Your english is forgven since your point is a very good one. What the bleep made me want to claw my face off. Quantum mechanics blew my mind when i finally realized what it really said, but i could only understand how mind-blowing it was because I had taken the trouble to learn the science. In fact I had a very hard time accepting it until I had gone over the experiments several times. What the bleep and all the other tripe out there that just says stupid things like, what you expect is what guides the futrure, is not quantum physics it is just the same old power of positive thinking crap that con-artists have sold since prehistory.
What irks me now is that another one of my favorite scientific concepts "the meme" is not being popularized and bastardized before a mature rigorous science can be built around it. i still remember back in 1988, approaching a couple of my professors of evolutionary biology with a great new idea that ideas could act like living organisms and evolve in a way that was almost independent of their substrate. They both chuckled and said, "very good you have reinvented the meme." I was so taken by the idea that I didn't even mind that my thought wasn't original. But since then the more I have thought about how powerful an idea it is and how many complex subtleties it has. Now, it is just gong to be turned into some vague notion about how your ideas can affect the world. Ironically, the idea of the meme is a meme mutating into a new form that is less useful but spreads quicker and will largely drive out its ancestral form. Anyway, it seems like every time science comes up with something hard to understand there will be some charlatan there ready to exploit peoples ignorance about it and claim it can fulfill all their wishes. On Jun 6, 9:05 am, Enrique Fynn <[email protected]> wrote: > Really really bad science... I expected more from some members who want to > link everything with religion, god and other supernatural things... > I'm disappointed, those people don't have and will never have scientific > spirit, they watch that stupid DVD 'What the bleep we are?' full of > pseudo-science. > There is no quantum physics at all for a person who does not even understand > the 'old-fashioned' classic physics, this appears to be the question of the > moment, the top of all pseudo-science, they took the name... It is quantum > healers, quantum explanation for the spirit, I'm so tired of those crap, I > will not argue anymore with those people, it is meaningless since they > believes are based in dogmas, they don't think for themselves. > Enrique Fynn. > > P.S.: Sorry about the bad English. > > 2009/6/5 michalchik <[email protected]> > > > > > > > I have been a little puzzled since i have joined this group recently > > as to why most of the posts seem to be someone's pet theory about how > > the universe works (bad metaphysics) instead of a serious discussion > > of how and what we can know. Has the group always been like this? > > There are also some naive science questions, which I don't really mind > > but seem to belong on science discussion groups. > > > I am very interested in problems like empirical induction, logic, > > observer bias, fallacies, the philosophy of science, Ockham's razor > > and all the other rich fodder of epistemology but no one seems to be > > talking about that stuff. The group is in fact so quiet on those > > subjects that I don't even know if anyone would understand or care if > > I posed a serious question, problem or opinion on epistemology. > > -- > Enrique Fynn --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
