Oke, untuk disebut sebagai penelitian ilmiah, ia harus memenuhi kaidah logis, empiris dan sistematis. Bung THL bisa saja berargumen bahwa transpersonal psychology itu logis, empiris (jika Anda memasukkan indra keenam sebagai salah satunya) dan sistematis. Tapi, dalam pelaksanaannya dalam penelitian kuantitatif yang menjadi ciri khas sains, terutama jika menggunakan biostatistik, parameter variabel apa yang bisa anda ukur dalam transpersonal psychology?apakah parameter itu obyektif?pengalman pribadi bisa disebut obyektif?Anda bisa saja berargumen bahwa penelitian kualitatif bisa diakui dalam metode ilmiah, tapi apakah itu memberikan hasil yang kuat?

Jangan berpatokan pada diterbitkan atau tidak diterbitkan dalam journal, banyak faktor di luar sains yang berperan pada masalah penerbitan journal sains itu sendiri, masalah benar tidaknya itu lain perkara. Buku Mein Kampf yang ditulis Hitler juga merupakan buku terlaris saat ia berkuasa, tapi bukan berarti argumen dalam buku2nya adalah benar.

Amazon.com: The focus of Body Mind Spirit is on how some scientists are digging into spirituality. Do you think that science can really explore the ephemeral world of spirituality?

Tart: Yes. Essential science, which is an open-minded process of looking at what's there, thinking about it logically, always subjecting your theories and predictions to tests to see how well they work, and always trying to refine these processes, can refine our knowledge of the spiritual. I'm not saying it will explain it in any ultimate, absolute sense, but it can be extremely useful in discriminating the sense from the nonsense. Hopefully, the Body Mind Spirit book will help people begin to make some of those discriminations by telling them what we have pretty good facts on and what some of the indications of those facts are.

Amazon.com: Given the success of The X-Files, the proliferation of books on the subject, and the number of conventions and new research on the subject, paranormal studies seem to be surging in popularity. Do you think this interest could have a positive or negative impact on the scientific study of the subject?

Tart: It's having both. The negative impact is that people call themselves parapsychologists who have no relevant scientific training. When I get associated with those people, it decreases the value of the solid scientific work that I and other scientific parapsychologists have done.

Buktinya baca :

http://www.math.tulane.edu/~tipler/summary.html

Buku yang bermutu yang perlu dipahami oleh orang yang minta bukti. Tanpa memahaminya bagaimana bisa menyangkal bukti itu ?

Orang tidak mau membaca bukunya yang berisi bukti tsb, kemudian hanya mengalihkan ke persoalan lain, tidak mungkin bisa memberi kontribusi yang membangun.

Tipler sudah memberi kontribusi yang membangun dengan mengemukakan paradigma yang baru yang patut dipelajari oleh orang yang berpikiran terbuka dan mau belajar dari terobosan baru.

Tipler mempublikasikan karya ilmiah model alam semesta yang ada awal/Alpha dan akhir/Omega dengan informasi lengkap dalam jurnal ilmiah.

Filsafat agama menyatakannya sebagai keberadaan Pencipta alam semesta yang berpengetahuan sempurna yang sesuai dengan argumen filsafat  "The First Cause Argument".

The first cause argument (or “cosmological argument”) takes the existence of the universe to entail the existence of a being that created it. It does so based on the fact that the universe had a beginning. There must, the first cause argument says, be something that caused that beginning, a first cause of the universe.

The universe consists of a series of events stretched across time in a long causal chain. Each one of these events is the cause of the event that comes after it, and the effect of the event that comes before it. The world as it is came from the world as it was, which came from the world as it was before.

If we trace this series of events back in time, then what do we find? There seem, at first glance, to be two possibilities: either we eventually reach the first event in the series, the cause at the beginning of the universe that set everything going, or there is no first event in the series and the past stretches back into infinity.

The first cause argument tells us that the second of these is not possible, that the past cannot stretch back into infinity but rather must have a beginning. The argument then proceeds by suggesting that if the universe has a beginning then there must be something outside it that brought it into existence.

This being outside the universe, this Creator, the first cause argument tells us, is God.
 

@luth
Saya kan memberikan contoh bahwa buku terlaris bukan berarti isi buku itu benar terlepas dari konteks buku itu. Mohon jangan tertawakan pendapat orang lain. Anda sendiri juga bukan orang yang sempurna dalam berpendapat.