On 27 May 2015 at 02:07, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC+10, Liz R wrote:
On 25 May 2015 at 00:34, Pierz pie...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 9:08:30 PM UTC+10, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom and you
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC+10, Liz R wrote:
On 25 May 2015 at 00:34, Pierz pie...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 9:08:30 PM UTC+10, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom and you shall view my last,
number 26th, the last
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC+10, Liz R wrote:
On 25 May 2015 at 00:34, Pierz pie...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 9:08:30 PM UTC+10, spudb
On 26 May 2015, at 16:07, Pierz wrote:
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 1:03:48 PM UTC+10, Liz R wrote:
On 25 May 2015 at 00:34, Pierz pie...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 9:08:30 PM UTC+10, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom and you shall view my last,
.
-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com javascript:
To: everything-list everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript:
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 4:19 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 9:19 PM
On 25 May 2015 at 00:34, Pierz pier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 9:08:30 PM UTC+10, spudb...@aol.com wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom and you shall view my last,
number 26th, the last one. This kind of thing is interesting to me. I tend
toward the materialist
, 2015 4:19 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 9:19 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript: wrote:
Hi Telmo,
I have tried the Other Side stuff for a bit, and found it wanting.
Not so
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2objectid=11450770ref=nzh_tw
Antarctica's Larsen B ice-shelf is on course to disintegrate completely
within the next five years, according to a study by US space agency Nasa.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
I will eventually buy the book and let ya know.
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, May 17, 2015 10:08 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On 17 May 2015 at 06
On 15 May 2015 at 23:52, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:21 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 May 2015 at 21:38, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 21:30,
On 17 May 2015 at 06:38, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Here is another out of the box thinker, Telmo, that has published a book
of course. He is a prof at Stanford University, with a view unlike anything
I can recall covering this topic. Like Lomborg,
-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 02:53 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
Crap Telmo, because its WSJ, its a paywall for cut and pastes. Basically
Lomborg got dogged because he
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 21:30, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Clouds, especially high clouds have some effect. They reflect visible
bands back to space and they also absorb and reemit IR. Low clouds tend to
increase
On 15 May 2015 at 21:38, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 21:30, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Clouds, especially high clouds have some effect. They reflect visible
bands back to
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:21 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 May 2015 at 21:38, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 21:30, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Clouds, especially high
-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 07:52 AM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_2_a34fccef-8e29-4c62-9f14-1acedd46bb00
div dir=ltr
div class=aolmail_gmail_extra
div class=aolmail_gmail_quote
On Fri, May 15
/articles/the-honor-of-being-mugged-by-climate-censors-1431558936
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 07:52 AM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical
On 5/15/2015 2:37 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/15/2015 2:38 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
-
From: spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 02:53 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
Crap Telmo, because its WSJ, its a paywall for cut and pastes. Basically
...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 05:52 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_2_5d2b43db-de9f-4263-b4af-3052ef42ee24
div dir=ltr
Thanks.
The story, as told by him, sound
@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_2_e092defb-6ca9-4705-b1db-9c2615ea66e4
div dir=ltr
Hi!
Most of the article is behind a paywall for me...
div class=aolmail_gmail_extra
div class
everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 02:53 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_2_ab967ffd-fd70-4329-87a3-879ead672718
Crap Telmo, because its WSJ, its a paywall for cut and pastes. Basically
Lomborg got dogged because he
On 5/15/2015 2:38 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 21:30, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Clouds, especially high clouds have some
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:27 PM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/15/2015 2:38 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 3:07 AM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 May 2015 at 21:30, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Clouds, especially high clouds have
Clouds, especially high clouds have some effect. They reflect visible
bands back to space and they also absorb and reemit IR. Low clouds tend to
increase heat load because they reflect in the day, but they insulate day
and night. It's not magic, it's just calculation.
Of course, I am
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 4:20 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/12/2015 7:02 PM, LizR wrote:
Brent, that link doesn't work for me - did you miss something off the end?
Oops! Shoulda been:
Aha, that's more like it. Now I just need something by The Smiths to get me
in the right mood...
On 13 May 2015 at 21:36, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 4:20 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/12/2015 7:02 PM, LizR wrote:
Brent, that link
On 5/13/2015 2:30 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
I am still worried about the reliability of the temperature values
themselves. I
would be less worried if the raw data was made public.
It is public. But what good does that do.
Well it does good, at least for people like me. So
I disagree. I think this criticisms comes from a misinterpretation of what
the p-value means. The p-value estimates the probability of seeing results
at least as helpful to the hypothesis as the ones found, assuming the null
hypothesis. A high p-value is informative because it tells us that
On 5/12/2015 12:33 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
I disagree. I think this criticisms comes from a misinterpretation of what
the
p-value means. The p-value estimates the probability of seeing results at
least as
helpful to the hypothesis as the ones found, assuming the null
With climate change and cures for cancer you need statistics, because
there are no such laws in these fields. There is no equation where you can
plug-in a CO2 concentration and get a correct prediction on global
temperature change.
There's a law where you can plug in atmospheric
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
With climate change and cures for cancer you need statistics
Telmo,
some long long time ago I was facetious about the climate change (lately I
got more converted)
and asked: how was the study of a substantial climate change established -
say - over the past
30b years? - I meant: ALL of them? How was it for 'other' galaxies - star
systems?
I just did not
On 5/12/2015 7:02 PM, LizR wrote:
Brent, that link doesn't work for me - did you miss something off the end?
Oops! Shoulda been:
http://www.polygon.com/features/2015/4/13/8371781/homesick-is-a-fantasy-walkabout-in-a-scary-lonely-world
Brent
--
You received this message because you are
Brent, that link doesn't work for me - did you miss something off the end?
On 13 May 2015 at 09:53, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/12/2015 4:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 May 2015, at 00:43, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/4/2015 11:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at
On 12 May 2015 at 21:53, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Yes, and there's geophysical phenomena to include-in, like the recently
discovered active volcano's under antarctic ice. Melt's the underside of
the ice shelf, while the top side has expanded.
, May 12, 2015 12:22 PM
*Subject:* Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
With climate change and cures for cancer you need statistics, because there
are no
such laws in these fields. There is no equation where you can plug-in a CO2
concentration and get a correct
On 5/12/2015 4:52 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 05 May 2015, at 00:43, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/4/2015 11:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 10:23, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com mailto:lizj...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at
On 5/12/2015 12:22 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
With climate change and cures for cancer you need statistics, because there
are no
such laws in these fields. There is no equation where you can plug-in a CO2
concentration and get a correct prediction on global temperature change.
On 05 May 2015, at 00:43, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/4/2015 11:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 10:23, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
wrote:
Of course believing
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 9:08 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom
On 05 May 2015, at 02:01, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/4/2015 11:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 15:08, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom and you
, 2015 5:55 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
I believe satellites and weather stations give a lot of samples of atmospheric
temperature (and other properties, I assume). Why is it hard to believe that we
can make an estimate of mean global temperatures based
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 11:55 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe satellites and weather stations give a lot of samples of
atmospheric temperature (and other properties, I assume).
Yes, I am not questioning these readings. I believe that 2010 was warmer
than any year in the previous
Have you read the weathergate mails? There you can see how the measures
and the adjustments are done. taking into account that they
systematically DENIED TO GIVE THE RAW DATA, the only thing that they
demonstrate is a parapsychological power of so called scientists to
influence the past depending
On 11 May 2015 at 19:40, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 11:55 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe satellites and weather stations give a lot of samples of
atmospheric temperature (and other properties, I assume).
Yes, I am not questioning
I believe satellites and weather stations give a lot of samples of
atmospheric temperature (and other properties, I assume). Why is it hard to
believe that we can make an estimate of mean global temperatures based on
such measurements plus observations of phenomena like shoreline erosion,
glacier
On 5/10/2015 2:55 PM, LizR wrote:
I believe satellites and weather stations give a lot of samples of atmospheric
temperature (and other properties, I assume). Why is it hard to believe that we can make
an estimate of mean global temperatures based on such measurements plus observations of
.
-Original Message-
From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com agocor...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, May 9, 2015 5:10 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
The fiddling with temperature
.
-Original Message-
From: Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, May 9, 2015 5:10 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
http
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
There is no dictatorship that can not be erected upon lies and violence.
And this one that comes is the worst of all history
2015-05-09 11:09 GMT+02:00 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com:
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, May 9, 2015 5:10 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
The fiddling with temperature data is the biggest science scandal ever
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth
politicians. It's
a mafia, Liz. And, no benefit to the public, no new tech ever gets to Market.
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, May 7, 2015 10:53 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:47 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
So all these hottest years on record we keep getting are made up?
Just curious.
Admittedly this is from 2010, maybe the trend has reversed in last 5 years?
How long is the record? What is the p-value for the hypothesis of
: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On 8 May 2015 at 15:14, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Better yet, assume some of its true, and move to solar. The only way to move to
solar is to create superb storage technology
exaggeration, savy??
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, May 7, 2015 05:47 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_1.2_5331f2a3-d522-4a14
On 8 May 2015 at 11:59, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Color me deeply suspicious. A engineer named Vannevar Bush said, the
validity of a science was its ability to predict. Bush also thought that
guided missiles carrying hydrogen bombs were decades
So all these hottest years on record we keep getting are made up?
Just curious.
Admittedly this is from 2010, maybe the trend has reversed in last 5 years?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and
becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On 6 May 2015 at 14:34, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Much of the nobel committees even for physics and chemistry seem biased, and
subjective. Templeton, is for scientists with intellectual
@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, May 7, 2015 06:09 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_1.2_600d12ce-8204-4df7-a753-465ec05eb76f
div dir=ltr
LizR:
div
My 1st impact to the 'global warming' fable' (1960-80) was:
My termperature-records
On 8 May 2015 at 15:14, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Better yet, assume some of its true, and move to solar. The only way to
move to solar is to create superb storage technology, for night and winter
times. Otherwise solar fails. Any demands for
Let's say I have no objection to anything technical done to remediate AGW
except regulation aka serfdom.
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, May 7, 2015 9:40 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical
On 8 May 2015 at 13:51, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Let's say I have no objection to anything technical done to remediate AGW
except regulation aka serfdom.
So you wouldn't be in favour of the government providing subsidies to help
renewable or
LizR:
My 1st impact to the 'global warming' fable' (1960-80) was:
My termperature-records are incomplete about the years 30 million
(billion???) years ago so I cannot formulate an objective opinion. Later on
changed position, because of human industrial
activities contributing to technological
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 10:23, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Of course believing in the
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 5:59 PM, PGC multiplecit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:03:50 PM UTC+2, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Alberto G. Corona agoc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that even
mean?
Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 9:08 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
I sure
On 6 May 2015 at 14:34, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Much of the nobel committees even for physics and chemistry seem biased,
and subjective. Templeton, is for scientists with intellectual and
spiritual leanings, Nobel is best left to academic
.
-Original Message-
From: LizR lizj...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 10:08 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On 5 May 2015 at 12:01, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote
On 6 May 2015 at 13:49, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Respectability? You must mean what a majority or a self appointed peer
group like in Oslo decide what is acceptable. By the way, how's those 100
degree Fahrenheit summers you have been having for
: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
div id=AOLMsgPart_2_5e8b2376-c552-4025-af5c-bcfc6a3097a8
div dir=ltr
div class=aolmail_gmail_extra
div class=aolmail_gmail_quote
On 6 May 2015 at 13:49, spudboy100 via Everything List
span dir=ltra target=_blank
href=mailto:everything
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
Hi spudboy,
I follow Ben Goetzel and have some of the books he recommends on the
topic on my to-read list.
I remain agnostic on this stuff, and just try to consider the simplest
explanation, even if it's boring. In the case
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that even
mean? If, for example, ghosts were real, then this would just mean that
current
That looks like a game I wouldn't play even if I played computer games...!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Everything List group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
not come back with
information.
-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 4:19 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 9
a nobel prize or even any sort of recognition.
-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 4:19 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 9
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that even
mean? If, for example, ghosts were real, then this would just mean that
current scientific theories are incomplete or wrong.
So what?
--
Alberto.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
anything concerning Ben Goetzel's views.
Thanks.
Mitch
-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 9:08 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Mon
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com
wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that even
mean? If, for example, ghosts were real, then this would just mean that
current scientific theories are incomplete or wrong.
So what?
No
On Monday, May 4, 2015 at 4:03:50 PM UTC+2, telmo_menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Alberto G. Corona agoc...@gmail.com
javascript: wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that even
mean? If, for example, ghosts were real, then this would just
On 5/4/2015 1:23 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Totally agree, Telmo, regarding communication. On the Bostrom concept of
Sims and, by extension, our reality being a sim, I like the concept, but in
a way, it seems too simple, Rather than life
everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 4:19 am
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism!
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 9:19 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
wrote:
Hi Telmo,
I have tried the Other Side stuff for a bit, and found
On 04 May 2015, at 10:23, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that
even mean? If, for example, ghosts were
, as you can tell gave birth to his Promotion theory.
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 05:47 PM
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism
On 5 May 2015 at 12:01, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/4/2015 11:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 15:08, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the
On 5/4/2015 7:08 PM, LizR wrote:
On 5 May 2015 at 12:01, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net
mailto:meeke...@verizon.net wrote:
On 5/4/2015 11:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 15:08, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
this fix, but I am tweaking his work to suit
myself and emotions.
-Original Message-
From: Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, May 4, 2015 2:15 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism
On 5/4/2015 11:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 15:08, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
I sure did, Telmo. Scroll to the bottom and you
On 5/4/2015 11:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 04 May 2015, at 10:23, Telmo Menezes wrote:
On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 10:08 PM, LizR lizj...@gmail.com
mailto:lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
mailto:te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, spudboy100 via Everything List
everything-list@googlegroups.com wrote:
Stathis, probably, Steinhart would agree with you regarding revision, for
me, with the loss of contiguous identity, the succeeding person is merely a
clone, as if you could magically clone a person
Spooky!
On 3 May 2015 at 12:03, LizR lizj...@gmail.com wrote:
Michael Shermer is the publisher of Skeptic magazine, which I used to
subscribe to - but I could only take so many debunkings, lectures on
science, and so on, and eventually I cancelled the sub, reasonably well
convinced that I
On 4 May 2015 at 06:45, Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com wrote:
Of course believing in the supernatural is absurd -- what does that even
mean? If, for example, ghosts were real, then this would just mean that
current scientific theories are incomplete or wrong.
That would just mean the
If you know of Ben Goetzel, and Damien Broderick, as well as Eric Steinhart,
they have claimed Psi experiences, or spiritual experiences, but are split on
the true significance? At the end of the day, it either works for us, or it
doesn't.
-Original Message-
From: LizR
of months ago. Any data or opinion on
Goetzel's view on all this?
Mitch
-Original Message-
From: Telmo Menezes te...@telmomenezes.com
To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, May 3, 2015 2:45 pm
Subject: Re: Michael Shermer becomes sceptical about scepticism
Hi spudboy,
I follow Ben Goetzel and have some of the books he recommends on the topic
on my to-read list.
I remain agnostic on this stuff, and just try to consider the simplest
explanation, even if it's boring. In the case of this story, this sounds a
lot like the event was staged by some nice
97 matches
Mail list logo
