Originally Posted by cdcox
There are worms spilled all over the place here. I will focus my answer on your last point.
The idea that the mind is able to overcome a true physical ailment is a viable scientific hypothesis. It can be investigated because the mind is a natural thing that obeys the laws of physics and could be scientifically studied using observation. The inability of science to offer a satisfactory explanation at this moment does not remove this idea from being a valid area of scientific inquiry.
The idea that the healing was caused by God according to his will is not a viable scientific hypothesis since it cannot be investigated because humans cannot access the will of God and an assumption from the beginning is that God doesn't have to follow the laws of physics.
Yeah, but some of those cures are also not supposed to be possible per science too. And no one knows the scientific mechanism, unless the illness or disease is psychosomatic. It's simply "belief" on behalf of the person. One doesn't even have to prove what was in the mind of a God, if he/she even has a mind. Then there's the matter of a dead girl whose body did not decompose. That's not done by her mind since she died.
Bill Belichick learned to film signals of opponents from the former Chiefs, and Charger's coach Schottenheimer. Others like Edwards, Johnson and Cowher did too. They learned from the CHEATS and CHEATERS who still couldn't win.