GPRS cellular internet, which is quite basic, at a cost of NIS 19 per month, for 25M which is more than is needed per month.
   My mobile is neither generation 3.5 nor generation 3 nor any generation, just a basic Nokia 3120.
   The method:
   connect to the internet.
   Go to "Move to the address" and browse to the magic page:
   http://www.google.com/xhtml
   Now you get a Google search page specially adapted for a mobile phone.
   It is recommended to save in favorites.
   Through it, the desired site is searched for, and Google displays it adapted to the tiny screen of the mobile, with or without images of your choice.
   In your case, the link is: http://www.google.com/gwt/n?mrestrict=xhtml&site=search&q=%D7%94%D7%99%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%9F&source=m&hl=iw&ei=0jTfRvi0C4KMngPLuYK3AQ&ct=res&cd=2&rd=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hayadan.org.il%2Fwp%2F
   It is recommended to keep it in your favorites as well, of course after it appeared on Google, and not to write down this string.

   Websites that do not appear in Google yet, are not available for viewing.
   Tested in Orange and Cellcom.
   Successfully!
   I am 55 years old,
   An optics and vision site, all main stream physics and non-commercial information
   http://www.optometry.co.il

   By the way: on the alternative page I have a nice video about quantum theory, if by chance you are not familiar with it.

9. Hi.
   It is interesting, but not many know the method.
   I am connected to GPRS cellular internet, which is quite basic, at a cost of NIS 19 per month, for 25M which is more than is needed per month.
   My mobile is neither generation 3.5 nor generation 3 nor any generation, just a basic Nokia 3120.
   The method:
   connect to the internet.
   Go to "Go to the address" and browse to:
   http://www.google.com/xhtml
   Now you get a Google search page specially adapted for a mobile phone.
   It is recommended to save in favorites.
   Through it, the desired site is searched for, and Google displays it adapted to the tiny screen of the mobile, with or without images of your choice.
   In your case, the link is: http://www.google.com/gwt/n?mrestrict=xhtml&site=search&q=%D7%94%D7%99%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%9F&source=m&hl=iw&ei=0jTfRvi0C4KMngPLuYK3AQ&ct=res&cd=2&rd=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hayadan.org.il%2Fwp%2F
   It is recommended to keep it in your favorites as well.

   Websites that do not appear in Google yet, are not available for viewing.
   Tested in Orange and Cellcom.
   Successfully
   I am 55 years old,
   Optics and vision site, all main stream physics
   http://www.optometry.co.il

   By the way: on the alternative page I have a nice video about quantum theory, if by chance you are not familiar with it.

10. I'm sorry the answer didn't satisfy you, but my time is limited and I'm not going to research something I don't believe in the principle behind it. Anyway, how do you surf on a cell phone, if I didn't make a dedicated page? Google promised that they would do this for me for the benefit of Google News surfers, but did not get back to me, did they install such a page? I would be happy to receive these details to refer the other surfers as well.

11. Well, no point in arguing.
    I believe that because our knowledge is so limited, anything is possible and anything is possible.
    In any case, your site is interesting, and I surf it a lot, mainly via mobile.
    55 years old

12. The comparison is out of place. The theory of evolution is proven, while channeling is not possible by any scientific standard, even in a school laboratory. Therefore, it is not a matter of who is more persuasive, but which theory.
    There is no point in relating objectively to every anecdote that appears on the website, because at best it is a prediction that anyone can give based on the knowledge available today and at worst, a story along the lines of Harry Potter. As soon as the foundation is shaky - the connection - the whole building falls like a tower of cards and there is no point in examining this or that card.

13. Father you are fast.
    You didn't take anything I said seriously.
    You sound to me like the excellent worker I have, what to do Dathiya, when I try to talk to her about evolution at a basic level "You don't understand, the world has only existed for 5000 years, it doesn't make sense that there was a generation and another generation, and this monkey, nonsense! I don't want to hear the is it at all"
    For half a day she only sells basic products.
    By the way, for your comment, commercials sell something, and I don't.
    Sons of 55

14. Hello my son

    First of all, a nice way to insert an advertisement. In any case, since she writes there that all the knowledge was obtained through channeling, there is no point in even reading further. There is no basis whatsoever and there cannot be any basis for communication. The good scientists have already conducted tests and it turned out that when they hid information from the callers, they could not reveal it, so at most it is an intuition based on knowledge about the deceased to whom they are calling - how he spoke, what he liked, etc.

    Many things sound two-faced, so really with all due respect even to those who don't sell their services, it doesn't make them right. At most it can be said that they are honest.

15. Hello father
    I faithfully follow your site, and I came to a quite clear conclusion: the scientific knowledge we possess is only a fraction of all the scientific knowledge that exists in the universe.
    In fact, we have no reasonable idea about most of the things that surround us:
    It is not clear to us what light, time, matter, the mysteries of quantum theory, the limits of space, human consciousness, the origin of life, death, most of the concepts of cosmology, the limits of mathematics, the interrelationships between the forces of nature and the forces themselves are.
    In fact, when you think about it, you will argue that there is not a single thing that we are 100% sure about and understand for sure.
    All scientific measurements are taken in by our senses, which are merely the brain's interpretation of the surrounding light and waves.
    You will surely agree with me that there is a huge amount of information that is not yet in our possession, and may be completely acceptable to you by virtue of being scientific.
    The fact that there is a considerable percentage of eye-catchers who use the power of spirituality to accumulate wealth, cannot invalidate the entire spiritual field and define it as wrong.
    For example - reading minds. I have no faith in this, but if he suddenly finds a miraculous particle, scientifically proven, that it is the particle that creates the structure of thought and explains its operation in an especially long formula, and perhaps even creates a "magnetic" field around it, then things will look different. We will have a scientific explanation for mind reading, and we will also probably understand why it is only possible for people with these or other rare qualities and more, and then suddenly it will be acceptable to you.
    I think the example is understandable.
    The fact that you don't watch the show "Everything Honey" which was excellent, because there is a promo for reading in a cafe, reminds me of those who claimed that the earth is the center of the universe and were sure of it.
    That coffee shop reader must be a cheater, but that doesn't make you right.
    In any case, to make my words short, I am a secular person, who did not even celebrate a bar mitzvah, I have a bachelor's degree in science and work in a very respectable para-medical profession.
    I know very personally a caller, who gives me information on various subjects, which turns out to be incredibly accurate over time.
    She doesn't make a living from it or advertise herself, and she certainly doesn't lie to me.
    I have no explanation for this, but everything for me can be equally logical, particles, souls, black holes and communication with you know what.
    What is the real difference between all these, where is the limit, in geometric physics, or maybe we dare a little more?
    If you want to be a little shocked by the information she has, try:
    http://www.amallia.info
    Best regards
    55 years old

16. I am a complete atheist and admit that I have a tendency to make generalizations
    Regarding the believers. And so that I don't sound superficial, I'm happy to lean on
    older and wiser than me and refer you to Zvi's interesting book
    Atzmon - "The body of the soul - the wonders of the human mind" in part of the book it is stated that it is difficult for the mind to grasp its own finitude and therefore it searches for answers and solutions in the metaphysical realm, and this is where beliefs and religions come in (in my view, they are all idolatry) because religions and beliefs provide an alternative to death
    And a complete failure in the hope of "serving" another term in other noble spheres or, alternatively, to be reincarnated in another creature... and thus solves

    God-fearing and death-fearing to himself the problem of his complete cessation with his death.
    I do not deny the importance of religious belief as part of the development of civilization, but there is now room to move forward and give science the place of religion because it tries, at least, to explain things and phenomena by inventing measuring tools and not by means of fantasy stories and reasons for these and other phenomena, at the discretion of the sovereign in heaven.
    And back to the beginning of the articles, there is no doubt that the intellectual level of most of the programs on the second channel is below the level of tolerable stupidity and I am not surprised by this - people are lazy by nature and adopting the brain for them is exhausting therefore the popular programs are like the popular snacks, easy, do not contribute to health
    and get fat. There is no need to resent it - only a select minority
    Contributes to human progress and the rest lag behind and don't even know how to explain to you how their bodies work... Only wisdom has limits - stupidity doesn't....

17. To Moses
    Indeed Einstein was as you say and he had no other option and in general all the other scientists did not have faith in the Torah and revelation nor did they have an option for such a thing (unless they themselves would have been granted such a thing and there is no sense that this could happen at all) Here comes the power of faith herself. However, the problem begins with heresy in metaphysics itself, while the axioms of science itself are metaphysical, including all reality itself, and physicality itself is metaphysical.
    All the ten atheists you can find on anyone with a soul (a spark as you say) do not reach their ankles (yes, Feynman too) and I didn't just bring them up. Greatness and genius come with madness and spark and not with rationality (of course I forgot Bach and Beethoven)

18. Hello to my dear father

    I really enjoy reading your articles here and on YNET every time, but I really don't understand why to wage wars instead of strengthening positive directions.
    There is something about mysticism and religion that attracts people. If it's the search for meaning, a desire for anchoring (Akogito) in reality, an escape from the loneliness of modern man and any other reason you can't think of.
    The claim that ignorance breeds idolatry (because if I don't know something I just associate it with metaphysics) doesn't quite agree with the fact that even in the Western world the percentage of believers is very high.
    Perhaps this is due to the fact that no one is truly capable of killing God ("If you kill God you cannot take refuge in his wings" - Nietzsche) but perhaps it is due to the fact that there are many layers that cannot be scientifically measured with contemporary tools but they exist and if we fight them we will not give them be discovered.

    If there are people who have special senses, it may be that they attribute them to astrology, numerology, piety in religion, etc., but to come and say that it's all nonsense and only what I understand has its place is nonsense because you are blocking your ability to break boundaries.
    For example, I'm at the end of my medical studies and we were often talked about the harm of the alternative healing methods, but what to do, there are things even if I don't really understand how they work, the fact is that they work - for example, using needles to heal pain has been shown in controlled studies to be effective.

    Perhaps the approach should be changed: go the opposite way from intuition to science when intuitive is not only what is intuitive to you because maybe there is something in someone else's intuition as well...

    The quantum world and even before that speaks of the inability to look at reality in only one way (uncertainty, etc.). If we go only from the realistic to the inductive we may lose all the parallel paths. On the other hand, if we separate the chaff from the chaff and try to reach those real intuitive places that exist (if indeed there are any) we may be able to reach additional sources of knowledge.

    One such failed attempt was made with homeopathy where the basis for the knowledge of preparing the "potions" came from a metaphysical source and in a controlled study it did not work (as I thought in LANCET), but this does not mean that all the alternative knowledge is not true.

    To conclude, scientific progress tends to rely on building blocks that are built on top of each other and there is no doubt that this is the main way, but I want to offer here a way to get a "direction reading" where to go, in which direction to carry out the extrapolation. And maybe we can shorten a lot of processes this way.

19. With all due respect to the fact that Prof. Alan Sokal lives on the twenty-first floor, the accepted opinion, although perhaps not among scientists, is that even before Newton it was agreed that a fall from a great height harms the integrity of the body.
    If I were you, commenter Ben, I would be more careful to check that in my responses I do not "provide evidence" in my opinion for the position I am attacking. Please look at your response: Your claim against the religious worldview (in response to Yael Petar?) is that it does not meet the criteria set by the scientific community, of being refutable, or as the gentlemen I quoted wrote: its truth claims are irreducibly self-referential, in that they can be upheld only by appealing to the standards that define the scientific community.

    Also, regardless, any scientist or member of the "outer circle" of science who is willing to acknowledge the programming of the existence of an event that, if it occurs, the scientific method cannot explain, will raise a hand.
    Anyone who doesn't, I'm under no circumstances inviting them to jump off the roof.

20. Anonymous user - exactly on pearls of this type Prof. Alan Sokal said, "Whoever thinks that science is only a construct of social and linguistic conventions and has no grip on reality, is welcome to challenge the convention of gravity from my apartment window (I live on the twenty-first floor). "

    I think that sums it up in a nutshell. According to the religious worldview, there is no real danger in jumping out of the window. Whether you crashed to the floor or not, retroactively it fits perfectly with God's hidden ways, whatever they may be.

    Of course it is possible to define that precisely within the framework of religion it is more likely that events A, B, C will happen than events X, Y, Z according to such and such understandings regarding the nature of God. But then the occurrence, hypothetically even, of events X,Y,Z will be evidence against the existence of God (a scribble of a formula and a half in probability theory proves it). Any religious person who is willing to acknowledge the possibility of the existence of an event that, if it occurs, means that there is less chance that God exists, raise a hand.

    Anyone who hasn't, Alan Sokal's home is still open to visitors.

21. "Science is a highly elaborated set of conventions brought forth by one particular culture (our own) in the circumstances of one particular historical period; thus it is not, as the standard view would have it, a body of knowledge and testable conjecture concerning the real world. It is a discourse, devised by and for one specialized interpretive community, under terms created by the complex net of social circumstance, political opinion, economic incentive and ideological climate that constitutes the ineluctable human environment of the scientist. Thus, orthodox science is but one discursive community among the many that now exist and that have existed historically. Consequently its truth claims are irreducibly self-referential, in that they can be upheld only by appeal to the standards that define the scientific community and distinguish it from other social formations."
    Gross, Paul R. and Levitt, Norman. Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science. The Johns Hopkins University Press. 1998.

22. Science is faith. You believe that the quanta look according to how science has determined, you believe that the world operates according to laws of forces (which by the way contradict each other), you believe that 1+1=2, etc. Science is based on axioms that we can never prove perfectly. Science builds theories upon theories when the foundations on which it rests have been determined, one might say, arbitrarily.
    Moreover, the tools available to science in its "scientific" investigation are empirical experiments, inductive logic, and common sense. If you performed the same experiment a million times and discovered that A leads to B. This does not mean that even the million and one time you perform the experiment this is what will happen. In addition, science cannot confirm with certainty whether A is the one that leads to B or a number of other additional background events.
    Example: All 20 times you threw a cigarette butt into a wooden house, you found out that the house burned down. But don't take into account the mood, the type of wood coating, the type of wood, the angle of the cigarette butt shot into the wood. You might come to the conclusion that every cigarette butt in the world thrown into a wooden house leads to a fire. And you probably won't find that if you had thrown a cigarette butt into a wooden house in an empty space, there would have been no fire. This is how science works (inductively). According to science, the experiment would have confirmed a law of nature according to which a cigarette butt always sets fire to a wooden house, and of course this law is wrong and does not always work but only if there are other background events.
    This is exactly what happens in science. For example, Newtonian mechanics may be effective in calculations at relatively slow speeds. But when trying to examine the subatomic happenings, the laws of physics change. Every Torah today in science operates in its limited field and this is also proof that the laws of science are not perfect, or at least not as perfect as you pretend to present them.

23. Equating science and religion is a fundamental mistake. Science, as a discipline, is not a religion, and does not depend on the belief of one or another person. Even if we all believe that the world was created by some god, the evidence that supports (and actually proves) the theory of evolution will not disappear.
    The science that my father meant to the best of my understanding is that which represents rational thinking. Fortune tellers and coffee readers are at best psychologists on a dime and at worst con artists.

    And by the way, when you mention Einstein (and other scientists) as someone who believed in God, you should understand that Einstein believed in a metaphysical God, one who does not interact with the physical world. Such a belief is light years away from mysticism and also from most Judaism
    its forms.

    And in response to Elon - for every great scientist who shows a religious spark, you can find ten who are staunch atheists (Feynman, Schrödinger, Weinberg, etc.).

    And I'll end with a quote: when the human genome mapping project was completed, Bill Clinton (who was then president) said, "Now we have the book with which God created man," in response Professor Sidney Brenner, a Nobel laureate, said
    "We have the book through which man created God - the Bible"
    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/291/5507/1265

24. They don't just threaten science, they threaten our very existence here. I am simply calling not to give them legitimacy in the main media. If it were up to me I would also eliminate the astrology sections in newspapers and portals. As for Channel 2, there is nothing to be done, it became a fact because of the ratings and it is forbidden to legitimize garbage under the auspices of the ratings, they used to make sure that the Hebrew in the advertisements was correct, today they don't make sure about that either, so obviously they won't make sure to tell the truth. We lose people every day who sink into vain beliefs instead of stepping forward. We don't have a huge rear like in the USA, which leads the world thanks to the engineers it attracts and not thanks to its natives who go into stupid professions.

25. Channel 2 has long since become rating garbage that is not worth watching regardless of what it broadcasts.

26. Simply because it seems to me that you are interested because you write about it quite a lot and devote time to it.
    I really don't think they threaten science.
    And I see no reason to treat them at all.
    and give them space even if it is mine.

27. To Uri, what is there to study other than comparative folklore - the similarities and differences between different mystical beliefs, what both mystics agree on and what they argue about. The scientists at least have an agreement on the facts. This is not the case with the mystics either. The only agreement comes from the fact that everyone probably read the same books and that all the writers copy from each other.

28. dear father,

    Science is a religion no less than Judaism, Hinduism and Spiritualism. Let's start by saying that the beginning of scientific investigation back in the days of ancient Greece (Aristotle, Zeno and the atomists) was based on spiritual foundations. Secondly, the greatest and most creative scientists of all time took inspiration from mysticism - Kepler who tried to discover the heavenly music of the angels and thus founded the science of astrophysics, Descartes who wanted to prove the existence of God through logical reasoning and thus founded the rational thinking that Nessa (and perhaps on the opposite Nessa) arose Modern science, Einstein "God does not play dice", and even a number of today's leading scientists in the field of quantum mechanics who retired in favor of tarot cards/mysticism/the occult.
    Another thing, science as an empirical tool for studying the world does not meet the rules of its own definition. Many problems such as demarcation (Popper, Hampel), the problem of induction (Yom), etc. are discussed in countless essays in the philosophy of science department and do not find a satisfactory answer.
    But I completely agree with you about the fact that they have pushed science aside and are not investing in it at all. I believe that in the future a more enlightened and educated world awaits us.

29. To my father Blizovsky
    Maybe enough of all this chatter about mysticism and astrology.
    You want to learn mysticism, go learn.
    The only person here who is haunted by demons is you.
    I really don't see a place here to give it a hand.

30. I am of course talking about Newton Euler Gauss Descartes Riemann (how not) and last but not least (who in his soul was like that) (Einstein and also von Neumann) was a man full of contradictions and even at the end of his days for some reason he actually decided to convert to Christianity. For some reason (or actually it's quite obvious) there hasn't been anyone in the last sixty years who reaches their level (maybe Witten)

31. Ami and Dror, both of you are drifting down the slippery slope of postmodernism and don't even realize it.
    There are many things about which the truth is in the eye of the beholder - in everything related to astrology, religion and science, the last 200 years have eliminated the existence of that relative truth by leaving one truth which is responsible for the fact that man visited space and that those people whose mental health is strengthened by prayer do not die at the average age of 40 and can use a variety of medicines and treatments whose effectiveness is not a product of one faith or another and work effectively on Muslims, Jews and atheists.
    A mocked faith is impossible not to mock.
    A person who lies with a determined forehead can only be proven to be lying.

    Postmodernism and relative truth are good for some things, but not when it comes to facts versus fiction.

32. My father's problem is that he does not understand that the Torah is not a religion. It exists and is not some sociological phenomenon. Unfortunately, in his thinking he is no less primitive than those he talks about. Just notice that the great scientists were really people with imagination and mystery and had a soul that he would call "religious". And so they had great works. I am a physics student for a master's degree in Hebrew and most of the professors there (also in mathematics) are as dry as the desert. They have no philosophical sensitivity and the depth of their understanding and intuition in the subjects they teach is unfortunately as shallow as my bathroom and in general 95% of scientists today are unimaginative technocrats. Each of their articles is 100 words (actually much, much more) about one idea.

33. Another thing for Ami, I'm not a doctor. I did a master's degree without a thesis, I thought about continuing but it's probably beyond my physical strength.
    And besides, this is not my personal opinion, but the accepted opinion among everyone who deals with science, only that not all of them are able to raise their heads above the specific subject they are dealing with, and maybe they don't like to deal with politics either.
    Those who ask me to deal only with individual scientific information, as I happily do on the site every day, and not to express myself on issues that are important to the very existence of science in a reformed country, are trying to bury their heads in the sand and, like in the days before Darwin, to think that science only reveals the secrets of creation. I cannot agree with such a thing.

34. My explanation is

    Because science does not give many people an answer (any) to their questions. Science still does not speak the language of ordinary people.

    Mysticism - yes

35. To Dror and to my people. Older and wiser people than me have done exactly the same thing, please read Elia Leibovitz's article, which analyzes Carl Sagan's book A Haunted World (from which I borrowed the title for the series), and you will see that in the last decade the situation has only gotten worse.
    https://www.hayadan.org.il/leibowitz-141097/

36. True. This return of the masses to religion and the education of the youth according to religion is a dangerous return to the past. Belief is a personal matter of a person and only the person himself will determine his belief and decide on it at some stage in his life. Likewise, religious or pro-religious education encourages rejection of science and knowledge and brings the believer into a narrow and opaque world. Likewise, I believe that the Rabbinical Court should be abolished as a political and governmental body, religion should be definitively separated from the state and pro-Jewish education should be prohibited among the secular classes. other thing.

    Christian but loves science, liberal.

37. Thanks Ziv.

38. How does it read–> How does it happen?

39. Avi Shalom,

    Kudos to you for the great site that I visit regularly and love it very much. You are a precious and versatile person.
    I have to admit that I really don't understand why you feel so strongly about the whole belief in God thing.
    In my opinion, you are turning science into a religion, and it really isn't.
    Science is not the opposite of religion. There is no need to constantly compare science and religion as if there is any value to this comparison.
    You surely know that there are excellent scientists who believe in God. Faith does not need proof and in fact when we know with scientific clarity then from that moment we no longer believe but know.
    And if in your own way you are looking for reason in belief, because there is this too: belief in the hidden makes life fascinating and mysterious, and therefore you will find the subject a lot in cinema and art in general.
    Beyond that, scientific studies have found that faith and prayer strengthen mental health.

    All the best,

    sparrow

40. Even if in this small essay there is quite a bit of truth in the form of facts (for example: "While R&D craves budgets, and everyone knows that investing in it promotes the economy, a huge part of the Israeli GNP goes to Kabbalist rabbis, astrologers, palm readers, card readers, read in the liver, in coffee and more"), then his legitimacy is only within the scope of Dr. Bilizovsky's right to a personal opinion - even if it is somewhat eccentric.
    You have every right in the world to think whatever comes to your mind. The same goes for me and my partner. Although I do not believe in "vanities" such as fortune-telling and the like, I would not find it appropriate to express such deep disdain in such a large audience of a public that does believe. The use of rhetoric that ridicules the beliefs of others. There is nothing to be alarmed about, Avi Bilizovsky's war on folk beliefs and everything "unscientific" is a real war whose basis can be summed up in the sentence: I am right and you are wrong.

    In other words - my religion is better than your religion. My God is better than your God. Science is the absolute truth and popular beliefs (held by the masses) are absolute nonsense.

    Such statements are accepted and have been said quite a few by priests of science like my father, without a doubt a man who writes and thinks about science and presents it to the public all the time and makes a positive advertisement for it at every opportunity. It is legitimate. What is perhaps less legitimate is that one question is stronger than another. Because then they come back and get involved in idolatry.

    Ami Bachar,
    Scientist, atheist and liberal.

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.