Dante, you know very well that I never said, nor attempted to imply, that people are capable of manipulating matter in a radically gross manner typical of Dr. Manhattan via prayer or will. If you are going to critique anything that goes against your strong ideological need to believe that the universe is not affected by consciousness in any way whatsoever--a tenet not supported by quantum mechanics, and which you and other atheists associate (wrongly) with religious belief, and thus need to denounce at all costs--then do so from an intellectually honest standpoint. Trying to make opponents of a differing point of view look foolish by claiming they make sweeping claims they did not actually make, or vastly exaggerating what they contend, is dirty pool, and it's a tactic reeking of desperation. And if you have to take a personal potshot at my economic views to attempt to bolster your attack on anything I post that conflicts with your sacrosanct ideological view regarding materialism, that reeks of even more desperation. Ad-hominem territory backed up by inappropriate sarcasm often does.

There is much study by legitimate physicists that make it quite clear that what those termed "mystics" and "magicians" did both in the past and now has strong connections to what has been discovered in quantum physics over the past century. You need to believe otherwise from a purely political standpoint, because you adhere to a system of ideology that tries to divorce science from anything that you believe may remotely connect it with religion, including limiting what areas science should study or delve into for political reasons.

Let's take a look at two texts written by three quantum physicists who are respectable researchers and teachers in the field, none of whom are religious, and at least one of whom is an atheist. They simply do not suffer from the irrational hatred of religion or anything they remotely connect to it like certain schools of atheists do, causing the latter to try to impose those political limitations on science. Saying that science should ignore studying this or that for reasons based on personal ideological issues, and ignoring the connections between certain phenomena prevalent throughout human history that correlate with important scientific finds, is a textbook example of bad science, and it shows how irrational those who purport to be the most rational amongst humanity can be.

Note the book Quantum Enigma by physicists and college professors (and thus hardly crackpots) Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner: http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Enigma-Physics-Encounters-Consciousness/dp/0199753814/ref=pd_sim_b_5

Now note this professional review of the book by another scientist and college professor, Richard Conn Henry: http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/quantum.enigma.html

Note that Henry is an atheist like yourself, albeit not one who utterly refuses to accept what scientific experiments in quantum mechanics are making clear, because he feels that as a scientist dedicated to discovering the truth about nature, he cannot afford to. Also notice that his acceptance of the theories explained by Rosenblum and Kuttner in the book did not cause him to start accepting a religious interpretation of the universe, which is clearly the greatest fear of many atheists if they (in their own eyes) fail to denounce some of the most important discoveries of quantum physics. This fear is purely ideological and political, and has nothing to do with "good" science, something that Henry himself makes quite clear in statements I will quote just below.

First, note Henry's earlier descriptions in the review of how Copernicus and Galileo both feared ridicule for formulating theories they honestly felt their research concluded that strongly conflicted with the ideology of the times. Similar observations were made by Rosenblum and Kuttner in their book, which included attacks they received from fearful fellow members of their university staff (similar to the ones you make to me when this subject is broached).

Note these lines from Henry in the review: "On this fundamental topic, physicists are mostly terrified wimps.

"And what are these 'terrors' that prevent the acceptance of the obvious? I think it is a combination of the fear of being ridiculed, plus the fear of the religious implications [emphasis mine]. Does that sound familiar?"

Hmmmm, interesting to see that I'm not the only individual to recognize this clear and obvious fear of those who have a powerful ideological need to support the belief that the universe is entirely material, since that fully eliminates anything that can be remotely attributed to religious or "mystical" beliefs from the equation. In the eyes of some atheists (but not all, as genuinely scientific thinkers like Rosenblum, Kuttner, and Henry make clear), making this conflation is an affront to their ideology, which is based on a politically-driven belief that religion is the cause of all evil in the world and must be isolated and expurgated from the world in favor of a fully materialist viewpoint (which never did anything to stop war or hatred when put into widespread practice by certain nations, such as the former Soviet Union--but at least it takes the blame away from the for-profit economic system that glorifies inequality, greed, and a price tag on every major and minor necessity, eh? Ooops, ad-hominem alert!).

Now please note these words of Henry:

Despite the fact that I am heavily criticizing this book, above all for its timidity, I do highly recommend it, if only because, except for Nick Herbert’s excellent “Quantum Reality,” it is about the only available book that clearly brings out the amazing, the astounding, the utterly unbelievable simple facts. Although quantum cryptography and quantum computing are gradually forcing people to stop averting their eyes, there is still an amazing amount of ignorance about these unbelievable experimentally established facts.

'That’s crazy' a physicist said to me just the other day, when I described the quantum Zeno effect. Yet this physicist has worked lifelong in quantum-intensive research!

All I had mentioned was that, if you observe a quantum system with a short half life, it will not make the transition to the lower state. Your simply observing it (not interacting with it in any way) causes it to remain in its higher-energy state. (Just Google on “quantum Zeno effect,” should it happen that you don’t believe me!)

“Quantum Enigma” only mentions the quantum Zeno effect in passing, which surprises me. Despite their timidity, it is quite clear that our shivering authors know darned well that mind is central⎯and nothing shows the truth of that more clearly than does the quantum Zeno effect.

Wow, a fellow scientist actually considers the text by Rosenblum and Kuttner to be one of timidity!

You can now see that I never said that observing particles on the sub-atomic level and focusing your will on them will result in radical alterations of matter, or changing one substance to another, and you clearly know this. Careful, unbiased readers of my text will clearly see this also. But as the three quantum physicists I mentioned here explicitly state when discussing quantum mechanics, the nature of our reality is affected by the observations of all sentient beings collectively. I stated in my first post that making conscious alterations in reality is difficult for this reason (hardly resembling your claim that I said we can readily make Dr. Manhattan-style alterations with just a little focus!), and it does not take the form of radically altering or transmuting matter! Rather, it can influence events on a usually subtle level (in fact, I used the word "subtle") that can nevertheless have potentially significant effects on someone's personal sphere, and it takes a huge amount of practice, visualization skills, and focus to accomplish with any degree of reliability, since moving against the consensus reality is like trying to run uphill. That is the scientific reality behind what certain people have termed "magick" or "prayer" in the past, and why a lack of strong belief in its possibility sabotages its effectiveness if one tries it on a whim, or only in times of pure desperation.

This also shows that your claims that I am unique in making what you call this conflation in an attempt to isolate me from all "legitimate" science is quite wrong, as this subject is of great debate among physicists as you can see here. I'm sure you do know many Neo-Pagans, but how many of them have actually made an attempt to validate their practices by studying quantum physics? None that you know, it seems, but it's something they should be researching. Other Neo-Pagans, however, have made this connection clear in books they have written, and that's hardly "bad" magick (which you are not expert on, mind you, since you don't practice it, you simply try to debunk it), because Neo-Pagans do not deny their practice being subject to legitimate scientific laws.

Further, not everyone who utilizes something is interested in learning how it works from a scientific standpoint, but only concern themselves that it does work--just as many people without mechanical and engineering knowledge are satisfied that putting a key in the car's ignition and turning it in a certain way starts the vehicle and enables it to move rapidly without concern for knowing the underlying scientific principles that makes this process possible.