English (United Kingdom)French (Fr)Russian (CIS)Espa
Home Forum Neurohacking The Bay the line between science and woo woo

Login

      
      |
If you want to register, please send a mail introducing yourself to nha.council at our domain name (omitting the "www" of course).
Message
  • You are now subscribed on topic the line between science and woo woo

Alex
useravatar
User Info

the line between science and woo woo

Hi dudes,
I submit this talk for your judgment. Science or woo woo?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqG5TagD0uU
Bruce Lipton, 'Epigenetics -the science of human empowerment'

Here ends the sensible bit of this post  :  )

Something else fun that I came across today:

Psychologists are telepathic. (should really have put this up on April 1st)*  : )
In a series of studies reported today in the Journal of Metacognition, researchers found that qualified psychologists significantly outperformed matched controls on experimental tasks measuring the ability to guess a target selected by others from a random stimulus array.

The original aim of the study was to assess whether there was any validity to parapsychology claims of ‘remote viewing’ abilities in the normal population. A participant selects one of five ‘target’ pictures – of former politician Lembit Opik, a duck, a map of Seattle, a weasel with a chainsaw, and some wool. Will a ‘viewer’ in another room – completely blind to the selection process – be able to tell which image the participant has in their mind?

We would expect the viewers to be right 20 per cent of the time, purely by chance. But the experimenters discovered something quite unexpected. Their colleagues – postgraduate researchers, lecturers and professors in psychology – appeared to be much more successful at the task than were people from other disciplines. ‘Initially, we were skeptical about the whole thing,’ lead researcher Professor Chris Turner told the Research Digest. ‘But on performing the statistical analysis, I spilled my latte all down my white lab coat. When we considered the results from the “trained psychologists” as one group, we found a hugely significant difference, with the psychologists outperforming the “controls” by more than two to one.’
Professor Turner replicated the group’s own results before running a new experiment. Would the influence work the other way? Could psychologists actually be more successful at implanting a phrase into the mind of someone in another room? Incredibly, the ‘trained psychologists’ group was significantly better at transmitting one ofa number of quotes to an isolated individual.

Obviously, something is going on here. What?  LOL  :  )
Best,
AR



*Yes its a joke, dudes. Well-written, and very funny:
Refs: Turner, C., Nilsson, R., King, P., Harkes, J., Shirtliff, P., Pearson, N., Wilson, D., Sheridan, J., Hirst, D., Williams, P. & Worthington, N. (2014). Brief report: Evidence of superior mindreading and control in professional psychologists? Journal of Metacognition, 4 (1), 91-92.



Edited By:  Alex
May-05-14 09:44:55

Administrator has disabled public posting
Sakiro
useravatar
User Info

Re: the line between science and woo woo

Bruce Lipton talk

Still didn't finish it .. but a quick thought.

Could the problem about all this epigenetic stuff talks start when the host (in this case lipton) or the viewer misunderstood that one thing is "epigenetic give you the power to control WHICH genes can be expressed" to the enormous difference of "epigenetic give you the power to CHANGE your genes".

As far as i know the "blueprint" can't be changed, you only have control for which one you want to express (based of what you ALREADY have).

Makes sense?

More later i think!


Administrator has disabled public posting
Alex
useravatar
User Info

Re: the line between science and woo woo

Hi dude,
We do know some things can actually change the blueprint (hard radiation for a start) but this does indeed seem to be a common misunderstanding among those who discuss epigenetics.

The biggest problem so far though is that most people have never heard of it and can't imagine such a thing. The gap between current discovery and human awareness is now huge (and getting bigger). There are not enough points of similarity between what people know and this new information and it can't be processed. This 'gap' and the attendant fear of change may be the biggest factor affecting human development. People either just don't get it, or refuse to believe it. It's like going back in time and trying to explain the earth isn't flat, or trying to explain to creationists how evolution happens. Proof is just denied.

People who don't take part in the 'time machine' of culture (eg, read, write, listen and learn) -and that's most humans- are literally stuck in the past, believing what was believed in the past. The more we learn, the bigger this gap gets (perhaps the only downside to learning is at some point most of what you know, nobody else can comprehend?) But hey -imagine how Darwin felt! LOL  :  )

Plus there's the insecurity (maybe for some, shock) of discovering that most of what we believe is not true. Those who study science maybe get used to finding out that what we thought was provably true last week or year now provably isn't, we don't feel personally threatened when that happens because it happens all the time, but many folks rely on the security of believing most things they are 'told' are reliably (and permanently) true.

There's also the embarrassment factor. Nobody likes to discover they've been conned. I think if I'd spent ten years dieting & exercising and some dude said 'all you have to do is turn off these genes', I'd feel a bit of a dumbass. Nobody likes feeling like a dumbass.

Saying we can alter gene expression also implies self responsibility and that's something some are not at all used to. My neighbor for example believes that if we get ill it is the doctors' problem -that's what doctors are for. Self-responsibility is not a popular concept -she might have to start considering that her current obesity may in some way be her own 'fault' (she still thinks in 'blame' and guilt terms); and that takes away the anxiety-pacifying belief that one is a victim.

So not everyone sees epigenetics as a marvelous opportunity  :  ) fortunately it is a hotbed of new research and those who want to learn have more resources than ever before, all hail the internet.
Best,
AR


Administrator has disabled public posting

Board Info

User Info:   Newest User :  sailing 1   Members Online: 0   Guests Online: 627
Topic
New
Locked
Topic
New
Locked
Sticky
Active
New/Active
Sticky
Active
New/Active
New/Closed
New Sticky
Closed/Active
New/Locked
New Sticky
Locked/Active
Active/Sticky
Sticky/Locked
Sticky Active Locked
Active/Sticky
Sticky/Locked
Sticky/Active/Locked