|
Tom...
I have no reason to doubt your assertion that you possess photographs that depict things that cannot be explained by materialism. However since you not only haven't displayed them, you haven't even described them, I can't give any weight to them as evidence. Sorry. I am sure that if I said to you : "actually, I have documents that prove conclusively that mankind possesses too much intelligence - but I can't tell you the nature of these documents nor can I show them to you", that you would be sceptical, to say the least.
You accuse me of being unduly technical. No, not really.
One statement says baldly that animals are psychic.
The other simply says some animals can do stuff that we can't leading some people to call them psychic.
The difference between these two statements is not the degree of "technicality", but the conclusions reached.
Relationships in nature cannot be 'explained away' by Darwinism. No one has bothered to say HOW one species can communicate with another species, perfectly, and in a fraction of a second.
No - and no-one has been able, either, to demonstrate that such communication does, actually happen in reality. And if something doesn't exist, then it doesn't need explanation.
back to the birds: and the ones in the front could not see the ones behind. maybe - but I bet they could hear them.
And I have no wish to disparage your powers of observation, but while might be fine for you to say: "I could not understand how they might be communicating, nor could I detect any single bird moving alone" - I can accept that you (or I ) might be unable to detect such a thing, but I'd be willing to bet that if the flight of the flock were filmed, then played back in slo-mo that you would see the individual flock members in motion, and how it spreads from one point to the rest. And please, if you can have unsubstantiated photos, I can have imaginary slo-mo film.
You actually tried to say that cats 'know' when we come home by a combination of lights and sounds: that is complete nonsense.
that is such a belter.. Nonsense?
Nonsense?
- are you telling me that where you live the sun stays in one position in the sky the whole day? That the noise of traffic in any one place is constant no matter what time of day it is? That in any neighbourhood, certain background sounds are not indicators of time of day?
Example: If I'm lying upstairs in bed, and hear a car engine outside, footsteps approachin the front door, clattering noise at the front door, and then a thump as of stuff hitting a floor, I associate that with a newspaper lying on the floor. Now even if I have never seen outside the door, and cannot imagine what the significance of the sounds is, even if I do not have the faintest concept of "car", nor what a newspaper is for, I still associate over time, the occurrence of A) noises with B) newspaper.
I take it you have heard about Pavlov?
I put it to you that the cat is an affectionate animal. It appreciates the attention that is lavished on it when the owner returns. Owner-Returning is associated with Being-Made-A-Fuss-Of. Sunlight-Being-Specific-Strength and Sound-of-More-Traffic is associated with Owner-Returning.
Cat sits in window and waits to see Owner-Returning.
OR
Like the cat in house next door to mine, it sits in the window the whole day when the owners are out. It gets the sunshine, and can get visual stimulation from what's going on outside. When owners at home, cat never sits in window.
Nonsense? Hah!
Yours sincerely...
|