Have you experienced something science could not explain?

[John Phoenix]

I would like to hear from scientist that has had personal experiences they could not explain through their current knowledge of science.

 

This could be anything from perceived miracles to experiments under lab conditions.

 

I just thought this would be interesting and fun.

[Gasparri]

I would like to hear from scientist that has had personal experiences they could not explain through their current knowledge of science.

 

Marriage.

[iNow]

Marriage.

 

Explainable by science.

[insane_alien]

specifically psychology and evolutionary biology.

[Sisyphus]

I expect I see things every day that nobody has successfully and fully explained yet. I just don't know what they are, because I don't have exhaustive knowledge of everything that anyone has ever figured out.

[John Cuthber]

Sleep?

There are some interesting theories, but as far as I know, it is not explained fully yet.

[The Clairvoyant]

I think everyone is baffled by the suicidal cows at the moment

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1209638/Scientists-baffled-suicidal-cows-throw-cliff-Switzerland.html

 

Surely this can't be explained only guessed at ?

[Mokele]

Surely this can't be explained only guessed at ?

 

Not necessarily. For instance, I have a hypothesis about this - the Lammergeier vulture. This species is native to the Alps, and has been reported to drop rocks on mountain animals (including humans) in an effort to scare them into falling. I'd hypothesize that the vulture scared the cows, and caused a stampede. I can test the hypothesis by examining the cow carcasses for signs of scavenging by this particular bird (should be fairly straightforward, since it's the biggest bird in the region with a nearly 9 foot wingspan).

[iNow]

Sleep?

There are some interesting theories, but as far as I know, it is not explained fully yet.

 

Yeah, but there is a giant difference between "not fully explained yet" and "science cannot explain."

 

Implicit in the second is that science cannot... ever... explain something, and that's just silly.

 

 

BTW - Sleep is restorative for muscles, and also heavily involved in the consolidation of memory and experience. In short, sleep allows us to prevent new stimuli from being perceived while the brain reorganizes itself. Every morning when you wake up the structure of your brain is quite different than the structure of your brain when you fell asleep.

 

There are many ideas that are not "fully explained," but that does not mean that science cannot explain them. I'm confident you agree, but I'd venture to guess that there are many others reading this thread who think otherwise.

Edited September 4, 2009 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

Not necessarily. For instance, I have a hypothesis about this - the Lammergeier vulture. This species is native to the Alps, and has been reported to drop rocks on mountain animals (including humans) in an effort to scare them into falling. I'd hypothesize that the vulture scared the cows, and caused a stampede. I can test the hypothesis by examining the cow carcasses for signs of scavenging by this particular bird (should be fairly straightforward, since it's the biggest bird in the region with a nearly 9 foot wingspan).

 

How would you ascertain that they scared the cows then scavenged vs simply scavenged?

[John Phoenix]

Yeah, but there is a giant difference between "not fully explained yet" and "science cannot explain."

 

Implicit in the second is that science cannot... ever... explain something, and that's just silly.

 

 

BTW - Sleep is restorative for muscles, and also heavily involved in the consolidation of memory and experience. [ In short, sleep allows us to prevent new stimuli from being perceived while the brain reorganizes itself. Every morning when you wake up the structure of your brain is quite different than the structure of your brain when you fell asleep. ]

 

There are many ideas that are not "fully explained," but that does not mean that science cannot explain them. I'm confident you agree, but I'd venture to guess that there are many others reading this thread who think otherwise.

 

As Spock would say, "Fascinating". I never heard this about the brain before. I'm going to do a web search on this but in the meantime do you have any good links that talk about this?

 

Remember folks the gist of my question allows for things that science cannot explain at the present time. I do believe however if something is real, science will one day be able to explain it. This includes proving the existence of God ( assuming there is a God for example) or even the possibility that there may be beings walking among us that exist in other dimensions that overlap our own like perhaps ghost. Things such as ghost may be considered pseudoscience now simply because we lack the ability to quantify them with a present scientific method. But I think if something is observed by so many people that tells us that the possibility they are real exist. We just have to wait till science catches up.

 

I like this forum because it gives me a chance to pick the brains of the educated. I can have a discussion about ghost lets say on any old forum but to get opinions of scientist about whats possible or yet to be explained is really interesting.

 

I have one. Many years ago I use to play with Ouija boards. Ouija boards have been a part of many cultures for centuries in one form or another. In fact their use dates back to many thousands of year BC. One day as a teen after a stint of playing with one for many hours a day, I was in the kitchen fixing lunch. I had fixed a bowl of green beans and set it on the counter at least 4 or 5 inches from the edge. I turned around and took a few steps toward the drawer that had the kitchen utensils to get a fork. This only took a few seconds. I heard THUMP and turned around to see my bowl of green beans sitting upside down in the middle of the kitchen floor. The beans did not spill but were all intact inside the bowel that was upside down. A check of the counter where the bowl was sitting revealed that there was no water or other substance on the counter that could have caused the bowl to slide off. The bowl was at least 3 to 4 feet away from where it was sitting on the counter to it's present position on the floor. The counter was about 4 feet high. Further more this counter was the type that had a slight hump on the edge to prevent things from sliding off of it. The only thing I could figure is there is no way this bowl could have traveled this distance, inverted itself and landed with beans intact under the bowl unless there were forces at work which I could not understand. This is why I attributed this happening to my use of the Ouija board. This was witnessed by myself and my mother who heard the thump and came to see what was going on. Needless to say it wasn't long after this I threw my Ouija board away.. you know.. just in case

Edited September 4, 2009 by John Phoenix

[Mokele]

How would you ascertain that they scared the cows then scavenged vs simply scavenged?

 

Timecourse of scavenging, ideally. It may be possible to determine from the wounds whether they were inflicted shortly after death or many hours later.

[iNow]

As Spock would say, "Fascinating". I never heard this about the brain before. I'm going to do a web search on this but in the meantime do you have any good links that talk about this?

Curiously, there was a special on the PBS program NOVA:Science Now just this week. Here's the link:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/teachers/programs/3410_01_nsn.html

 

To the right of the page, you can click the link to "Watch the video online."

 

 

Also, I haven't reviewed it for accuracy, but the link below seems pretty detailed and accessible:

http://www.memory-key.com/NatureofMemory/sleep.htm

 

Either way, check out the NOVA program, too. Enjoy.

[dr.syntax]

Hello John Phoenix, I recall this incident where I had been returning from work for 2 or 3 days and my girlfriend at that time kept telling me about how she had looked in a full length mirror in our bedroom and at times would see this other woman there. This frightened and upset her. I never discounted it outright, but thought she might be having some sort of hallucinations. Anyway, we both got up and were eating cornflakes or something like that for breakfast as I was getting ready to go work. The amazing thing was that this regular sized bowl we were using as a sugar bowl that was at least a half full of sugar began moving about the table in a rapid manner. Changing directions in all sorts of ways. Reversing directions,turning at rght angles,going in circles. I was a bit amazed. I wiped the table to ensure it was dry. These movements were always some cosiderable distance. A foot or more at a time and rapid. There were no subways or trains or any other source of vibrations. Also, it was only the sugar bowl that moved. Not the bowl I was eating from, the spoons or anything else on the table. She said something to the effect of: see, I told you there was a ghost in the apartment. I saw no reason to argue with her and went off to work. I always remembered that incident and have never come up with any scientific reason for it. I am not a religious person nor was she. I don`t know what to make of it to this day. ...Dr.Syntax

[iNow]

Probably a mouse, lizard, or large bug or roach in or under the sugar bowl.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Alternatively, dr.syntax's home was the subject of an upcoming Pixar film about anthropomorphic dishes that must fight off the scourge of evil dish-eating dish detergent bottles while keeping their anthropomorphicness hidden from their owners for fear of giving away their secrets.

[dr.syntax]

Probably a mouse, lizard, or large bug or roach in or under the sugar bowl.

 

from you. Your opinion means nothing other than that to me anymore. Why can you not allow other people to discuss anyting without some wiseass response unless they are one of your suck up buddies of course ? ...ds

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Alternatively, dr.syntax's home was the subject of an upcoming Pixar film about anthropomorphic dishes that must fight off the scourge of evil dish-eating dish detergent bottles while keeping their anthropomorphicness hidden from their owners for fear of giving away their secrets.

 

insult me? Up until now I have resisted responding in the same manner. Stick that Refsmmat where the sun don`t shine old salt along with your folksy wittisisms. ..ds

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

SECTION. So why some of these know it all so called scientists see fit to read these postings just to ridicule them says a lot to me as to what sort of people they are. Some of these names have become familiar to me. They appear to have an insatiable need to belittle others. Why else would they seek out this section of the forum of all places to offer up thier smarmy replies to the postings offered here ? ...Dr.Syntax

Edited September 11, 2009 by dr.syntax
spelling again

[The Clairvoyant]

SECTION. So why some of these know it all so called scientists see fit to read these postings just to ridicule them says a lot to me as to what sort of people they are. Some of these names have become familiar to me. They appear to have an insatiable need to belittle others. Why else would they seek out this section of the forum of all places to offer up thier smarmy replies to the postings offered here ? ...Dr.Syntax

 

 

It's a good point. There's really no need for it and their time and energy would be better spent elsewhere.

 

To answer your 'ghost' experience I think you can break it into 3

 

1. An event that as yet is unexplained by science

2. A natural event that could currently be explained by science if someone were to do a thorough investigation of your house

3. A spiritual event that might never be explained by science

 

Could it be explained by science. Probably, but maybe not yet. What would one of the scientists on here make of it if it happened to them ? Would it scare the sh*t out of them or would they just put it down to something unexplained and not be frightened by it in the slightest ?

[iNow]

[The usual smart assed answer I have come to expect] from you. Your opinion means nothing other than that to me anymore. Why can you not allow other people to discuss anyting without some wiseass response unless they are one of your suck up buddies of course ? ...ds

 

What are you, like five years old? There was nothing smart ass about my answer at all. I presented you with the single most likely explanations for the phenomenon you described, and THAT's how you respond?

 

You're not making many friends here, dr.syntax.

[Sisyphus]

dr.syntax, they're making light of it, but I hardly think it's as insulting as you are taking it. The point is there's no obvious explanation to those experiences, and nobody here can possibly explain them because we don't have enough information. We can suggest explanations, but it's going to be pretty blind because all we have to go on is what you've said. It reminds me of this video on "open-mindedness" which I like a lot:

 

http://www.reasonproject.org/archive/item/qualia_soup_-_open-mindedness/

[Fuzzwood]

SECTION. So why some of these know it all so called scientists see fit to read these postings just to ridicule them

 

Because that is what your claims are, and every answer that does not approve of your theory is considered as trash in your eyes. So it is really your own close-mindedness that is causing ppl to react the way they do.

[The Clairvoyant]

What are you, like five years old? .

 

Strewth man, there you go again. You just can't help yourself. Read it through before you type, nobody is asking that much from you.

 

 

There was nothing smart ass about my answer at all..

 

There was, you were being a smart arse.

 

I presented you with the single most likely explanations for the phenomenon you described .

 

Really ? Surely not. A cockroach carries a plate 'at speed' for approx. a foot ? No way, that is not likely at all and if it were 'big enough' to do that then you'd see the darned thing.

 

and THAT's how you respond? .

 

With a smart arse response, how did you expect him to respond ?

 

You're not making many friends here, dr.syntax .

 

If he's going to continue getting daft smart arse responses I doubt that he's that bothered.

 

 

It's a good interesting, topic and I for one would like to hear more. I'd also like to hear more if you have experienced something unexplained but then later gone on to explain it.

[iNow]

Really ? Surely not. A cockroach carries a plate 'at speed' for approx. a foot ? No way, that is not likely at all and if it were 'big enough' to do that then you'd see the darned thing.

You're here trying to suggest that a cockroach, a large bug, a mouse, or a lizard are LESS likely to have moved that sugar bowl than a ghost... That a ghost is the more likely explanation? Interesting proposition, but I must strongly disagree due to the simple fact that we have evidence of the existence of bugs, lizards, and mice moving things in a household, and no evidence whatsoever that there even is such a thing as ghosts.

 

 

For the love of Thor, I'm like fly paper for the mentally disturbed and the wooo worshipers.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

There is, of course, a third option: you're wrong but it wasn't a ghost, either. The Clairvoyant saying a cockroach is a ridiculous hypothesis does not make ghosts any more plausible.

[The Clairvoyant]

You're here trying to suggest that a cockroach, a large bug, a mouse, or a lizard are LESS likely to have moved that sugar bowl than a ghost... That a ghost is the more likely explanation? .

 

Show me where I suggested this. I never said suggested anything of the sort. What I did suggest was that your 'likely cockroach scenario' was in fact unlikely. Ghosts were not mentioned at all as an explanation.

 

For the love of Thor, I'm like fly paper for the mentally disturbed and the wooo worshipers.

 

There you go again. Please read it through before you type.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

There is, of course, a third option: you're wrong but it wasn't a ghost, either. The Clairvoyant saying a cockroach is a ridiculous hypothesis does not make ghosts any more plausible.

 

Nobody said it was.