Wherein Bing Genuinely Tries to Comfort a Concerned Christian

If you know me, you know that I am a big-time skeptic when it comes to the existence of gods, so much so that the difference between atheism and my agnosticism is vanishingly small. I am willing to be proven wrong, absolutely. But so far, I haven't heard of any good, independently verifiable evidence for the other side of the argument.

My current set of beliefs regarding the intersection of science and religion are complicated, but my baloney detector always goes off when I see someone say that they are a biblical scientist, because it implies a contradiction: if no matter what you discover you will have to reconcile it with the Bible or reject it, if you preclude the possibility that the Bible is wrong, you can't be doing science, because scientific beliefs are always contingent on future verification and are always potentially falsifiable. This is why I hammer away mercilessly at Answers in Genesis, who cannot in any way claim that they have even a passing acquaintance with the scientific method, and who, having had evolution explained to them over and over very slowly, I can no longer consider to be honest.

But today, I am talking about a group I have not come across before, a little group called Forcing Change, a group with what seem to be conspiracist leanings. (See, for example, a number of the articles that appear there: "One World, One Money," "Conquering Canada: The Elite Reconfiguring of North America," and "A New World Agenda.") In fact, I am responding to an opinion piece put forward by Carl Teichrib, called "Science and the Supernatural," which washed up at Worldview Weekend. I have not seen him at Worldview Weekend before, and I hope I will dissuade him from ever appearing there again. He begins with a quote:

"In the past few centuries, science has made us aware that the universe is stranger and more interesting than our ancestors realized. It is an amusing thought that it may turn out stranger and more interesting than even the scientists are willing to admit." – Colin Wilson, The Occult: A History, p. 33.

I'm pleased to see him citing his work, but mostly because I have been grading student papers all weekend. He opens with a series of observations that make the naturalist inside each of us weep with envy:

My family and I live in a very rural part of the Canadian prairies. Going shopping at a mall or big box-store is, literally, an all-day affair. Simply put, just driving to a community that's large enough to have such shopping facilities can take longer than the actually time spent shopping. Trips to the doctor, theater, or library requires a concerted effort; when a roundtrip to the nearest volunteer-run theater takes the better part of 100 miles, you question whether the movie is really worth seeing!

But there are perks living this far out in the boonies. On any given night, we can walk outside and see the Milky Way in exquisite detail, with stars touching each horizon, all viewed without the aid of a telescope or a set of binoculars. Spectacular Northern Light shows, which set the sky on fire, are enjoyed to the fullest. As are the thundering wings of thousands of migrating geese, swans, cranes, and ducks each spring and fall.

We've seen the sun and moon play tricks in the ice-filled winter air: sun and moon-dogs, "glories," unusual halos, and other surreal light phenomenon. We've also witnessed a multitude of other interesting natural phenomena: bead lightening, sky bands and light arches, funky mirages, giant whirlwinds, multiple tornadoes (that was wild!), and thousands of perfectly formed mini snowballs falling from the sky in the middle of a sweltering August afternoon. Over the years my family and I have witnessed a plethora of beautiful and unusual natural wonders.

Why am I telling you all this? Because Colin Wilson was right: the universe is a strange and interesting place. Moreover, our immediate world and the greater universe is still a place where human science can be utterly confounded.

Now this is pretty good. But I sense a disturbance in the Force.

Science, in its pure form, is chiefly concerned with what is observable, testable, and repeatable.

Spot on.

It is restricted in that sense to the physical study of physical matter.

Well, and other "physical" stuff. But, yes, the natural world.

But "pure science," both in the past and present, has often had its fingers in another pie: metaphysics, the philosophical inquiry into the basis of reality – i.e., religion (it could be argued that all science has some metaphysical foundation, however, many secular humanist say that "pure science" operates independent of metaphysics; a debate that this article cannot rightly explore). What's more, science has become increasingly interested in exploring the possibilities of tapping into the supernatural.

You are contradicting yourself here. I agree with your earlier statement that "pure" science has to do with the physical world. However, "pure science" cannot simultaneously only look at the natural world and at the supernatural. And this leads to the first set of problems that you have established for yourself: confounding various "pursuits and application of knowledge, including esoteric knowledge" with "science." There have been many modes of thought and practices that have sought to gain knowledge of the world and how it works: divination, necromancy, etc., but these are not sciences. These practices and methods generally produce the appearance of knowledge, that is, knowledge that has no applicability to the real world.

Let us take an example: An experienced trader in the stock market goes to a psychic. "Madam Gaga," he says, "I am wondering whether or not I should sell my stock in Fudge Motors." The psychic says, "Yes, I think you should." So the trader goes back to work and trades in all of his shares and shifts it elsewhere. A few days later, Fudge Motors announces huge losses. And this is not the first time that this has happened--the psychic has been right more often than not. Clearly the psychic predicted the change in Fudge Motors' fortunes.

Or did she?

Regardless of whether or not the trader is aware of it, he has gone to the psychic with 20 years of experience. He has a sense that something is not right about the valuation of Fudge Motors' stock. He is looking for confirmation of this sense, although he frames it to himself as "looking for advice or insight". Why would a psychic fight with this guy's hunch? He knows better than she does. She does not need psychic powers to pull this off and take the credit for his lucrative dealings. She simply tells him what he wants to hear, what he already knows/suspects. And this is what I mean by the "appearance of knowledge." She probably doesn't have any insight into the stock market that a pro wouldn't have, and she doesn't need to have psychic powers to give him permission to make a decision. The client already has the knowledge, but credits the psychic.

Now, into the breach:

Take for instance a published report by Eric Davis of Warp Drive Metrics. This report, titled Teleportation Physics Study, was produced and paid for by the US Air Force Research Laboratory at Edwards Air Force Base (contract number F04611-99-C-0025, public release date August 2004).

Technical in its nature, the report delves into aspects of quantum physics and its relationship to space and time, something that I find fascinating, even if I'm often lost by the complex terminology. The report also details another "science" – one that crosses over, into, and beyond the study of quantum physics; psychokinesis (the movement of objects though psychic channels).

Outlining this strange occurrence, Davis explained that Uri Geller, a well-known psychic, was able to bend a spoon without physically touching it during a talk he gave at the US Capital building. Furthermore, Davis elaborated on the deep interest that the US military/scientific and intelligence community has had, and continues to have, in the field of occult sciences – particularly remote viewing.

This very weird document is freely available on the web. There seems to be a lot of math. Some of it may even be right. I don't know. Don't have to. I am more than qualified to evaluate the relevant "psychic" section because it is not "technical," it only appears to be technical. It has cited sources and comes squashed in between slabs of mathematics, but it is not technical. In fact, it's downright sloppy and the military should get its...no, MY money back for this freshman-year bullshizle. Let's look at the section about spoon-bending in the original document:

"Psychic Uri Geller (1975) is the original model for demonstrating PK (psychokinetic) spoon bending. During a talk that he gave at the U.S. Capitol Building, Uri caused a spoon to curve upward with no force applied, and then the spoon continued to bend after he put it back down and continued the talk (Alexander 1996).

Wow. It's independently documented, so it's science, right? To quote General McAuliffe at Bastogne when he received a German command to surrender, "Nuts!"

You see, they cite Uri Geller's own 1975 biography for the info that he is the originator of spoon bending. But Alexander, he's clearly impartial. We can trust Alexander. I mean, if we can't trust Alexander, who can we trust? Here's the citation:

Alexander, J.B. (1996), "Uri's Impact on the U.S. Army," posted on http://www.urigeller.com

From Uri's own website? It's Uri's. I checked:

Uri Geller is not independent. Davis, the author of the weird document that Carl cites, could say in all seriousness "Uri Geller reports that he bent a spoon." So what? I levitated an elephant once. There. It's on my website. Did I really do it? No! But, you see, I'm not a dirt bag. But what about the bending spoon? I know for a fact that Uri Geller has been to Capitol Hill, and while he was there he visited Senator Claiborne Pell, who was not yet dead at the time. He had one of Uri's spoons mounted on his office wall, according to James Randi, who appears in the tale told by Martin Gardner, "The Senator from Outer Space." Randi, who makes no claims of having supernatural powers, replicated some of Geller's illusions. If Randi can do it without paranormal insight (only insight into effective illusions and human psychology), why should we conclude that Geller has power? Because he says so? Not good enough. Not by a long shot. And if you look at the account by Alexander (heheh), you will see that Geller did not "cause a spoon to curve upward with no force applied." When Geller went on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, and Carson asked Randi to prepare a scientific test of Geller, Randi simply kept the materials away from Geller and did not allow him to handle the testing materials. And Uri failed monumentally. Really:

See? Useless. "Oh, I'm tired!" Whatever, Uri. Very feeble. And in the Capitol account, what do we see? We see Geller, "put [the spoon] back down." He handled it. He was in control of the demonstration. This was not a scientific experiment, complete with proper controls. This is a demonstration before a credulous audience. The only difference between Geller and a normal stage magician is a conscience, and this feeble grasp at legitimizing psychic abilities is disgraceful at any price.

Remote viewing, which includes and combines elements of clairvoyance (seeing things in the future) and out-of-body experiences, has been especially intriguing to the intelligence community. For decades, a multitude of governmental agencies and corporate laboratories have been involved in remote viewing programs. Davis, laying out the historical context for military-scientific study within this field, explained the following,

"The reader should note that the very first U.S. military-intelligence R&D programs on psi, PK and mind control were conducted by H.K. (Andrija) Puharich, M.D., L.L.D during his military service at the Army Chemical and Biological Warfare Center at Fort Detrick, Maryland in the 1940s-50s. Puharich had an interest in clairvoyance and PK, and dabbled in theories for electronically and pharmaceutically enhancing and synthesizing psychic abilities. While in the Army, Puharich took part in a variety of parapsychology experiments, and he lectured Army, Air Force and Navy groups on possibilities for mind warfare. He was a recognized expert in hypnotism and microelectronics." (Teleportation Physics Study, p. 55)

This is an amazing admittance. Already in the mid-point of the last century, the defense and intelligence community was involved in psychic and occult exploration, including clairvoyance – and had coupled this theoretical research with mind-bending drugs and electronic stimuli.

The first thing that I notice is that phrase, "dabbled in theories for electronically and pharmaceutically enhancing and synthesizing psychic abilities." Noticeably absent is any mention of any experimental results. You would think that there would be a description of something other than this Puharich's interest in parapsychology if the researchers (I use the word very very loosely) are really going to recommend a $7 million/year program studying this goof. But they don't. Wanna guess why not? He doesn't even have an entry in the bibliography. He's not published in this area. He did not meet the scientific standard of peer-review. We are clearly not talking about respectable science.

And even if he was able to enhance psychic abilities using drugs, we would still clearly be talking about the natural world. A massive project to identify the changes in the brain caused by psychic drugs would be immediately launched, and if anything at all useful had been discovered, it would have been Nobel Prizes all around and there would be more than 60 years of work building upon the discoveries. Of course, you have to discover psychic abilities before you can enhance them, right?

With respect to remote viewing, it's completely unproven. It has been put to the test repeatedly and it has the following strokes against it from the get-go that make it an unlikely candidate for experimental success. First, it does not have a plausible mechanism. You can say, "Well, psychic energy," but what is psychic energy? How is it stored? What work is being performed (energy is the capacity to do work)? Secondly, the phenomenon seems to violate all known laws of physics, at least certainly at the scale of human perception. Yeah, there are examples of where Einstein's equations predict that information appears spookily transmitted between particles when one entangled particles' spin is measured or something. (The phrase Einstein used is great: "spukhafte Fernwirkung"--totally a great band name!) But all we get from those measurements is information about spin, not hi-def reality-o-vision.

In the year 2000, W. Adam Mandelbaum, a former intelligence officer and practicing psychic, laid out a frightening futuristic scenario in his controversial book The Psychic Battlefield: A History of the Military-Occult Complex (St. Martin's Press, 2000).

"Besides an end to privacy and manipulation of financial markets, a cadre of highly developed psychic warriors might start to think of themselves as a new Master Race. We have seen, in Eastern Bloc Olympic training, the widespread use of suggestion, imagery, and mental rehearsal to enhance sports performance. We will probably see this trend continue in the military of the third millennium to create Super Soldiers…The conscious creation of a superior military force will result in those participants becoming consciously aware of their superiority. Add ego to weapons access, mix with superior psychic spying skills, and Voila! we have a new SS that makes Himmler's boys look like the Cub Scouts." (The Psychic Battlefield, p. 235).

RUN AWAY!!!!

Yeah? So? He's telling a story. Why should I give this any credibility? We already have egos mixed with weapons. They're called Marines. Furthermore, visualization is not a psychic technique, as evidenced by the fact that athletes who mentally rehearse do not pass bodily through the hurdles they are, uh, hurdling. If mental rehearsal does anything useful, it strengthens connections between the portions of the brain that will be used in competition, a purely physical process subject to the scrutiny of science.

But the military and defense communities, including that of Russia and China, are not the only areas where science and the supernatural have combined. Psychic activity has also been used in the fields of archeology and criminology.

No. It really hasn't. Have you ever heard of a psychic being called in as an expert witness in a murder trial, or any other trial? Or how about a search warrant being issued by a judge on the basis of what a psychic has said? Of course not. If psychics are real, why are are there any unsolved crimes? All crimes have potential witnesses is psychics are real. We simply do not live in a world that is at all like one in which psychics could do what they say they can.

Of these two, the use of psychics in criminology is probably the most widely known, fueled in large part by various television programs and publications that have highlighted the apparent successes and failures of criminal-clairvoyant investigations.

Ah, citing fiction. What's wrong with this? So much lousy analysis and science comes from people citing fiction. Sesame Street is not a real place. There is no such thing as pouting, irritating and hormonally deranged sparkling vampires. Desi and Lucy weren't really married...What? Crap.

The use of occult powers in the field of archeology, however, is relatively unknown.

Completely unknown, actually, at least to archeologists. You know, I went to the American Journal of Archaeology online, which has been publishing peer-reviewed archaeology studies since 1897, and when you type in "psychic," as far as I can tell, all in all 108 volumes, the 24 mentions of the word "psychic" all have to do with the definition "of or relating to the psyche." Now if you want to see an example of a known psychic fraud, Derek Acorah, and his inability to be useful as an archaeologist, I refer you to the Bad Archaeology blog.

Hans Holzer, one of the most prolific writers on parapsychology and spiritualism, detailed a number of psychic archeological experiments in his book Window to the Past.

"Prolific" does not carry any authority in and of itself. Holzer is another notorious fraud. I would first direct you to his claim to fame, his association with the Amnityville Haunting. The following comes from his obituary, which, I would like to note, he did not write himself after he died, which is another thing that we would be seeing if we could really talk to the dead:

Holzer embarked on his most famous investigation in 1977, following reports about a family who claimed to have been terrorised by paranormal phenomena after moving into a sprawling colonial mansion in Amityville, Long Island, in 1975. The house had been the scene of a grisly multiple murder a little over a year before, when 23-year-old Ronnie DeFeo went from room to room shooting his parents and his four siblings in their beds.

This is true. And the whole thing, including Holzer's involvement seems to have been part of a ploy on the part of DeFeo's lawyer to make up an alibi for him: demonic possession. It didn't work. He got six consecutive life sentences.

Oh, wait. Holzer did apparently contribute to his own obituary after he had died:

Hans Holzer, who died on April 26, is survived by two daughters. Through one of them, he has since sent his heartfelt "thanks" to The Daily Telegraph for its interest.

Haha. Really? Was this independently verified? Pretty funny. Even his death is a joke.

Through the use of mediums and the employment of such practices as telepathy, individuals were able to pinpoint archeological sites and document important historical events. Holzer, elaborating on the pseudo-science of psychic archeology, explained that,

"The expressions of mediums, no matter how genuine and detailed, nevertheless do not represent scientific fact in the accepted sense, but they can lead to investigations in areas where scientists might not have looked. If such follow-ups are undertaken free from all prejudice and preconceived notions, psychic clues can be among the most valuable tools of historical research." (Window to the Past, p. 94)

And here is an example of another problem with Carl's analysis, the confusion of pseudo-science as having anything to do with real science. He uncritically reports that psychics were able to make relevant discoveries using psychic powers, but then (correctly) describes psychic archaeology as a pseudo-science. This suggests to me that Carl does not appreciate the unbridgeable gulfs between a pseudo-science and science. To give him a sense of what legitimate, peer-reviewed archaeologists think of Holzer's work, I refer you to Marshall McKusick's article, "Psychic Archaeology: Theory, Method, and Mythology Psychic Archaeology: Theory, Method, and Mythology," which appeared in the Spring 1982 issue of the Journal of Field Archaeology (pp. 99-118). I quote the abstract and encourage everyone to pick up a back issue, because it is a thumping good read:

In contemporary society the growth of mystical, occult religious cults is providing the public with new interpretations about prehistory, human evolution, and ancient civilizations. One spiritualistic search for the human past is named psychic archaeology and it preaches the gospel that traditional field archaeology is limited, obsolete, and largely useless because it has not been getting the right answers about antiquity. The doctrine continues that the truth about man's cultural origins is obtained from psychic mediums who have the occult power actually to visit prehistoric times in visions and to exchange messages with the spirit world. These psychic mediums are widely believed to have the ability to dowse for artifacts and in various ways communicate with the ghosts of the dead. One looks in vain to the professional journals for discussions of the fallacies of psychic archaeology, and, partly because of the lack of a professional response to the occult challenge, these new religious movements have grown unchecked despite errors, anachronisms, and false premises in their astonishing claims about the origin and development of human society. This review article is concerned especially with recent publications of Jeffrey Goodman, Hans Holzer, and David Zink, along with a few other earlier authors; their books are cited in the text and in the footnotes.

Psychic archaeology is so bad, it's not even addressed in the literature. That's how not a part of science it is. So, be careful, Carl. Science and what these people are talking about are two different matters entirely.

Reincarnation, psychic healing, the development of super-consciousness, exceptional precognition, out-of-body experiences, remote viewing, and a host of other topics which dance along the razor's edge of supernaturalism and occultism have all been topics of scientific thought and study.

And they have been found over and over and over again to be completely and utterly lacking. I'll make a suggestion because I don't think that Carl is familiar with the skeptical literature. James Randi has offered $1 million for anyone who can demonstrate under proper scientific control conditions the existence of any supernatural or occult powers. No one has ever gotten past the preliminary stage. Not. One. Person.

Furthermore, scientific inquiry into psychic phenomena is often rooted in basic scientific orthodoxy, taking on aspects of repeatability, testability, and observation. However, this doesn't negate its supernatural side, nor does it elevate psychic research into the echelons of hard science.

Actually, hard science, all hard science so far, has found a lack of supernatural forces. The lack of evidence for the supernatural is truly overwhelming.

But being testable, observable, and repeatable does give verification that psychic activity exists.

No. Being testable only means that proponents claim the phenomenon has an effect on the real world. And the only repeatable result is that these psychic abilities can't be observed. It's really never happened. Ever. Not once. Please, Carl, point me to the peer-reviewed literature that says "[r]eincarnation, psychic healing, the development of super-consciousness, exceptional precognition, out-of-body experiences, remote viewing" exists. Seriously. Where is the psychic healing research? Certainly in the Lancet or JAMA, right?

To the skeptical "scientific mind," however, the notion that this pseudo-science trespasses into the foggy world of occultism or supernaturalism is rarely accepted as a serious option.

But theology and human history says otherwise. From an historical and contemporary context, mankind has embraced occultism in an attempt to harness and utilize supernatural powers for individual gain – sometimes setting in motion forces that have destroyed both body and mind in the process.

Why we should accept theology (at least as an inquiry into the nature and actions of God) as a legitimate field of study, I don't know. Several theologies have developed and they have come to no consensus about the Almighty(ies)'s(') character(s) and behavior(s). It sounds a lot like ball lightening to me, by which I mean it explains an unknown in terms of another, undefined unknown, which adds nothing to the sum of knowledge, merely adding yet another thing that we don't know. It's an endeavor that hardly can be said to progress.

Worse still, history is rife with civilizations that have followed occult-based ideologies and philosophies, with death and destruction in close pursuit (Nazi Germany comes to mind; see The Occult Roots of Nazism by Goodrick-Clarke, and the 4-part video series The Occult History of the Third Reich).

The problem here is one of perspective. From the point of view of a dedicated born-again Christian, everyone else's religion is an occult belief. Take, for instance, the beliefs of Catholics from the point of view of Southern Baptists. The Catholics, hell-bound to a man (and let's face it, the women never really had a chance), are devotees to a false gospel and the doctrine of transubstantiation, well, that's just vampirism and cannibalistic rituals--almost Satanic. And of course, the practices of Christians seem equally perverse, misguided and occult to member of nearly every other religion. It's true. I would also mention that nobody remembers the Nazis for the hierarchy's preferred improvised Nordic religion. It came at no extra charge when they bought the family-sized case of nationalism.

Not ironically, noted occultist and "mother" of the New Age, Helena P. Blavatsky, warned against the dangers of supernatural/occult powers as a military/criminal device. The following was originally published in Lucifer magazine, 1891, and was re-published in a collection of Blavatsky's writings titled Studies in Occultism.

"…if purely material implements are capable of blowing up, from a few corners, the great cities of the globe, providing the murderous weapons are guided by expert hands – what terrible dangers might not arise from magical occult secrets being revealed, and allowed to fall into the possession of ill-meaning people! A thousand times more dangerous and lethal are these, because neither the criminal hand, nor the immaterial invisible weapon used, can ever be detected." (Studies in Occultism, pp.28-29).

Really. Madame Blavatsky, the parlor psychic and plagiarist who was exposed in 1883 by the (mostly) rigorous British Society for Psychical Research (of which William James was a member) to be little more than a crude fraud who nonetheless gathered an immense following (http://www.victorianweb.org/religion/theosophy.html). The one who was so busted that she burned down her house to hide the trap doors that had been found. It's not the most glamorous part of her story, and so I'm sure it does not get told often, but she was a run of the mill fraud with no special insight into the afterlife or psychic phenomena (only that customers could be tricked into paying for faked miracles).

Blavatsky then suggests that the occultist must "live the life" in order to properly handle the potency of supernatural powers. This is a twisted position, for the practitioner is obviously dealing with forces that go beyond the human capacity to understand or control.

Or she's hyping her thoroughly debunked self. Never underestimate the depths to which a con will go to trick you. She will sell you your God. She will sell you your demons. And sometimes they come as a set.

In other words, the individual is not "playing with the occult," rather the supernatural is toying with the practitioner. This is evidenced through personal lives impacted by supernatural bondage, including insanity (see Tal Brooke, Riders of the Cosmic Circuit, 1986, and Elissa Lindsey McClain, Rest from the Quest, 1984).

I forgot that we were citing, so it took me a sec to realize what I was looking at in the parentheses. Tal Brooke runs a California-based Christian anti-cult outfit. Of course, he presumably substitutes one set of irrational beliefs for another, but at least there's no added loss for society. He did see that Transcendental Meditation was barred from public schools, and then I stopped reading.

So, what about a real exorcism? Who's up for one? I could go for one. I'm trying to find a good one on YouTube. Let's watch some Russian exorcisms:

If this were performance art, I'd call it, "Grunting Woman on Floor with Arched Back. Number 4." How is she not mentally ill? I mean, where's the pea soup, man? I know I was promised pea soup!

Wow! Exorcism is dull! Nothing that you can see in these vids needs supernatural explanation. Really. Grown men in dresses torturing the mentally ill, that's what I see. But I was genuinely blown away by this segment from 20/20, because it kind of sort of makes a point I hit on earlier. It starts at time 4:35:

First off, Ms. Vargas (may I call you "Angel Cheeks"?), no person worth talking to will say, "You can't prove to me that this is not an exorcism." An honest skeptic has to have an open mind, but demands a high standard of evidence for extraordinary claims. But it's not this common misperception of skeptics that I am especially interested in here. It's the reply by the daughter: "There's really no way to convince them unless they want to believe." I do believe she is psychically channeling my imaginary stockbroker. This is confirmation bias, pure and simple, a well-understood phenomenon, a tendency for people to look for evidence that confirms a preexisting position instead of looking for evidence against it. An example of this might be asking someone if their brother is an introvert. "Well," comes the reply, "He likes to read and he plays chess and he does not usually come to family functions. So, yeah, I guess so." But the person is only looking for confirming evidence, not taking into account the fact that while her brother is busy not attending family functions, he is partying hardy with Paris Hilton or something.

[...] Yes, the physical world is a marvelous wonder, filled with many transfixing and puzzling surprises. It still baffles man by its beauty and complexity. So too the non-physical universe, including mental and spiritual components, is a place of fascination. However, when dabbling and dealing with the supernatural – and the mind sciences that sometimes attempt to explain or exploit it-a mental, emotional, and spiritual minefield is encountered. And just as wandering into a physical minefield will destroy the body, so too will a spiritual minefield destroy the soul.

Whatever we are looking at here, Carl, it's really not science. It's pseudoscience and simple self-deception. And if something completely imaginary can destroy the soul, the soul must be a fragile thing indeed.

HJ