Well, not knowing exactly what a Sikh is, I did some research on the internet.  The web sites that I looked at, in one way or another, stated that Sikh's have a great devotion to God and denounce all "superstition and blind rituals."  It seems to me that the man claiming to be a Sikh was offering up a blind ritual.  It's one thing to make your living off your talents or gifts, but most people don't peddle them in a public arena.  Perhaps the American, in passing, did tell someone about his family and they passed the information on.  If the American was traveling to India because of a guru, then most likely he has traveled to India more than once.  It is very possible he wouldn't remember what information he had divulged throughout his travels.

I think there was quite a bit stored subconsciously for the author before he ever went to the prayer meeting, that could have influenced his experience of speaking in tongues.  Brother August had played albums in class of recorded glossolalia, so the author knew what it sounded like.  Brother August also told him that the Holy Spirit comes alive during the small prayer groups.  The author talked about how he was drawn to a particular prayer group, but earlier states how he knew that that particular prayer leader was known for invoking glossolalia.  Not only were these type of prayer groups new to the author, so was the set-up of the church.  He talks about the inclusiveness of the alter and pews.  I think the author got caught up in the moment and what he conciously and subconsciously knew about the subject resulted in the type of experience he had.

Bush sure throws the word "evidence" around a lot, yet we have seen no evidence of what he was trying so hard to drive home, the threat of weapons of mass destruction.  The statement he makes regarding how the removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime will be the day of liberation for the people of Iraq, sounds ironic.  In many ways, yes, they have been freed, but only to struggle under the grip of the new and larger monster.

I do agree that cold readings are all about being a very good observer.  Everyone has unconscious movements when reacting to something, and if someone is well trained they know how to read these movements and apply them.  Maybe readers are some sort of cosmic therapist for clients, but if the client really knew what the reader was doing would they continue to see the reader or just make an appointment with a therapist?  I suppose it is more entertaining to believe in a magical higher source tha it is to see a doctor.

Interesting analogy of computers to human minds regarding the susceptibility of viruses, even through the long-windedness.  Yes, I agree that children are more impressionable than adults and that minds are easily infected or as the author put it "ripe for malignant infection."  I was not raised religiously and am not to familiar with any religion, but the mortal extent to which a person will go for their faith will continually baffle me.  I would imagine those that favor their religious doctrine do not find it ridiculous.  Only can it be ridiculous to those of us who prefer to keep mystery within the pages of a paperback novel and not as an entity that inhabits and influences our lives.

I found Baba Faqir's words to be poignant.  I find it hard to deny that living a truthful life is more peaceful and happy than living one based upon lies.  If more people did accept responsibility for their own actions, then maybe there would be less angry people.  Baba Faqir also talks of Karma and reincarnation.  These are two things that in our society are not regularly considered.  I think the philosophy of  'if you give, you get', could certainly be misconstrued in this day and age.  But, perhaps when practiced honestly, results can appear.  Reincarnation could be difficult to believe, especially when considering any great suffering that a person may have had to endure.  To think that their suffering can be due to how they lived their past life, is hard to swallow.  And how does the theory of reincarnation apply to hundreds of people who live in countries where they suffer hardships everyday?  Did they all live dishonest past lives and that is why they are all suffering together?

I think Faqir was very fortunate to turn towards love instead of violence and aggression, considering his childhood.  To reach the goal of a spiritual peace is to be commended.  I did have some reservations throughout the story.  The reaction of his cousin to the meat he was going to eat, was a bit over the top.  And the rection his mother had to the chicken was ridiculous.  I also can't relate to the feeling of needing to be forgiven by God for your sins.  When I think of sins, to me they are based upon rligion.  I think it is more about forgiving yourself.

I am not entirely sure that I understand the Chandian Effect and it's too bad that it took four pages of blah, blah, to get to the main thesis!  Okay, so what I think this guy is saying is that experiencing natural phenomena is chalked up to being related to your level of consciousness.  I wish he would have given some examples.  So, if you are feeling ethereal one day and see a U.F.O., then was this a vision or drem, and are you now on a level of consciousness that equates to a more peaceful life?  I must admit I found it hard to stay focused through all the definitive or non-definitive words.  Who would use this classification system?  The military?  Probably not.  And would this classification system prove or disprove the existence of extraterrestrials?  I doubt it.  Carl Sagan or no Carl Sagan, who knows what could possibly be out there in the galaxies upon galaxies that exist.

I am not a vegan or vegetarian.  I have a friend that has been a vegan for a very long time and has tried to raise her two children to be vegan.  I would call her children vegetarians.  Her daughter found it hard to put a face on ice cream.  I was a vegetarian for six years and then started to crave meat.  I come from a biology background and tend to look at the process as natural.  Professor Lane questioned whether people really do enjoy the taste of meat.  I do.  I am selective in what I purchase.  I buy only organic and free-range and I don't eat meat all of the time.  It is a part of my diet not the main part of it.  There is a book out, by an author that I don't remember, who researched diets based upon blook types.  He goes back to first man, who were hunters and predominantly blood type O.  Then discusses the evolution of man from hunters to farmers, who then had become primarily blood type A.  I eat a diet that is based upon my blood type that was recommended to me by my accupuncturist.  I feel much better eating this way than I did when I was vegetarian.

Please see all above postings.

A skeptic would have to have evidence that could not be disproved to explain the miracles of Sathya Sai Baba.  A believer of Sathya Sai Baba would never believe anything that could disprove him.  They believe him to be perfect and will never question what he does.

Viruses are sneaky and they are also non-living.  They need a living thing to be able to reproduce.  They invade a host and cause the existing cells to make more virus cells.  In the Scribner-Bantam English Dictionary, one of the definitions for a virus is, "moral poison".  This definition is fitting for Dawkins argument that religions are akin to viruses.  Dawkins argues that religion is like a virus because it's functions are not too dissimilar.  Religions are non-living and need a host to be able to reproduce.  A supporter of a particular religion could also be viewed as a virus cell.  They look for someone with a compromised immune system that they can invade and cause the replication of their religious belief.  Once a person has been infected, they are told what to do without questioning the informer.  Dawkins uses "suicide in the militant service of faith", as an example of a "suicide mission virus."  When a believer is infected with this particular virus, they will then commit the act of suicide without ever questioning having to do it.  They do what the virus tells them to do.

     I was baptised Catholic (father's influence), but never attended church (mother's influence).  Because I don't really know anything about the Bible or the story of Jesus, I checked out some Christian websites:  lifeway.com and christiananswers.net.  From the different things that I read, I would say that the main point Biblical Christians would argue of Dawkins theory, is that you never question the Lord's instructions because he sacrificed his life for us and basically He knows best.  God only does right.  He suffered for our sins, so don't we owe Him.  I would imagine Biblical Christians believe that by spreading their word (which could equate to infection) they are helping people to come clean and live a better, truthful, and more loving life.  Heaven has always been represented as the place to be.  So, if blowing yourself up and killing hundreds in the process, is what God wants you to do, then by-golly, won't it just get you to heaven that much quicker.

F. Heylighen defines 'meme' as "a cognitive or behavioral pattern that can be transmitted from one individual to another."  The popularity of the Bible, in light of Memetics, could have started long ago with the missionaries who traveled with the settlers.  Their goal was to transmit their beliefs to others which was done quite successfully.  The native people were converted and it moved on through generations.  I think another reason for the popularity of the Bible, is just plain fear.  People have been taught to believe in the sins created from the Bible and I'm sure they are afraid not to believe in it at the chance that this might cause great suffering to themselves or their loved ones, so it continues through their generations and communities.  The Bible is promoted constantly.  There must be 4-5 channels on the cable television that I have, that are preaching Christianity.  Just this week, I was approached twice on campus by girls promoting their Bible study class.  Were they trying to pull a 'meme' on me?  They were certainly promoting the Bible and trying to transmit their behavioral pattern on to me.

I think a skeptic would explain the popoularity of creationism compared to the evolutionary theory in the U.S., based upon the dedication people have to the existence of God.  According th the website adherents.com, it was estimated that in the year 2000, 76.5% of the U.S. population were Christians.  I would imagine that most people who follow the teachings of the Bible wouldn't be too comfortable believing their existence came through the evolution of matter and not through the love of God.  It is probably easier to believe in supernatural powers and miracles than trying to understand how energy works.

I think Faqir Chand's most significant revelation concerning religious visions was that "all manifestations, visions, and forms that are seen within are mental creations."  His believers would probably not accept this claim and think he is being humble.  They are looking for someone from a higher power to help and guide them with their lives.  Faqir Chand said, "O Man, your real helper is your own Self and your own Faith, but you are badly mistaken and believe that somebody from without comes to help you."

I really could not grasp the U.F.O. article and don't really understand the Chandian Effect.  I get more confused every time I read it.

I woud say the major problem of connecting quantum mechanics with the paranormal is that there is no real evidence that the paranormal actually exists.  Most paranormal feats can be explained by science.  In the article by Victor J. Stenger, 'Quantum Quackery', he states, "since no convincing, reproducible evidence for psychic phenomena has been found, ...this is a flimsy basis indeed for quantum consciousness."

I think Lane won the paranormal debate.  The strenghths were in Lane's admittance of his gullibility, he stood behind his skepticism, even of those he admires and loves, and he was well researched in the areas he was discussing.  The weaknesses were in the way Caldwell kept misinterpreting Lane's statements.  He also asked questions about things that he seemed to not have researched thouroughly himself.

The most non-rational thing that I believe in is that my close family members who have passesd on, watch over me.  Going by the guidelines for critical thinking, I would first have to admit that I have no hard evidence to support this.  Is it logical to believe this?  From a scientific standpoint, no.  Considering  the rule of honesty , honestly I would rather not know the evidence that could prove this impossible.  The fact that I believe this is not a bad thing.  It doesn't affect the decisions I make or how I live my life.  It is merely comforting to think perhaps someone you love and miss can still be near you in some way.

The Skeptical Manifesto discussed skepticism as a way of thinking.  It relates to critical thinking in every day life by suggesting that we consider all facts before believing something whole-heartedly.  The manifesto also suggests that skepticism should be "followed with something rational, or something that does produce progress."

Of all the posts on the Sikh issue, I found a post by 'sirambulance' most persuasive.  He did some web based research on Sikh's and also presented several different scenarios of how the Sikh man could have been familiar with the American.  The following is his post.

After reading the article and doing some research on www.sikhs.org, it seems to me that the young american meets a  man"claiming" to be of sikh faith.  One of the philosophies of the faith says that they "denounce superstition".  As soon as the sikh man claims to have the psychic ability to know the names of the americans mother and sister, and will perform this feat for a price, he has exposed his own scam.  Any true follower of the sikh faith would not claim to have any psychic ability.  Perhaps the silh man had overhead a converstion the american had over the phne earlier in the day and followed him to the marketplace.  Another thought I had was that maybe the sikh man was also visiting from america, he may have recognized the american as someone he had met or heard of before.  Perhaps the young american was famous to some degree back in the states, this would make his life a bit more public as opposed to the average person.  Maybe an article in the newspaper on the young american was pulished and it spoke briefly about his family.

The first and most apparent thing about the Iraq/US war is that there is no evidence to support the main reason for the invasion.  There has been no discovery of weapons of mass destruction.  This fits the "rule of falsifiability" which says,"...that if the claim is false, the evidence will prove it false."  Considering sufficiency, "the burden of proof" rests upon Presiden bush.

It seems to me that the people who are upset and against gay marriage, are basing their dispproval upon religion.  There is no evidence to prove that gay marriage is evil or wrong, or is going to cause social chaos.  There is noting to prove that it is bad for a child to grow up with same sex parents.  What is really the threat?  A poll done by Cornell University "shows that voters who favor gay marriage tend to be young, educated and earn a comfortable living.  Voters who oppose gay marriage are usually older, less educated, vote Republican, and are not as wealthy."  The poll also showed that "about 34.5% of those voters who attend church less than once a month supported gay marriage.  Those voters who attend church once a week or more opposed gay marriage by almost 87%."  Yes, this is only one poll, but it speaks volumes.  It seems that the strongest conviction a non-supporter of gay marriage has, is that God wouldn't approve.  Considering pros and cons of gay marriages, I first would have to think of the pros and cons of any marriage.  This is a personal issue between the people getting married.  The fact that someone gets married doesn't affect me.