Here are a couple more.
noetic.org/publications/revi … Narby.html
The Noetic Science Site is made up largely of a group of scientists who are combining science with spirituality. They encourage the general public to join in on their quests. Lots of interesting articles, radio and video.
freeflyer,
From what I can tell, what you call a scientist, I call a pseudo-scientist.
Scientists use observation and experimentation to test hypothesis about the processes in the natural world. Once they know if their hypothesis is correct or incorrect, they submit their results in peer-reviewed publications. Peer-review means that their experimental design is scrutinized to make sure that it didn’t favor an outcome over another.
Anecdotal evidence has a place in science but it’s generally when an idea or a discovery is looked upon very closely and when the results are reproducible in some way that it will become accepted as good science.
What you and papamerv talk about hasn’t, to this day, withstood such scrutiny. If you think you can prove the opposite, you may become a rich person by taking on the James Randi’s Million Dollars Challenge.
Ahhh, BigThumb
I like a good skeptic… it keeps things in balance.
שלוה
Freeflyer, does associating karma with quantum mechanics make it more justified in your mind. Granted you have a few links where people have put forward propositions about quantum mechanics affecting reality on a large macroscopic level but I think you’ll find that very few qualified scientists will be willing to invest much faith in the theory. Sure, it might be an interesting thought but it lacks a solid foundation of scientific evidence. I’m also not really convinced you understand fully what they’re proposing. If you feel so strongly about it why don’t you describe in a scientific manner how your thoughts can affect reality. It’s easy enough to point out a link but so far those links haven’t convinced me, their reliability is questionable, and a lot of it doesn’t confirm your point but only alludes to the fact that people are researching the possibility. I’m also researching the possibility that I’m Elvis’ love child, but that doesn’t make it a fact now does it.
Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. So don’t think that I mean to change your opinions, but if you insist on discussing them on a public forum just be prepared to back them up.
Science or Quackery?
“Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. So don’t think that I mean to change your opinions, but if you insist on discussing them on a public forum just be prepared to back them up.”
Well, I don’t really have any beliefs and my opinions change often because so does science, new discoveries, etc.
Most things science has proven have proven to be wrong, or perhaps better said, ‘changed’ - ie, nine planets in our solar system, the world is flat, no life on mars, etc…
I can’t prove anything to you other than what I’ve read myself and it’s difficult to discuss so much information on this forum, so the best I can do is give you some links.
Eg. The Institute of Noetic Sciences was founded by Edgar Mitchell - an astronaught and bonefied scientist - hardly a pseudo-scientist (if you want more info on him, use google). He left the conventional scientific community and started his institution which is run by other real scientists as well. The information they have is not airy-fairy rubbish. It’s interesting and you will find scientists there as well as others who will back the idea that the ancients were indeed in the ‘know’ about many modern quantum theories. By this, I mean in the realm of consciousness. This is what quantum theories have discovered - our consciousness is not what we seem to currently believe it is.
So what we’re all going on is theories and evidence that points to certain conclusions - which may change.
I think it’s healthy to have skeptics from both sides. Maybe that way we’ll get to the truth of what our reality and consciousness really is. Heck, we don’t even know where we came from yet. Darwin’s theory can’t be proven either - it’s just a theory - like everything else.
If you’re really interested in this topic, which is vast - the links I’ve offered and that Merv has offered are a good start.
I like to keep to an open mind.
That’s pretty cool, mig
oops… almost forgot
As for using the word “fact” in reference to the ancients and shaman, poor word choice on my part.
Instead, I’ll say, evidence that thus far has led to the conclusion…
But I suppose that could change too
Time to lighten up - maybe find a balloon…
I don’t understand what you mean by “healthy to have skeptics on both sides”. Science itself isn’t about your opinion or mine and which of us can argue better. It’s about finding logically correct evidence to support claims. And that evidence must withstand scrutiny among the scientific community.
Your ‘both sides’ attitude is similar to the present global warming issue where a handful of scientists, most of them linked to the oil industry, were quite successful, until very recently, in helping the Bush administration discredit an overwhelming majority of scientists who, after looking at the evidence, pinned carbon dioxide as the main culprit.
Here you’re playing the “guilt by association” game: If scientists are wrong on this issue then everything they did must be wrong. So Pasteur must have been wrong when he figured out the process to kill microbes because some processes are now better. Newton’s gravity laws must all be wrong because Einstein explained general relativity ( I’m levitating as I write this!).
Einstein himself must be wrong on all his findings because some of his work was corrected by more recent scientists. And it goes on and on.
"9. “Open minded”
There is a difference between being open minded and downright guillible. Being open minded means assessing each new piece of evidence objectively, and trying to see the wider picture. This mean accepting possibility, but evaluating probability. It does not mean believe everything. This is a mistake many make. But the proposer and the skeptic can be closed minded."
This is from:http://www.physicspost.com/articles.php?articleId=44&page=2
Hey BigThumb
Don’t put words MY mouth
Because you don’t understand what I’m saying is your problem
and “Guilt by Association” 
Give me a break
Gullable?
You have some pretty strong opinions - and that’s fine
but you’re twisting my words and your accusations against me are ridiculous.
The kitchen is getting too hot for you?
Accusation is a strong word. My intention isn’t to accuse you of anything. My intention is to expose the huge problem with the pseudo-sciences that you seem to promote.
I’m all for people who think positively and do good things around them. You are probably someone like this. But justifying irrational theories by throwing words like quantum physics and by saying that science is mostly wrong is damaging to our understanding of the natural world and thus our ability to make clear decisions about it.
Of course science is not perfect. It is a human endeavour to understand the world using the tool of rationality. But, like many other human activities, it is subject to bias. That’s why the scientific community has some safeguards against bias.
The pseudo-sciences don’t have the same standards.
It’s a big faux pas to state the a Hypothesis is Correct. You can never be absolutely positive about an answer in Statistics (that’s where Hypothesis Testing comes from) because there is always some degree of Probability that the results are due to random sampling.
You either Reject or Don’t Reject the Null Hypothesis.
** I haven’t got nothing more than Nitpicky shit to contribute, you’re really handling this well PollicisMajus! **
Thanks Charles_T. You’re absolutely right. I sacrificed vocabulary accuracy for clarity. I guess this means that everything I wrote is wrong 
!
Using your new data, and the scientific method, you can now return to your argument and reform it to better explain your observations.
I have no PH’d. No one did a hundred years ago. Even Stephen Hawling (the braining guy in the chair) questioned the validity of various theories (A brief History of Time) put forward by PH’d types. All a Ph’d really means is that you repeated what you were told by your Profs. And you did it well, and then wrote a paper that your Prof’s found acceptable.
Henery Ford didn’t have a Ph’d nor did the Wright brothers. Nor did most of those that discovered the mysteries of our solar system.
I said that to say this.
When a Doctor declares that you are brain dead, they have determined that there is no more electrical activity going on upstairs. (thats what makes you alive, electricity in your brain)
Observing the particles, changes their effect. “I say”, this is due to the electrical charge of your observing brain (like the electrical field from a power line) changing the “air” around the site.
In the field that is studying this effect “entanglement”, they have measured that this effect transmits this interference at a speed of ten thousand times the speed of light.
Following me???
You call your mom (other side of the world), she answers saying “I was just talking about you”
Or the other way around.
You are connected
And another. . .
You are in a conference room full of people suddenly you feel the need to turn and look at the entrance door and you recognize someone entering. . .
You feel the hair raise on the back of your neck. . .
All sorts of evidence is available to demonstrate that even our thoughts effect everything around us.
Science is having a tough time proving it to those that need steak and eggs for breakie.
We are surrounded by negativity. hence a negative environment.
I choose, for my remaining days on this planet, to promote love, respect and compassion, by doing everything in my power to demonstrate how, why, you know, what ever I can, because driving a Hummer, (cause it makes one look cool), is a symptom of a grade school mentality that is a very sad reflection of our societies general state of mind.
With Love, Respect and Compassion,
Papa Merv
Sure they did.
If you want people to take you seriously, then don’t get such basic facts wrong. Like the fact that a lot of people had degrees in 1907.
[quote=“papamerv”]
I have no PH’d. [/quote]
Me neither!
I’m not sure if you implied this but Hawking has a phd. (second paragraph second line)
Please read this for a good explanation:(http://www.hi.is/~hj/QuantumMechanics/quantum.html#Heisenberg); or do your own search about the uncertainty principle.
[quote]You call your mom (other side of the world), she answers saying “I was just talking about you”
Or the other way around.
You are connected[/quote]
Moms in general talk about their kids more often than others people would do. The probability of you phoning while this is happening is small but still greater than you phoning an aquaintance who would say the same thing. Does your mom talk about you a majority of times when you phone? Could you test this in a logical fashion? If so, apply for the million dollars challenge ( link in a previous post).
[quote]
All sorts of evidence is available to demonstrate that even our thoughts effect everything around us.
Science is having a tough time proving it to those that need steak and eggs for breakie.[/quote]
Coincidences are different than evidence that can be tested. Science is not having a tough time disproving it, pseudo-science is having a tough time passing the test of science.
Again, these are noble intentions and I too strive for a similar lifestyle. But that doesn’ t mean I will be gullible about Ramtha, Deepak, Dianetics or Snake oil.
Good science is the best we have to explain the natural world around us and it’s not because a few things are unexplainable within it’s realm, that pseudo-scientific explanations are correct.
Maybe we need a mythbusters film festival in town, a chance to gather together and debunk all that is debunkable… 