---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote :
As usual, you miss the point Sal.
I believe the expression for what you do,is, "leading from behind"
Just a bit too timid to go beyond the orthodoxy of present day science.
And seemingly threatened as well.
>
On 9/24/2014 12:54 AM, salyavin808 wrote:
>
Gosh, you really are an asshole, no wonder people don't read your posts.
>
Ad hominem is the second to last resort of someone who is losing a
debate and is unable to respond with legitimacy. The last resort, most
difficult for the ego, is to consider that he might be wrong.
>
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fleetwood_macncheese@...> wrote :
I agree, Steve. By limiting our known world, to that which science has
vetted, inflicts a bias, of materialism, on our thinking, and our
culture. One reason I don't care for a lot of science fiction, is that
the assumption begins with science, and is imagined, from there. So
limiting.
A bias towards that which might be possible? Kind of the idea behind
the name! Stick to fantasy novels dude, anyone can do anything there,
and it's why I always hated them, even as a kid. What's the point of
having suspense in a book or movie if the protagonist can just rewrite
the laws of nature with a spell. The world isn't like that so why the
need to pretend that it is? Much better to grow the ability to deal
with reality rather than rush into a fantasy world to deal with problems.
And without science there wouldn't be a sci-fi to enjoy. Or an
internet, or astronomy or anything else we've added to our
understanding in the last few hundred years. I'm happy to be its
defender on FFL. As the late great Richard Feynman said: "Science is
how we've learned not to fool ourselves" .
I see the world more like walking through an art gallery. How many
perspectives, are there expressed, in an art gallery? And yet, science
would describe it in dry terms, perhaps as a building, housing a
collection of objects, representing other objects. Cold, rational and
absolutely true. But, missing everything.
I enjoy science, especially engineering; civil, architectural, and
electronic, but to say that something cannot exist, until science says
it can, is such a small thought, and far, far from reality, as it is
presented.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <steve.sundur@...> wrote :
Right, I think so Share.
What I find bothersome, is the arrogant attitude, that science is the
final word on such things, knowing of course that science is updated
on a daily basis.
And then, when something heretofore considered impossible is
explained, then the reply is, "Of course, it just needed a proper
explanation, as I said"
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <sharelong60@...> wrote :
Steve, I like what you're saying here which is that we don't yet know
all the laws governing gravity. And I think this is a very scientific
attitude. I bet we don't know all the laws about anything yet!
Including how human bodies obtain energy from their surroundings.
Which kind of makes the future fascinating to consider (-:
On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 1:18 AM, "steve.sundur@...
[FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Given that there are plenty of ways he could be cheating I know where
I'm going to put my money.
Sure, what interested me was that the environment seemed to be
controlled. I suppose it could be a case of deception, but I haven't
looked into it to see if there are accusations of that sort. And of
course, that can be a somewhat an easy out. "It seems impossible, so
there must be some deception going on"
The below isn't one of them I'm afraid as there is nothing unusual or
contrary about it other than it appears counter to our expectations
drawn from the sort of things we usually run into. Supercooled helium
isn't a day-to-day occurrence and it isn't defeating gravity in any
way. Nor has anything else anyone has ever come across, apart from
anecdotally and what are we to make of that?
Well, that is what I am saying. Right now, the relationship between
body and akasha and the lightness of cotton fiber could not result in
levitation because it would appear to violate the laws of gravity.
But if somehow, someone levitated by utilizing that formula, then we
suddenly modify our understanding of how gravity would work in that
situation.
Preview by Yahoo
I didn't use the word hogwash, bullshit would be closer to it anyway.
This guy in Australia was caught out, there was no magic going on. I
don't know why people not eating would be a sign of anything great
anyway, it's the sort of thing I'd avoid in a guru. I like my chips
and gravy too much to be impressed by thinness. But the lure of magic
is enough for a lot of people I suppose, it's always interested me,
I'm an eternal optimist but becoming rather sceptical these days.
Wait a second. What does it matter if you think it's silly? That has
nothing to do with it. What has everything to do with it, is that it
is, on the surface, impossible. I did a quick search to try to find
some deception about it. This guy below states, "It's a fraud,
because I say it is". He doesn't cite any obvious deception. His
says, "I am a (self proclaimed) authority on such matters, and I
declare it to be a deception"
Has This Man Gone 70 Years Without Eating? UPDATE: Chill Out,
Everyone. He Obviously Has Not.
<http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/has-this-man-gone-70-years-without-eating-update-chill-out-everyone-he-obviously-has-not.html>
image
<http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/has-this-man-gone-70-years-without-eating-update-chill-out-everyone-he-obviously-has-not.html>
Has This Man Gone 70 Years Without Eating? UPDATE: ...
<http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/has-this-man-gone-70-years-without-eating-update-chill-out-everyone-he-obviously-has-not.html>
Okay, here's a weird one. You may remember the story of Prahlad Jani,
an Indian yogi who claims that he hasn't ever eaten or had a drink in
the last 70 year...
View on www.treehugger.com
<http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/has-this-man-gone-70-years-without-eating-update-chill-out-everyone-he-obviously-has-not.html>
Preview by Yahoo
A corrupt study is always a possibility, conversely we shouldn't
accept potentially corrupt information just because the claimed result
gives succour to our cherished beliefs, not if we are interested in
truth anyway.
Well, of course! What would being intellectually dishonest get you.
Nothing but delusions.
Having a threshold of credibility is a good plan, it means you have a
handy way of weeding out the bullshit at the start but it shouldn't be
so rigid that you become blinkered. What you need is a good working
knowledge about something before you consider contrary evidence. We
can always be wrong but the discovery of a chakra - whatever that
means- in the brain that creates nectar of this usefulness (or at all)
would be a major discovery. Let's hope for the diet industry's sake if
no one elses that this guy has broken the laws of conservation of
energy, as well as a few others.
I'll bet good money that he hasn't though...
Well, as I said, in case I missed something, nothing came up as
evidence of fraud in this case in the initial google search.
People in general may like KK but she isn't defying the laws of
nature, even though her arse appears to be stretching them sometimes.
I don't care what anyone thinks, and this is not scientific, but
everything seems to be speeding up. Sure, you can say it's all about
technology, and maybe it is. But nothing seems to stay in the news
cycle for more than a few minutes. It happens, and then it's in the
rearview mirror.
The silly Kardashians feel compelled to do something titillating or
outrageous every week or so, to stay in the limelight. I hope we can
forget about them, soon as well.
.
Preview by Yahoo
