Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Well its not like this is the first time certain scientific institutions have been caught faking climate data for those who so desperately want to tax us to death, and have control over every aspect of our lives.
  3. Point is he has not done 'science' for a very long time. He's not even qualified he just makes stuff up Pseudoscience
  4. Well certainly i agree, but as we all know people are rarely objective, and the greater the mass of the people the greater subjectivity. So basically i read before about 7 years some things Sheldrake wrote and it appeared very interesting to me because of what i know from other sources which are not scientific. Now i am really interested in what Dr. Sheldrake has to say.
  5. That's sad man. You shouldn't pursue a subject for an agenda, it should be a pursuit of knowledge.
  6. Hmmm.... this makes me even more interested in Sheldrake now...
  7. Its how you present a discovery or theory to the world. You can't just make stuff up, you have to prove yourself to many people who know their fields and can call a fake. Like how one might go to 2 or 3 doctors for comparison of a diagnosis.
  8. Have you read what the people at TED wrote on their blog about his talk? Doesn't give me the impression that they thought as much of him as you do. At TEDxWhitechapel on January 13, 2013, Rupert Sheldrake gave a provocative talk in which he suggests that modern science is based on ten dogmas, and makes the case that none of them hold up to scrutiny. According to him, these dogmas — including, for example, that nature is mechanical and purposeless, that the laws and constants of nature are fixed, and that psychic phenomena like telepathy are impossible — have held back the pursuit of knowledge. TED’s scientific advisors have questioned whether his list is a fair description of scientific assumptions — indeed, several of the dogmas are actually active areas of science inquiry (including whether physical ‘constants’ are really unchanging) — and believe there is little evidence for some of Sheldrake’s more radical claims, such as his theory of morphic resonance, and claim that the speed of light has been changing. They recommended that the talk be should not be distributed without being framed with caution. Accordingly, we have reposted his talk here, with the above cautionary introduction. We invite scientists, skeptics, knowledge-seekers and supporters — and Sheldrake himself, if he’s willing — to view and discuss the talk. https://blog.ted.com/the-debate-about-rupert-sheldrakes-talk/
  9. Goodnight see you tomorrow
  10. What is this "peer review" anyway? To me it sounds more like "dogma review."
  11. i think she's suing cause she was ridiculed by the relevant government authorities when she reported the sighting.
  12. Its just removing the guise of the formal church to offer religious ideas under the facade of credibility by misrepresenting scientific theory.
  13. Actually, if you check out neuroplasticity you will find that stroke victims for example, can learn to talk and walk again after being paralysed by a particular part of the brain being damage, but that you can recover by teaching another part of the brian take on the jobs of the damaged part. And besides, the physical brian affects parts of the physical body, consciousness is non physical.
  14. make the animation, it will prove more than a plastic tube in your hand
  15. Thanks.. Science Delusion.. what a great Title. Makes me almost horny...
  16. well I think this old guy is headed to bed. Good night all
  17. Funny how he disparages science and scientists yet shamlessly promotes his own claims without the benefit of peer review.
  18. David Icke with his human eating shape shifting lizard men, and Billy Meier blatantly fake pictures which he claims the government planted. I guess you're also a supporter of Sitchin's work too?
  19. Sorry what was that? Some guy walking about in his boxers?
  20. No, the two are disconnected in that scenario, that's not what happens to accident victims with severe brain damage. Depending on which part of the brain is damaged, we can predict what disabilities that person will suffer. Or lobotomy's. They work because the mind is the brain and we can precisely predict the outcome of altering the brain or removing parts of it. If you cut the signal of it goes dead, this is all signal and receiver in one, a stand alone unit. That's why all the above is predictable and the connection is maintained until the entire unit is shut down and we can take out parts that are not working properly or if parts are damaged corresponding actions are comprised.
  21. I am not quiet but working and testing it with a closed end long plastic tube using latch mechanism Just give me some time.
  22. Nope, not yet! But, I just saw this and I'm getting more and more angry:
  23. Give me time.i am very near to success.
  24. But Lanza and Cruz lived in a house with adults who both could legally buy guns and they had no problem getting to them. Please see my above post, it really relates to that.
  25. Sheldrake is an impressive guy, his book, the Science Delusion, or, Science Set Free in the US, has dismantled the top 10 scientific dogmas in an unbiased, just want to know the truth kind of way.. I didnt get my hands on a copy just yet, but there are many presentations from Sheldrake, TED TV, amongst others that explains the basic concepts etc.. If you have time, it might be worth hopping over to YouTube and checking them out..
  1. Load more activity