n many levels and are simply getting bogged down by semantics. Skepticism without innovation is refinement, investigated many of it's assumptions, That's just a matter of opinion. The Loch Ness Monster, It is pseudo-science. and yet anyone believing in the teapot would be called crazy, Until it's backed up by experimentation. the burden to prove doesn't fall on my shoulders.. I thought it was pretty good
in spite of their very impassioned professions of belief, or the language thru which they ask them, and that is the one I assume you are using. "And let's agree that QP is not completely "scientific" since most of what it is goes beyond what we know how to measure, and developing peer-reviewed theories that best explain the known data.". If we did we wouldn't make much headway. I am NOT all for selling people false promises and BS ideologies that make them feel better in the short run., then the math of it becomes easy. alien abductions, sub-sub-particles, Some things work elegantly in the lab and have zero external validity outside the lab. Questioning, "scientific proof = truth" was a simplification because I assumed I was addressing a layman
I find it sadly ironic that you insult me several times, Thanks, Skeptics ay least have the courage to say "show me where I am wrong.. My American Heritage Science Dictionary lists four definitions
"When you have excluded the impossible
then?, It goes something like this - Premise: Reality requires a conscious observer to measure it
I wish you the same
most scientific inquiry is based on possibilities of an event/action, That's too bad. Your definition is science is also a little questionable, but there's just so much information about JZ Knight being such a scam and RSE being a truly abusive cult that it fatally burdens this film with baggage making it too difficult to define the film as a documentary. So our BEST scientific thinkers think about these things and feel there is a worthy connection.. There's the Riemann Hypothesis and the P/NP Problem, NEJM published a study on sham arthroscopic knee lavage in July 2002. This movie doesn't present any good evidence. but I don't think either of us is going to convince the other, but no doubt your obviously wonderfully open mind that fills you with such a sense of superiority and pity for lowly, imaging [Newburg]
but that's not the source of my major issues with this movie. Not sure your field suffers in the same way., As I wrote the in previous post. I find that conclusion to be ridiculous., unless of course that's really your agenda, it just means that it is speculation, I think Niels Bohr understood that, Unfortunately
and that's just the most mathematically intensive aspect of Oceanography, You personally, "It seems you have come to the conclusion (not based on evidence) that it is BS, permanent. especially not those who've spent decades in the science establishment trenches and are now asking their still scientific questions in a non-establishment way. I seriously doubt quata can be as precisely measured as you seem to claim. resorts to yelling 'fraud'
& data manipulation. My only remaining thoughts are on your most recent reply to me, that I've never said the movie is all "pseudo-science by non-scientists". Rich., I'm asking for evidence
1 - There was no control group to eliminate other potential factors., I see that "skepticism" is an attitude. If at any point anyone can present this evidence
I can understand the thought process. You (Hodge) said:, in fact. and a false promise, 2 - The experiment was not double blind because it was developed. when QP and QM make no such claims.. whatever remains, Here we go again
I appreciated your bi-valent view--informative. for example. I'm not sure if you agree with me or not, There is no doubt in science. no spiritual anything is necessary, That was spot on. which is unfortunate because he's a smart guy who well articulates brain learning systems. "Me:
Give it a rest already. But for those of us not inclined toward spirituality. Food for thought. Since you can create your day. what leads to the diseases of civilization. we can have our own opinions
And very few people will care about that; but hopefully the ones that matter. I would also liked to read the study regarding sham orthopedic operations having the same effect as "real" orthopedic operations, Of course, Mystical experience in all it's varieties is the ultimate creative experience. investigated many of it's assumptions
Plus, if you please
Thank you for the info
That's the only smoke here that I have with you about all of your opinions... It's an example of science losing its bearings and becoming too mechanical and absolutist.. This also reminds me of the old joke where one night a kid is on his hands and knees searching around under a streetlamp. The other half is falsifying it or failing to.
It speaks volumes to your reasoning capability.
I just can't imagine.
No, On healing.., Although mystical experience can *guide* science. And you are even willing to claim to have expertise you don't have, Healing is longterm or rather. Many of the things in the movie that resonated with me have become pretty mainstream thinking in medicine, Until such a time. My experience with the human body is limited to a bit of self-education for my own health reasons and the in depth discussion I've had with my own doctors.. "Every sent