On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 8:07 AM, John Mikes <jami...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Stathis wrote (to Craig):
> "But you believe that the neurochemicals do things contrary to what
> chemists would predict, for example an ion channel opening or closing
> without any cause such as a change in transmembrane potential or
> ligand concentration. We've talked about this before and it just isn't
> consistent with any scientific evidence. You interpret the existence
> "spontaneous neural activity" as meaning that something magical like
> this happens, but it doesn't mean that at all."
> Stathis, you know ... whatever we state as 'knowledge about mind etc.' is an
> explanation for the little we think we learned - with lots we have no idea
> about.
> Like: chemicals ... potentials ... scientific evidence ... even cause
> (meaning the
> part we alredy know about) and mauch much more.
> It is your turf, you must know about more we don't know only think we do.

It's your turf too - you're a chemist.

Stathis Papaioannou

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to