hi Jack — this might be a mis-characterization of scientific inquiry. Scientists, as curious & keen observers of the world around them, LOVE singularities & peculiarities, things that are rare, things that are new and novel, things that they may or may not have theorized about and are now observing for the first time.
Science thrives on new & novel discoveries — new species, new diseases, new astronomical events, these are the fuel for the advancement of knowledge, for the refinement of theories, etc. It is not the phenomena themselves that have to be repeatable, it is the observations about them.
The problem w/ the rare events you list, Jack, is, in my humble opinion, a matter of labels. When you identify phenomena in terms occult, mystical labels, like resurrection of Christ, theophanies of God, encounters with Ghosts, you’ve pre-empted the possibility that the thing observed wasn’t Christ, that guy who bled to death on the cross/God/Ghosts. Science has ready explanations for people that have come back from death-like states, had visions, etc. It is absolute & unassailable labels that hinge on belief which hinder empirical inquiry.
Jack Preston King, Mitchell Diamond, good discussion, I need to take time to go back and study both your writings in more depth before I go too far down this rabbit hole. Cheers.
