Scientists are causing Creationism (and the like)!

[Solitary]

Ask 100 patients with Near Death Experience what they saw of hidden stuff behind boxes, furniture etc. while they were unconcsious and dying (or dead) after they've been ressucitated, and compare the results. If there are enough people to actually report the accurate precise positions of the hidden stuff, that they couldn't possibly know of, conduct the experiment again. And again. This time with 200, then 500, then 1000.

But even though the scientists promissed to do so, nobody has wanted to actually start the project yet.

I wonder why.

That's not true at all, and one doesn't have to be a scientists to do that. I worked in an emergency room and operating rooms where there were messages written on top of short walls. Every single person that had an OB experience while floating near the ceiling could ever give the correct answer to what was written. James Randy himself had one and was convinced it was real when he saw himself in bed with his cat while floating around the ceiling until his friends showed him it was impossible because the cat had been locked up on the porch. Neurologist are able to stimulate the brain and cause OB's. What's that tell you?  :roll: Solitary

[mediumaevum]

Ask 100 patients with Near Death Experience what they saw of hidden stuff behind boxes, furniture etc. while they were unconcsious and dying (or dead) after they've been ressucitated, and compare the results. If there are enough people to actually report the accurate precise positions of the hidden stuff, that they couldn't possibly know of, conduct the experiment again. And again. This time with 200, then 500, then 1000.

But even though the scientists promissed to do so, nobody has wanted to actually start the project yet.

I wonder why.

That's not true at all, and one doesn't have to be a scientists to do that. I worked in an emergency room and operating rooms where there were messages written on top of short walls. Every single person that had an OB experience while floating near the ceiling could ever give the correct answer to what was written. James Randy himself had one and was convinced it was real when he saw himself in bed with his cat while floating around the ceiling until his friends showed him it was impossible because the cat had been locked up on the porch. Neurologist are able to stimulate the brain and cause OB's. What's that tell you?  :roll: Solitary

The I guess the experiment has already been done.

Thank you.

[Mermaid]

Oh wow, how did I miss this thread?
I am so sorry to have not done my part to educate the public. This is ALL MY FAULT.

[josephpalazzo]

Oh wow, how did I miss this thread?
I am so sorry to have not done my part to educate the public. This is ALL MY FAULT.

We should throw you behind bars, and throw away the keys.

 :P

[Smartmarzipan]

Question:
Why did it take a whole thread of prejudice, hatred and name-calling to figure out that such a comment that you just made, was the only neccessary to counter my Original Post?

Why?

Do people here just love to ridicule people, instead of going straight forward to the answer, with link, source citation and propper information?

Someones in denial.

It seems to me that authors of scientific journals are simply too lazy.

My EXACT thought. Lmao  :rollin:

I'll tell you who's lazy, but it ain't the authors and scientists....

[Colanth]

But frankly, I don't like being spoken to the way you folks do it in here.

Adults who speak to children as if they're adults are only fooling themselves.  If you want to be spoken to about science as someone who understands science, first learn science.  If you don't, and you speak to people who do, they'll speak to you as if you can't understand what they're talking about.

Yes, we understand that children don't like being treated like children, but people who deal in reality DO treat children as if they're children - whether the children like it or not.  If the child-minded politicians want to keep throwing tantrums about it, they'll end up destroying the world - but reality WILL NOT change to fit their beliefs of how it should be.

[Colanth]

Sorry, but I tried the question mark-thing in real life many times in my life, last time towards a teacher about a math problem when I was studying a little math many years ago. Ever since his reply ("You are not ready for this yet!"), I have stated that I would never ever ask a question about science in a "question-way", but make a statement of my own, that other people (scientists) would have to attack by proving me wrong.

Then you're in denial.

Science and math aren't subjects that anyone can fully explain to just anyone who asks.  Most people AREN'T ready for the answer to most questions they ask.  Which is why science isn't done that way.  It's done by education.  By the time you're ready to ask a question, you've put in about 8 years of post-graduate study and years of work under someone who is ready to ask questions.  Until then you can't even understand the question, let alone the answer.  (That means that the question you ask is either incompetent or ludicrous.)

A person without a scientific education who asks for a simple explanation of something in science is like a 3 year old who wants to know the technical reason that the sky "is blue" (it's not) - in a few simple sentences.  He's not intellectually equipped to understand, "the atmosphere refracts red light more than it refracts blue light" - but that's the answer.  A physicist who gives him that answer is foolish.  One who tells him that he's not ready for the answer is telling him about all he's capable of understanding - but it's not a satisfying answer.

That's where you are.  You can't understand the actual answers yet, but being told that you can't doesn't satisfy you, and you're unwilling to put in the time and effort needed for you to understand the answers.

Who's lazy?

[Hijiri Byakuren]

Science and math aren't subjects that anyone can fully explain to just anyone who asks.

So much truth to this. I remember in Introduction to Astronomy, the first thing everyone wanted to know was, "When are we learning about black holes? I want to know about black holes." Toward the end of the quarter, after learning (among other things) about the life cycle of stars, we finally went over black holes. His explanation of what they are and how they work was pretty quick and sounded fairly simple to us at that point, and he capped it off by saying, "Now, aren't you glad we went over all that other stuff first?

[mediumaevum]

Sorry, but I tried the question mark-thing in real life many times in my life, last time towards a teacher about a math problem when I was studying a little math many years ago. Ever since his reply ("You are not ready for this yet!"), I have stated that I would never ever ask a question about science in a "question-way", but make a statement of my own, that other people (scientists) would have to attack by proving me wrong.

Then you're in denial.

Science and math aren't subjects that anyone can fully explain to just anyone who asks.  Most people AREN'T ready for the answer to most questions they ask.  Which is why science isn't done that way.  It's done by education.  By the time you're ready to ask a question, you've put in about 8 years of post-graduate study and years of work under someone who is ready to ask questions.  Until then you can't even understand the question, let alone the answer.  (That means that the question you ask is either incompetent or ludicrous.)

A person without a scientific education who asks for a simple explanation of something in science is like a 3 year old who wants to know the technical reason that the sky "is blue" (it's not) - in a few simple sentences.  He's not intellectually equipped to understand, "the atmosphere refracts red light more than it refracts blue light" - but that's the answer.  A physicist who gives him that answer is foolish.  One who tells him that he's not ready for the answer is telling him about all he's capable of understanding - but it's not a satisfying answer.

That's where you are.  You can't understand the actual answers yet, but being told that you can't doesn't satisfy you, and you're unwilling to put in the time and effort needed for you to understand the answers.

Who's lazy?

I was, in fact, capable of understanding why the sky "is blue", at the age of 5-8.

I understood the basic principles behind taxation and why we need it to have our society running - at the age of 4!

I fully understood the need for waging war against countries to keep peace - before the age of 10.

With an intellectual capacity enough to understand politics at an early age, I do not understand why that is not enough to learn natural sciences.
If I can do so, and I have a normal intelligence, everyone else should be able to do so too.

The problem with other people is that they just are too lazy to sit down and spend some time with their kids explaining them how society and nature works.
They are too busy with other stuff. Thats the problem. Not the people who want to learn something!

The reason I never got an education is manyfolds. First of all, it is because I have difficulties socializing.

[Icarus]

The reason I never got an education is manyfolds. First of all, it is because I have difficulties socializing.

You and most science students, the only difference is it doesn't prevent them from following their passion.

[josephpalazzo]

I was, in fact, capable of understanding why the sky "is blue", at the age of 5-8.

I understood the basic principles behind taxation and why we need it to have our society running - at the age of 4!

I fully understood the need for waging war against countries to keep peace - before the age of 10.

With an intellectual capacity enough to understand politics at an early age, I do not understand why that is not enough to learn natural sciences.
If I can do so, and I have a normal intelligence, everyone else should be able to do so too.

The problem with other people is that they just are too lazy to sit down and spend some time with their kids explaining them how society and nature works.
They are too busy with other stuff. Thats the problem. Not the people who want to learn something!

The reason I never got an education is manyfolds. First of all, it is because I have difficulties socializing.

You seem to be a clever kid and interested in the subject of NDE and OBE. However, not having the credentials, it will be difficult for you to assess anything that you read, whether from the net or from traditional sources like journals, magazines or books. There are two major branches that you can look into: 1) those people who research brain activities in NDE and OBE, 2) those who study the content of what people see or experienced during NDE and OBE.

You also need to understand how scientific research takes place - something you don't seem to have a clue. Were you a student studying any branch of science, you would need to get a PhD (6 years), then do a postdoc (3-6 years), during which you would need to publish your research in peer-review journals, and then get tenure (5 years) at some university, during which you need to secure grants to conduct whatever project you have in mind. This is a long process, and there is no guarantee you will either complete it, or even if you completed it, you will get tenure. Many try, few are selected. You could work in industry but you won't have the freedom as in academic life, as whatever research you will conduct will be dictated by your employer.

Hope this helps.

[Colanth]

I fully understood the need for waging war against countries to keep peace - before the age of 10.

So you probably thought that Hitler caused WWII, right?

(A 10 year old's understanding of why we need war to keep peace is about the same as a 4 year old's understanding of sex - "it means are you a boy or a girl?")

With an intellectual capacity enough to understand politics at an early age, I do not understand why that is not enough to learn natural sciences.

Let's see.  In order to understand evolution you need to understand physics and biochemistry at the level of someone going for a degree in each - say about 3 years of post-secondary education.  That's just to actually understand evolution.  Now to understand abiogenesis, you first have to have a firm grasp of evolution, so the very basis for getting an education in abiogenesis is an education in evolution.

That's why "scientists" can't explain things like why science sees no need to study the supernatural to someone who has no more than a high school education, or got a degree in theology or "metaphysics".

If I can do so, and I have a normal intelligence, everyone else should be able to do so too.

You have enough understanding to think that you understand science.  From your comments here, it's plain to those who do understand science that your "understanding" is at a VERY basic level.  Not at all enough understanding to actually understand things like protein folding or why the concept of "species" can't be applied to prokaryotes.  And those are the equivalent of the kindergarten of science.

The problem with other people is that they just are too lazy to sit down and spend some time with their kids explaining them how society and nature works.

The problem with most people is that while they pretty well understand what they need in life, bookkeeping, airplane piloting, deep sea diving, whatever they do, life's just too short for them to spend the time and effort to learn everything else.

They are too busy with other stuff. Thats the problem.

It's not a problem, unless you'd rather live in a cave and use a sharpened stick to get your protein.  Life was simple enough then that most people could become expert at everything humans needed to know.

The real problems are that 1) people won't accept things they don't understand and, 2) most people think that they have some sort of "right" to be given some sort of "understanding" of anything they choose to understand. Like an "education pill".  The scientists are "holding out on them" by not explaining extremely complex things to them in a simple enough manner for them to understand them fully.  "Why should only scientists know about this?"  Scientists aren't keeping secrets - everyone is free to spend as much time and effort as the scientist who understands something in order to understand it themselves.

Maybe the real problem is that most people think that science is something so simple that scientists just go into the lab in the morning and discover something - without having put in 25 years of research before they could make the discovery.  That the scientist spent his entire life getting to the point that, now when his few remaining hairs are snow white, he made this enormous discovery.

Not the people who want to learn something!

The people who really want to learn don't post "why are they keeping this from me?" on the internet, they go out and learn it.

The reason I never got an education is manyfolds. First of all, it is because I have difficulties socializing.

That's funny, very funny.  MOST of the people who invent things, make discoveries, etc., didn't spend 4 years in the pub emptying pitchers of beer, they spent 12 years in a library or lab, alone, learning.  Really dedicated scientists are, in my experience, very poor at socializing.  Maybe that's why they turn to science - I don't know.  But Hawking said that the reason he learned so much is that since he couldn't do much physically, he thought a lot.  Einstein wasn't a social butterfly either.

[Smartmarzipan]

Stop blaming every thing and everyone else for what's wrong. Excuses, excuses.

"Scientists are to blame for creationists."

"Everyone is mean and irrational, and that's why they pick on me."

"I can't socialize with others."

"Lazy people are the problem, not me."

I don't much care for you, but I feel kind of bad for you, too. Based on your posts, I see a person who likes to place blame instead of just dealing with things. And maybe it's because you don't want to face the problem...it's you.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I have many books written by universities, and virtually all their sources only state the respective authors. While I do know where some of the actual sources are refered to in the end (ie. which books, articles etc.) it is an irritating problem that persists: That I have to Google the authors and spend time finding the specific books or articles.

It seems to me that authors of scientific journals are simply too lazy.

And lastly, I'd kindly ask that you don't call me stupid. I wasn't expecting that kind of retoric on an intellectual forum like this...

The fuck?

Hey man, speaking as someone who has been in academia for the best part of a decade doing various degrees on the way to completing my PhD (one day!), I'll say that you've missed the point entirely.

What, you want an author to quote, line for line, EVERYTHING they cite in an article (which may just be a page long with text and a couple more pages after that outlining experimental data and results) just becase you can't be bothered to examine further the texts they cite?

I agree, that journals should be free access and authors should be able to publish their material to free access peer reviewed journals. But that's not the same as saying "spoon feed me man!"

Fuck, we have better things to do, like doing more research and contributing to greater disucssion on topics, than spoon feed people who can't be bothered to help themselves.

Oh, but you see, it's the people spending their lifetime doing the research. They're the lazy ones. :-| Jog on son.