Edg,

I have been thinking of my plans with this discovery hard for the 
past week.  Many things still need to be looked into.  I will be 
sharing those plans and more of the science-talk in the Synthetic 
Life group at Yahoo!  I encourage you and others to join.  It would 
be great to get some of your feedback on a few things, being a fellow 
inventor.

I heard it is in bad form to promote other groups in another, but 
this really is a different subject matter than in here.  Also, some 
people in here are just too offensive and I would rather be able to 
moderate such things that I cannot do here (I will not moderate 
opinions of course...just insults).

Thanks,

Jeff

--- In [email protected], "Jeffrey N Cook" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Edg,
> 
> Can I post your very good comments to the Synthetic Life group at 
> Yahoo!?  I want to respond, but I would like to include some of 
them 
> with this quality skepticism first.  I can respond to all you 
asked, 
> but I just want to make sure others there (they few that are 
joining) 
> can hear what you have to say as well...in addition to my response.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jeff
> 
> --- In [email protected], Duveyoung <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > I watched all the videos.  If you have what you say you have, you
> > should be able to use microscopy to begin to show us evidence --
> > photos of the cells, etc.  That, and if you get a local community
> > college professor of biochemistry to try to "fool proof" and "de-
> germ"
> > your experiment, it could possibly open some doors for you, but, 
> even
> > then, probably not.
> > 
> > Billions of dollars in research have been spent, billions are 
being
> > spent now, and billions more are slated for the near term 
projects 
> to
> > understand life.  Your "proposal" is such an extraordinary claim 
> that,
> > trite as it is to repeat, extraordinary proof is required.  
> > 
> > Right now, a space ship is heading to Mars where it will land and 
> dig
> > into the soil to see if it can scrounge up any evidence of life 
> there.
> >  That's hundreds of millions of dollars spent right there, and 
you 
> say
> > you have an astounding miracle in a cup which would stand the
> > scientific world on its ear in such a way that no headline 
generated
> > by the Mars rovers, the Hubble Telescope, the manned landing on 
the
> > moon, etc. could possibly match. "Brand New Life Generated In 
> Minutes
> > Before Your Very Eyes" would be the most exquisite discovery -- 
true
> > bombast.  Your claim is hardly less in importance than, say, if 
> you'd
> > claimed that a space ship had landed on your lawn and that the
> > advanced beings were ready to tell us the secrets of the universe.
> > 
> > Your watery solution could contain any number of impurities --
> > including extremophile life forms that can survive boiling and 
other
> > measures to disinfect your lab equipment. That and other
> > possibilities, such as "you've put dried up sea monkeys in your
> > solutions when 'no one was looking'" are serious concerns to be
> > addressed. There are, after all, every manner of hucksters out 
there
> > who put secret batteries inside of cleverly made "perpetual motion
> > machines" etc.  You cannot be "seen" as legitimate until you 
provide
> > scientific, repeatable proofs.  Until then, well, 
your "discovery" 
> is
> > no more amazing than a magician who levitates using a camera 
trick.
> > 
> > I like the idea of life spontaneously forming, and I fully 
encourage
> > you to try to package your claims with scientific controls.  
> > 
> > Seriously, if you do not have a PhD in Biochemistry PLUS other
> > credentials of experience, you do not have much of a chance of 
> getting
> > a "fair display" of your concepts before the community of minds 
that
> > would be able to fully inspect and challenge them.  
> > 
> > Gregor Mendal after much effort and rejection was able to finally 
> get
> > his pea plant findings published in an obscure journal, but 
because 
> he
> > was a monk, most of the scientists (natural philosophers as they 
> were
> > then called) didn't get exposed to his ideas, and the few that 
were
> > lucky enough to have Mendal's findings put right in front of them,
> > rejected the ideas out of hand because of Mendal's lack of 
> credentials
> > -- he was just a monk. In fact, THE most famous scientist of the 
day
> > DID read Mendal's paper, and he abused and derisively dismissed 
the
> > paper.  
> > 
> > For 30 years his paper just sat there, and then, funnily enough, 
> three
> > different scientists, working apart and unbeknownst to themselves,
> > came to Mendal's same conclusions and went to publish their 
> results. 
> > But, they THEN took the time (should have done it first) to look 
up
> > the previous research in the field, and TO A MAN, they all found
> > Mendal's paper, and TO A MAN, they all faithfully reported Mendal 
as
> > being the "father of the science of heredity."  Those guys' names 
> are
> > not famous, because they had integrity.
> > 
> > You have to show the world this same integrity. You cannot count 
on
> > folks like us here to rally around you and help gather the 
> scientific
> > world's attention because you have a "rabble reverently chanting 
> your
> > name."  Either get the credentials, or be prepared to give all 
your
> > "secrets" to someone who has the credentials and hope that he/she 
> will
> > carry forward your discovery into the scientific world.  Remember 
> that
> > even then, famous scientists with WOW WOW WOW credentials are
> > routinely blasted by their peers. It takes a huge amount of 
effort 
> to
> > swing the group consciousness.
> > 
> > I am an inventor with tons of ideas "under my belt."  I've done 
what
> > you must do -- go to others "who know better" and have your hat in
> > your hand and be prepared to have your ass handed to you.  You of
> > course have something far more important to present than anything 
> I've
> > "cooked up," but that only makes it much harder for you to 
succeed.
> > 
> > I can tell you absolutely that if you think you're going to keep 
> this
> > all to yourself until you've got all the information tied down in
> > proprietary documents, agreements, patents, copyrights, etc., 
you're
> > kidding yourself.  The big boys with the dough will get "your 
stuff"
> > from you easily -- if anything, they'd sign paperwork that they'd
> > later ignore and say "sue me."  
> > 
> > You're going to have to be BLESSED BY GOD in a way that Mendal the
> > Monk never was.  
> > 
> > If you want to try to take a shortcut, approach someone rich who 
you
> > can get to "back your play" (or marry you and hand over her/his
> > checkbook) enough for you to jazz up the demo enough to create at
> > least the semblance of authenticity.  Maybe you can get enough 
dough
> > behind this to get something flamboyant going (multimedia
> > presentation) that would then titillate the establishment to at 
> least
> > examine your data enough to try to reject it, and then, voila, if 
> you
> > have the real deal, your shortcut would have worked.  
> > 
> > Huge gobs of good luck to you.
> > 
> > By the way, Maharishi promised me "new life," and I consider your
> > "offer" hardly less important to humankind.  If you're a fraud, 
look
> > out, you're playing with the foundation of reality itself in the 
> minds
> > of many.
> > 
> > Edg
> > 
> > 
> > --- In [email protected], "Jeffrey N Cook" 
<jnoelcook@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Alex,
> > > 
> > > Uh, let me guess...you watched only the first video.  That's 
some 
> in-
> > > depth analysis.
> > > 
> > > Jeff
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], "Alex Stanley" 
> > > <j_alexander_stanley@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], Jeffrey Cook 
<jnoelcook@> 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > All,
> > > > >    
> > > > >   I have filmed my latest experiment: this one 
on "synthetic 
> life."
> > > > >    
> > > > >   http://www.youtube.com/jnoelcook
> > > >     
> > > > You're in a kitchen, loudly coughing, wearing shorts and a t-
> shirt,
> > > > mixing two different liquids in a cup, that as far as I can 
see,
> > > > remain completely inert throughout the entire video. And, you 
> expect
> > > > us to believe that this is a demonstration of you creating new
> > > > bacterial lifeforms?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to