Science may have proof of psychic abilities

February 9, 2019

6 hours ago, Ankhael said:

@stereologist

So to continue with melanin acting as an antenna for the human being. Now that we have prove that melanin can absorb EM waves we can continue to speculate on rather humans can pick up information from them.

Continuing to be a liar is what you do. Tat is all you do.

There is no evidence at all that humans can detect signals. There is no evidence melanin does anything in humans other than absorb some forms of EM. That is not the same as acting as an antenna.

February 9, 2019

5 hours ago, Aten34 said:

LOL i screenshot the wikipedia article. it's highlighted in PURPLE "PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATION' in your face buddy . Now stop with your trolling dude. Ankhael got you bro

Please show that one of the abstracts is in the peer-reviewed section. Please do.

Open source journals in which all of his fake articles are placed ARE NOT PEER REVIEWED.

So please stop the trolling sock puppet.

February 9, 2019

Let's review:

Arturo Soli Herrerra is a fraud. He is a recognized quack.

One of this sales pitches is for Qiapi 1. There are no studies on this material. It does not appear to work. There is nothing in the literature.

All of his articles are nothing more than the same nonsense and failures egurgitated time after time. All of the papers are in open source journals
where the author only has to pay and it gets published. Not a single paper reports on an experiment. It is all the same unjustified claims.

Not surprisingly there is not a single scientist, doctor, biologist, biochemist to back Solis's claims.

That makes another fraud on the part of Arturo Herrerra.

There does not seem to be a single citation for these paper. No one cares.
These articles he writes are nothing more than unscientific advertising meant
to feign some pseudoscientifc backing to his scams.

https://despertares.org/2011/10/12/mexico-tratamiento-de-alzheimer-mediante-la-fotosintesis-humana/

Quote

Dr. Arturo Solís (ophthalmologist and neuro ophthalmologist) has been the author of this discovery valid to treat various incurable diseases until now or as a source of inexhaustible energy . Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, parkinson's, diabetes, cirrhosis, sciatic nerve or Multiple Chemical Sensitivity are some of the diseases that are being treated by Qiapi-1 by this Doctor and his team based on the stimulation of human photosynthesis.

Now we learn that Arturo is a liar and did not discover what he claims. He
calls his lie a miraculous discovery.

Quote

The electrical properties of MELANINE, are known since 1963, (Weiss and his collaborators) extensive references in 1974, 1977. They were the cause of the Nobel Prize in chemistry year 2000. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2000. Alan Heeger, Alan G. MacDiarmid , Hideki Shirakawa.

It also turns out that the patents claimed are in fact duplicates of other
patents.

Quote

In the Science Homepage. copyright 1974, American Association for the Advancement of Science There are references to prior patent of the device, especially as a battery, (McGinness PATENTS 4.366.216 and 4.504.557) References in one patent as in another, as an organic battery, but the important thing is that there are prior patents that Dr. Arturo Solís Herrera says he has patented.

Arturo Solis Herrerra is a liar and a fraud.

A site discussing the hoax of Arturo.
https://obrerofuturista.blogspot.com/

Quote

Pseudosciences often resort to the use of scientific language in an attempt to support their fictions. The scientific language used out of context is a common resource to give a serious and truthful appearance to practices such as homeopathy, astrology, reiki or Bach flowers.

Quote

As you will notice in the posts Solís Herrera has created a whole mythology of human photosynthesis and for them he has used writings in journals of dubious scientific quality , interviews in "alternative" media and even a book of his own where he says that melanin could be the black matter that physicists talk about. The worst thing is that this series of inconsistencies seem to have taken effect in some instances of government and Solís Herrera through his company Fórmulas Magistrales SA de CV has obtained public money. On behalf of CONACyT in 2006, $ 3,400,000.00 (project AVANCE C2005-228) was assigned for the development of a "self-renewable electrochemical photo cell" ; on the part of the Municipality of Aguascalientes obtained the project "Bat-Gen Batteries Pilot Lighting Program" to light the Plaza Patria de Aguascalientes, the project started in December 2010.

There is nothing like a poster stating lie after lie after lie (Ankhael) and then demanding that there be absolute proof that they are liars. It has already been done time after time after time.

A blog about the scams being pulled by Arturo Solis Herrerra.
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=es&sp=nmt4&u=https://lacienciaporgusto.blogspot.com/2010/10/fotosintesis-humana.html&xid=17259,15700023,15700186,15700190,15700248&usg=ALkJrhjVsifE84hOA2RgCLdt7aQrI4ej6w

Quote

The serious thing is that these tricksters try to pass their lies by science, for example, uploading a supposed scientific article to a non-refereed site sponsored by the prestigious scientific journal Nature ( Nature Preceedings , whose contents, according to their own guidelines , "are not refereed This service aims to offer an informal service of communication faster and more informal than that of scientific journals ... Many of the findings that can be found here are preliminary or speculative, and need to be confirmed "), to deceive the unwary. And they even dare to offer medical treatments based on these ravings.

1. Not one article by the fraud Arturo Herrerra is peer reviewed

2. Not one article by the fraud Arturo Herrerra provides an experiment, methodology, or results

3. Not one discovery claimed by Arturo Herrerra turns out to be true or if true was not made by Herrerra

4. The endless battery claim by that fraud Arturo Herrerra was never made

5. The endless battery claim by that fraud Arturo Herrerra uses demonstrably false claims about chemistry

February 9, 2019

There are plenty of horrible assumptions in this thread. Here is another of seemingly endless mistakes. An antenna does not detect a signal. It is suggested that an antenna detects a signal. It does not. Any conductor is an antenna. A piece of wire, a metal coat hanger, a car body, a bicycle, railroad tracks are all potential antennas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antenna_(radio)

Quote

An antenna is an array of conductors (elements), electrically connected to the receiver or transmitter.

Having an antenna is not the same as having a receiver. The receiver detects the signal.

A person can act as an antenna. They can grab onto the place where an antenna connects to a device and act as the antenna. That does not mean the person detects the signal. People are acting as antenna whether or not they are holding onto a receiver.

Does any of this have to do with melanin? No. It simply means a person is a conductor. Touch a wire and you can electrocuted because people are conductors.

February 9, 2019

6 hours ago, Aten34 said:

LOL i screenshot the wikipedia article. it's highlighted in PURPLE "PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATION' in your face buddy . Now stop with your trolling dude. Ankhael got you bro

Let's follow this to see how incompetent some posters are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_for_Biotechnology_Information#NCBI_Bookshelf

Quote

The "NCBI Bookshelf[4] is a collection of freely accessible, downloadable, on-line versions of selected biomedical books. The Bookshelf covers a wide range of topics including molecular biology, biochemistry, cell biology, genetics, microbiology, disease states from a molecular and cellular point of view, research methods, and virology. Some of the books are online versions of previously published books, while others, such as Coffee Break, are written and edited by NCBI staff. The Bookshelf is a complement to the Entrez PubMed repository of peer-reviewed publication abstracts in that Bookshelf contents provide established perspectives on evolving areas of study and a context in which many disparate individual pieces of reported research can be organized.

The NCBI Bookshelf is NOT peer reviewed, but is Entrez Pubmed only peer reviewed?

Let's follow the link and see what is stated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed

Quote

In addition to MEDLINE, PubMed provides access to:

older references from the print version of Index Medicus, back to 1951 and earlier

references to some journals before they were indexed in Index Medicus and MEDLINE, for instance Science, BMJ, and Annals of Surgery

very recent entries to records for an article before it is indexed with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and added to MEDLINE

a collection of books available full-text and other subsets of NLM records^[3]

PMC citations

NCBI Bookshelf

Ooops. Looks like the wikipedia entry was wrong. The section claimed to be peer reviewed contains more than that.

And this

Quote

The assignment of a PMID or PMCID to a publication tells the reader nothing about the type or quality of the content. PMIDs are assigned to letters to the editor, editorial opinions, op-ed columns, and any other piece that the editor chooses to include in the journal, as well as peer-reviewed papers.

There it is. Not everything is peer reviewed that appears in PubMed or any of these listings.

And let's not avoid this

Quote

The existence of the identification number is also not proof that the papers have not been retracted for fraud, incompetence, or misconduct.

Bolding mine.

February 9, 2019

4 hours ago, stereologist said:

4 hours ago, stereologist said:

The assignment of a PMID or PMCID to a publication tells the reader nothing about the type or quality of the content. PMIDs are assigned to letters to the editor, editorial opinions, op-ed columns, and any other piece that the editor chooses to include in the journal, as well as peer-reviewed papers.

You said in response to your quote above "There it is. Not everything is peer reviewed that appears in PubMed or any of these listings.

And let's not avoid this"

This link and screenshot explains the National Library of Medicine(NLM) Peer review everything before it is stored in PMC. BUT i did learn that everything that is peer review DOES NOT MEAN THAT IS FACTUAL INFO. that means even the NLM can be wrong sometimes

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pub/journalselect/

4 hours ago, stereologist said:

Quote

The existence of the identification number is also not proof that the papers have not been retracted for fraud, incompetence, or misconduct

Bolding mines

Since the NLM can be wrong despite their peer viewing... i came across what you quoted above. "retracted". i click the link and it took to the wikipedia page called retraction in academic publishing. Here is a screenshot and link of the article just in case you think i'm lying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retractions_in_academic_publishing

This simply saying that any information that is fraud or stolen or is untrue is retracted.

on NCBI PMC disclaimer it is discussed in further details. here is the link and screenshot JUST IN CASE i'm lying

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/about/guidelines/#retract

AS YOU CAN SEE the highlighted "the example" is a link an actual retracted article or journal

Here is a screenshot to how a retracted journal or article will look like

Now Arturo's journal was NEVER retracted AT ALL which means his information is considered reliable information to the NLM and NIH (National institute of Health)..

Like i said above the beginning of this particular post. EVERTHING IS PEER REVIEW BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH BEFORE IT HITS ANY DATABASES SUCH NCBI; PUBMED and PUDMED CENTRAL. BUT DOESNT MEAN IT'S FACTUAL INFORMATION

The PMC disclaimer says if anyone thinks the info of any journal is to be wrong they can contact PMC help desk and look at Policy on retractions

screenshot of that

Edited February 9, 2019 by Aten34

February 10, 2019

@Aten34

@stereologist You have not shown anything we've ask, your just gasping desperately for straws. You have not provided any scientific publications by scientists whom are experts in the same field as Arturo Solis Herrera to refute his claims. You have failed over and over, All you have provided is blogs in Spanish by people like me and you whom have no credentials that backs them up to even call Arturo's research a fraud. You still have yet shown us a "Article publication", "journal" written by researchers that show that he is a fraud.

Please show us some validated resources from actual researchers other than "blogs" you constantly keep spamming reposting. Your spamming blogs lol no official publications nor any researchers that talks ill of his work. If there isn't any publications by scientists whom looked at his work, you shouldn't post it.

I'll be addressing your comments regarding my speculation on being melanin being the "antenna"

February 10, 2019

16 hours ago, stereologist said:

Quote

An antenna is an array of conductors (elements), electrically connected to the receiver or transmitter.

Having an antenna is not the same as having a receiver. The receiver detects the signal.

A person can act as an antenna. They can grab onto the place where an antenna connects to a device and act as the antenna. That does not mean the person detects the signal. People are acting as antenna whether or not they are holding onto a receiver.

Does any of this have to do with melanin? No. It simply means a person is a conductor. Touch a wire and you can electrocuted because people are conductors.

I know we do not agree on Arturo, which is agree to disagree but i want to discuss this.

I agree, but i would speculate that the we are the receiver/ transmitter while melanin act as the semi conductors. We know that melanin can absorb the whole range of the electromagnetic spectrum as shows in other studies, regardless of our disagreement with Arturo. We also know that melanin can conduct electricity, even in Mcginness work this have been proven hince his battery he invented.

Now in modern science human can receive and transmit radio waves naturally. (maybe not in the conventional way presented in this theory). But human skin naturally absorbs and produces electromagnetic waves (infrared heat to regulate temperature) being naturally a Transceiver by pure definition, of course rather these waves are modulated and demodulated by the body in the form of information is questionable.

February 10, 2019

13 hours ago, Ankhael said:

@Aten34

@stereologist You have not shown anything we've ask, your just gasping desperately for straws. You have not provided any scientific publications by scientists whom are experts in the same field as Arturo Solis Herrera to refute his claims. You have failed over and over, All you have provided is blogs in Spanish by people like me and you whom have no credentials that backs them up to even call Arturo's research a fraud. You still have yet shown us a "Article publication", "journal" written by researchers that show that he is a fraud.

Please show us some validated resources from actual researchers other than "blogs" you constantly keep spamming reposting. Your spamming blogs lol no official publications nor any researchers that talks ill of his work. If there isn't any publications by scientists whom looked at his work, you shouldn't post it.

I'll be addressing your comments regarding my speculation on being melanin being the "antenna"

Here is what I have shown:

Let's review:

Arturo Soli Herrerra is a fraud. He is a recognized quack.

One of this sales pitches is for Qiapi 1. There are no studies on this material. It does not appear to work. There is nothing in the literature.

All of his articles are nothing more than the same nonsense and failures egurgitated time after time. All of the papers are in open source journals
where the author only has to pay and it gets published. Not a single paper reports on an experiment. It is all the same unjustified claims.

Not surprisingly there is not a single scientist, doctor, biologist, biochemist to back Solis's claims.

That makes another fraud on the part of Arturo Herrerra.

There does not seem to be a single citation for these paper. No one cares.
These articles he writes are nothing more than unscientific advertising meant
to feign some pseudoscientifc backing to his scams.

https://despertares.org/2011/10/12/mexico-tratamiento-de-alzheimer-mediante-la-fotosintesis-humana/

Quote

Dr. Arturo Solís (ophthalmologist and neuro ophthalmologist) has been the author of this discovery valid to treat various incurable diseases until now or as a source of inexhaustible energy . Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, parkinson's, diabetes, cirrhosis, sciatic nerve or Multiple Chemical Sensitivity are some of the diseases that are being treated by Qiapi-1 by this Doctor and his team based on the stimulation of human photosynthesis.

Now we learn that Arturo is a liar and did not discover what he claims. He
calls his lie a miraculous discovery.

Quote

The electrical properties of MELANINE, are known since 1963, (Weiss and his collaborators) extensive references in 1974, 1977. They were the cause of the Nobel Prize in chemistry year 2000. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2000. Alan Heeger, Alan G. MacDiarmid , Hideki Shirakawa.

It also turns out that the patents claimed are in fact duplicates of other
patents.

Quote

In the Science Homepage. copyright 1974, American Association for the Advancement of Science There are references to prior patent of the device, especially as a battery, (McGinness PATENTS 4.366.216 and 4.504.557) References in one patent as in another, as an organic battery, but the important thing is that there are prior patents that Dr. Arturo Solís Herrera says he has patented.

Arturo Solis Herrerra is a liar and a fraud.

A site discussing the hoax of Arturo.
https://obrerofuturista.blogspot.com/

Quote

Pseudosciences often resort to the use of scientific language in an attempt to support their fictions. The scientific language used out of context is a common resource to give a serious and truthful appearance to practices such as homeopathy, astrology, reiki or Bach flowers.

Quote

As you will notice in the posts Solís Herrera has created a whole mythology of human photosynthesis and for them he has used writings in journals of dubious scientific quality , interviews in "alternative" media and even a book of his own where he says that melanin could be the black matter that physicists talk about. The worst thing is that this series of inconsistencies seem to have taken effect in some instances of government and Solís Herrera through his company Fórmulas Magistrales SA de CV has obtained public money. On behalf of CONACyT in 2006, $ 3,400,000.00 (project AVANCE C2005-228) was assigned for the development of a "self-renewable electrochemical photo cell" ; on the part of the Municipality of Aguascalientes obtained the project "Bat-Gen Batteries Pilot Lighting Program" to light the Plaza Patria de Aguascalientes, the project started in December 2010.

There is nothing like a poster stating lie after lie after lie (Ankhael) and then demanding that there be absolute proof that they are liars. It has already been done time after time after time.

A blog about the scams being pulled by Arturo Solis Herrerra.
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=search&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=es&sp=nmt4&u=https://lacienciaporgusto.blogspot.com/2010/10/fotosintesis-humana.html&xid=17259,15700023,15700186,15700190,15700248&usg=ALkJrhjVsifE84hOA2RgCLdt7aQrI4ej6w

Quote

The serious thing is that these tricksters try to pass their lies by science, for example, uploading a supposed scientific article to a non-refereed site sponsored by the prestigious scientific journal Nature ( Nature Preceedings , whose contents, according to their own guidelines , "are not refereed This service aims to offer an informal service of communication faster and more informal than that of scientific journals ... Many of the findings that can be found here are preliminary or speculative, and need to be confirmed "), to deceive the unwary. And they even dare to offer medical treatments based on these ravings.

1. Not one article by the fraud Arturo Herrerra is peer reviewed

2. Not one article by the fraud Arturo Herrerra provides an experiment, methodology, or results

3. Not one discovery claimed by Arturo Herrerra turns out to be true or if true was not made by Herrerra

4. The endless battery claim by that fraud Arturo Herrerra was never made

5. The endless battery claim by that fraud Arturo Herrerra uses demonstrably false claims about chemistry

February 10, 2019

One of the ignorant ideas posted in this thread is that scientists have to refute the lies of a liar.

No they do not. Arturo Herrerra has fooled people including posters in this thread.

The burden is on the liar and fraud Arturo Herrerra to support his stories. He has not.

Not one faux article he has published contains an experiment, methodology, or results to support his obviously false claims.

No one has to show that a liar and fraud is wrong.

What we have seen inn this thread is that posters have lied about other papers.

1. They posted a link to a paper on melanin properties and lied that it supported the fraud Arturo Herrerra. Id did not mention water dissociation which is the lie, and a rather ignorant lie.

2. Posters have falsely claim that a patent means something works.

3. Posters have lied that PubMed only contains peer reviewed papers. Not one paper by the fraud and liar Arturo Herrerra was peer reviewed,

4. Posters have suggested that absorption of photons is the same as signal detection. That is a juvenil error and the sort of laughable lie told by the fraud.

5. Posters have repeatedly called radiosynthesis the term photosynthesis. Completely different.

6. Posters have repeatedly tried to push through the lie that the mechanism of radiosynthesis is known. It is not even known if melanin has any role in it.

7. Posters have repeatedly tried to falsely claim that all species with melanin are able to radiosynthesize although the sole example provided occurs in a different kingdom that does not include animals.

February 10, 2019

7 hours ago, Ankhael said:

I know we do not agree on Arturo, which is agree to disagree but i want to discuss this.

I agree, but i would speculate that the we are the receiver/ transmitter while melanin act as the semi conductors. We know that melanin can absorb the whole range of the electromagnetic spectrum as shows in other studies, regardless of our disagreement with Arturo. We also know that melanin can conduct electricity, even in Mcginness work this have been proven hince his battery he invented.

Now in modern science human can receive and transmit radio waves naturally. (maybe not in the conventional way presented in this theory). But human skin naturally absorbs and produces electromagnetic waves (infrared heat to regulate temperature) being naturally a Transceiver by pure definition, of course rather these waves are modulated and demodulated by the body in the form of information is questionable.

Arturo Herrerra is the sole source for these idiotic ideas being stated in this thread.

Not you post the blunder that we are the receiver/transmitter while melanin acts as a semiconductor. This is called putting the art before the horse. I suppose you have no idea what you are posting and have no idea what this is all about.

Not clear what battery you are now referring to. Here's an article on melanin and batteries.

https://phys.org/news/2016-05-melanin-great-batteries.html

Quote

it could function potentially as a very good cathode material.

The article is 2016. It tells us that melanin alone does not make for a battery. The lie that it can comes from that liar and fraud Arturo Herrerra.

Maybe you are referring to this:

http://smithsonianchips.si.edu/proctor/

The organic battery is still not here even though the paper referred to is 1973.These are the people that made discoveries, not the liar and fraud Arturo Herrerra.

Now you point out that the world as we see it is mainly EM. Everything from touch to hearing to taste to proprioceptive to kinesthetic to smell is all EM.

This is a lie: "Now in modern science human can receive and transmit radio waves naturally." Humans cannot generate radio waves. That is a bald faced lie.

Why lie and lie all of the time? Why not be truthful.

At least you finish with a semi-trutful statement: 'of course rather these waves are modulated and demodulated by the body in the form of information is questionable" Part of the problem is that signals do not have to be modulated or demodulated. Does the eye do that?

The statement that is correct is: "None of the EM generated by humans appears to contain a signal."

February 10, 2019

EM is well understood. If people were generating signals they would have been discovered ages ago. The portion of the EM spectrum that we do generate is well understood.

So far you've made a shambles of things so let me provide you with information about EM generated by humans.

One of the interesting ideas is doppler IR detectors that detect blood flow under the skin.

https://www.moor.co.uk/product/moorldi2-ir-laser-doppler-imaging/8

People can be induced to generate radio waves by placing them in highly magnetic environments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging

That is why believers in telepathy have to defer to claims of magic. If people were producing anything in any range of the EM spectrum it would have been detected a long time ago.

February 10, 2019

Here is what modulation means:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulation

Quote

modulation is the process of varying one or more properties of a periodic waveform, called the carrier signal

You should read the whole article.

February 10, 2019

@stereologist

Actually stereologist, Arturo is NOT even close to being the sole source of this thread. I didn't know anything about Arturo until Ankhael post research about him. The only thing I am saying about Arturo, base on what Ankhael has presented to us, is that if ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IS FALSE in his research, his research certainly wouldn't have appeared on The National Center for Biotechnology (NCBI) which is apart of the United States National Library of Medicine (NLM), a branch of National Institute of Health (NIH) for almost 5 years and NO ONE decided to retract it.. The National Institute of Health is the primary agency of the United States Government.. There's no way no anybody is going to post an article of a journal on their databases (which is the NCBI; PMC) without the National Institute of Health approval and that approval is called The Journal Selection for PMC. Like I said before above, things do slip through the cracks that aren't correct, but it is always corrected and if so, retracted.. Now I can't say too much about this thing called Qiapi 1. If it works or not, BUT it is not mention in the journal that is in PMC. So i can't concern myself with that. I'm just focused on what i have seen stored in the database of the NIH..

I recall you stating that no scientist have supported Arturo's claims. If you go back to his research in PMC, you will see at the top, a man by the name of Sergey Suchkov that supports his claims. In fact that journal on PMC, both Arturo and Sergey are authors of this particular journal. So NOT only Arturo claiming that melanin splits the water molecule, it's sergey as well. LINK below if you want to look at it again

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4125832/

Now once again, the theory of this thread is speculation. I've never said this to be true.. BUT I WILL DEFINITELY SAY THIS. Melanin have always been talked about when it comes to advancing Medicine. There's lots of Scientists that have not really figure out much about melanin's role throughout nature. The fact that melanin have reactions to the electromagnetic spectrum, people will be arrogant to say melanin have absolutely nothing to do with the electromagnetic field when it comes to human biology, just because no one or hardly anybody has never considered, looked into, thought of , or researched it..

From the beginning of time, it takes a QUESTION for Humankind to discover the wonders about this world and it's lifeform.. Science will always have room to correct, omit, add, and disregard information about this world and it's lifeforms. That is something we all have to accept...

Edited February 10, 2019 by Aten34

February 11, 2019

4 hours ago, Aten34 said:

@stereologist

Actually stereologist, Arturo is NOT even close to being the sole source of this thread. I didn't know anything about Arturo until Ankhael post research about him. The only thing I am saying about Arturo, base on what Ankhael has presented to us, is that if ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IS FALSE in his research, his research certainly wouldn't have appeared on The National Center for Biotechnology (NCBI) which is apart of the United States National Library of Medicine (NLM), a branch of National Institute of Health (NIH) for almost 5 years and NO ONE decided to retract it.. The National Institute of Health is the primary agency of the United States Government.. There's no way no anybody is going to post an article of a journal on their databases (which is the NCBI; PMC) without the National Institute of Health approval and that approval is called The Journal Selection for PMC. Like I said before above, things do slip through the cracks that aren't correct, but it is always corrected and if so, retracted.. Now I can't say too much about this thing called Qiapi 1. If it works or not, BUT it is not mention in the journal that is in PMC. So i can't concern myself with that. I'm just focused on what i have seen stored in the database of the NIH..

I recall you stating that no scientist have supported Arturo's claims. If you go back to his research in PMC, you will see at the top, a man by the name of Sergey Suchkov that supports his claims. In fact that journal on PMC, both Arturo and Sergey are authors of this particular journal. So NOT only Arturo claiming that melanin splits the water molecule, it's sergey as well. LINK below if you want to look at it again

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4125832/

Now once again, the theory of this thread is speculation. I've never said this to be true.. BUT I WILL DEFINITELY SAY THIS. Melanin have always been talked about when it comes to advancing Medicine. There's lots of Scientists that have not really figure out much about melanin's role throughout nature. The fact that melanin have reactions to the electromagnetic spectrum, people will be arrogant to say melanin have absolutely nothing to do with the electromagnetic field when it comes to human biology, just because no one or hardly anybody has never considered, looked into, thought of , or researched it..

From the beginning of time, it takes a QUESTION for Humankind to discover the wonders about this world and it's lifeform.. Science will always have room to correct, omit, add, and disregard information about this world and it's lifeforms. That is something we all have to accept...

Again you are completely clueless about publications. The places that the fraud and liar Arturo Solis Herrerra chose are places where you can submit any rubbish he chooses to write and it get into print.

The idea that it would not be listed by a listing service is as idiotic as I have shown as if being listed by Google makes something correct. Are you really that clueless? The answer to that that in definitely. Since the start of the references to these sham articles I have pointed out that the articles have appeared in journals that are not peer reviewed. I have provided links to places verifying that is the case. You on the other have posted a long list of nonsensical spam misrepresenting these facts. Why? Because you have nothing to show that even a single article has passed peer review.

So here you have the childish notion that the US government makes things true. The US government is not an arbitrator of what is correct or not. That is left to the scientists. You are so daft that you pretend that the listings are anything other than a research tool. That is all they are. They do not do anything other than Google does. They do limit their results to science articles. But there is no decision or than to provide information from journals. Some of the journals are total crap. They still get listed. Real scientists know their fields. They know which journals are total crap and which hold information that is more reliable. They know which ones are peer reviewed and which are not.

There are articles about the joke of homeopathy. There are articles on the failed idea of the healing touch. There are plenty of articles that are downright wrong. That happens. About 5% of all articles should be wrong. That is simple statistics. There are also purposeful hoaxes. The prayer article is a famous hoax. It was perpetrated by a fraud like Arturo Herrerra. It was caught despite being in a decent journal.

Then you try to lie like Arturo Herrerra. You mention Segey Suchkov is a scientist that supports Herrerra. You are so foolish. The two frauds are working together. The second name on the article is Herrerra. Can't you read? The article has no experiment, no methodology, and no results. It's the same lies Herrerra pushes. That is because the article is Herrerra's article.

So this thread is about speculation. M speculation is that you work for Herrerra and his faux science fraud named Sergey. Anyone that believes the illogical and unsupported tripe of these two frauds must be in cahoots with them.

So you try to finish up with some juvenile blather. Here it is: "There's lots of Scientists that have not really figure out much about melanin's role throughout nature. The fact that melanin have reactions to the electromagnetic spectrum, people will be arrogant to say melanin have absolutely nothing to do with the electromagnetic field when it comes to human biology, just because no one or hardly anybody has never considered, looked into, thought of , or researched it."

Research into melanin has been done by real scientists and long before that liar and fraud Arturo Herrerra and his menagerie of frauds pretended anything. As we have already seen articles have been posted that suggest melanin may have a role in the metabolic processes of orgaisms. So your statement is ccategorically dead wrong.

Now comes the final statement that shows you are completely ignorant of how science works and I mean real science not the stupidity promoted by the liar and fraud Arturo Herrerra and his lackies. Here is what you wrote: "Science will always have room to correct, omit, add, and disregard information about this world and it's lifeforms. "

Science does not disregard anything. Real science is not like the illogical and speculative malarkey you have posted. Real science tests and retests its ideas to make sure that the concepts are correct. When they are wrong someone does the experiments to show things are incorrect and they gain a huge appreciation from other scientists for getting things corrected.

Arturo and Sergey are just in it for the money - to steal money from people with false promises and lies.

February 11, 2019