Ain't nobody got time to read this whole thread, but I'm curious if anyone has brought up the causal closure of physics yet? I.e. that a physical thing is by definition anything that has any physical effect, so whatever it is that is causing the physical effects we see definitionally is physical, and something nonphysical, by definition, has no effect on anything physical. — Pfhorrest

Yes. Banno said something to the effect, but maybe it wasn't him but someone else.

This whole thread would be interesting if it weren't so boring. I mean, the protagonist of the thesis in the OP is a contrarian, but opposed to the normal and expected, he is a religious contrarian. Funny combination. I think he said somewhere that he's an atheist. But I could be mistaken, because 9 out of 10 respondents who sound like staunch Christians, are self-confessed atheists. They just believe in god, but they are atheists nevertheless, they say.

This is a funny website, except people are soooo serious.

Note: I am not saying that these patterns indicate free will. I am just saying that microeffects can affect the movements and actions of macro-organisms. — Coben

In a way that's true.