Jump to content
  • Sign Up
Delano

The Science Delusion

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, zaji said:

 

In different terms, I have dissected and discussed all the dogmas he's mentioned.

 

I have too and my experiences have provided different results.  This one in going into my consciousness file... thank you @Delano

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not listened to this yet, but I'm sure TED pulled the video for a reason.  Sometimes people say things that are just wrong and I suspect TED was trying stop the dissemination of  bad information.  Unfortunately once something has been published it never goes away...

 

TED does not seem to be in the business of censorship, indeed just the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the point it is censorship. Scientists are overwhelmingly atheist and a bit smugly so. The scientific approach in religion  would be agnostic.

Also certain fields like religion , the occult and consciousness don't lend themselves to statistical analysis and science can't credibly discuss them. You studied astrology and came to a conclusion. Scientists find it contemptible because they have no theory to explain how it could work. 

Edited by Delano
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Delano said:

That's the point it is censorship.

 

@Delano , It was censorship.  In this instance he used science to stymie a group of scientists.  Instead of determining why the speed of light fluctuates they twisted themselves into knots to basically make excuses for what they couldn't explain.  That's not science,  far from it.  If scientists closed ranks to decide measurements on what is observable then that's dogma. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes @Delano and @Mel Hopkins. Anytime you are not allowed to make a scientific inquiry about a conclusion (basically ask questions about why a thing has seemingly changed), it is censorship. If I, a lay person, is not allowed to ask a scientist about their conclusions on what they've observed, that is censorship. All science should be transparent so that any human on Earth, if they decided to, could conduct the experiment and reach the same outcomes...then, be allowed to come to their own conclusions about the outcome.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, zaji said:

All science should be transparent so that any human on Earth, if they decided to, could conduct the experiment and reach the same outcomes...then, be allowed to come to their own conclusions about the outcome.

 

@zajiYes!!!   As a writers we know this because we have to show our work...If we seem to jump to a conclusion we at least have to offer how we made the leap. 

So you mean something as fundamental as a measurement can be fudged?   Actually, that video made me throw up in my mouth a little.  Even in part of the 3-hour roundtable discussion he sticks it to the mathematicians.  When my daughters were in high school and college, I told them not to be afraid of math is not difficult.  it's simply another language like French.   Doggone if this dude just proved me right lol.   I'm his newest fan girl lol
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Delano said:

 

@Delano  you know I was all over that website  this morning LOL!

 

You probably won't believe I but I wrote about this before ever hearing about Sheldrake... my 3000 + word essay is called "God left the box, last night" and it talks about how science and religion attempt to have us believe in an unchanging god - so that we can forget our own true nature... I wrote and wrote but didn't finish it because I scared myself.   I couldn;t figure out how I knew what I did without ever learning it... now I understand how I can know it.  If one of us knows it we all know it. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mel Hopkins said:

 

...you know I was all over that website  this morning LOL!

 

You probably won't believe I but I wrote about this before ever hearing about Sheldrake... my 3000 + word essay is called "God left the box, last night" and it talks about how science and religion attempt to have us believe in an unchanging god - so that we can forget our own true nature... I wrote and wrote but didn't finish it because I scared myself.   I couldn;t figure out how I knew what I did without ever learning it... now I understand how I can know it.  If one of us knows it we all know it. 

 

My experiences all day, everyday. No clue how I know some things. I will say or write something that I've never read anywhere, then go look it up to see if anyone has thought about it. I will sometimes find conversations on the topic (very few), but I've reached a point where many things that are coming to me, no one is discussing. When I put the question or idea to others who have never heard it before, they look at me like dear in headlights. Then the "WOOOOW, I never thought of that. That's deep!" invariably comes. LOL. Next, comes the idea beginning to surface. It's all very interesting. 

 

When my sister died, I cut myself off from it all because I didn't want to know anything anymore. Many things stopped coming, not all. It is only recently since I've been opening up again that things are beginning to flood in. Strange yet familiar feeling.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, zaji said:

When my sister died, I cut myself off from it all because I didn't want to know anything anymore

 

@zaji , I'm sorry for the loss of your sister. <3   Yes, a loss of a loved one  will close us up tightly!  In fact, loss of love seems to get us tangled in veils of darkness  I believe that's how lower vibrations work - it takes away our innocence, our connection to ALL - so we can't "see", "hear" but mostly "feel".  I think that's another reason why non-attachment is so necessary but at the same time, It's difficult to let go loved ones.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished listening to the lecture which i found very compelling, and all of your comments were even more so.  i agree that everything can and should be questioned.  The idea that time brings change is not hard to accept.

 

There are those who  offer a metaphysical concept claiming:  "as above, so below", which posits that the answer to everything is above, just waiting to be channeled from this higher realm by those below whose minds will process the question into an answer.  But, frankly, the whole subject boggles my mind. 

 

i do believe that we inexplicably know things that we've never been taught. One of the caveats that i recently posted said: "He who knows and knows not that he knows, is asleep. Wake him! 

 

  We are all on a journey, seeking answers which require an open mind.

wisdom of Buddha.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm gonna go, grab a glass of wine, plop myself in front of a big screen and watch this video Good night y'all

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Cynique said:

Just finished listening to the lecture which i found very compelling, and all of your comments were even more so.  i agree that everything can and should be questioned.  The idea that time brings change is not hard to accept.

 

There are those who  offer a metaphysical concept claiming:  "as above, so below", which posits that the answer to everything is above, just waiting to be channeled from this higher realm by those below whose minds will process the question into an answer.  But, frankly, the whole subject boggles my mind. 

 

i do believe that we inexplicably know things that we've never been taught. One of the caveats that i recently posted said: "He who knows and knows not that he knows, is asleep. Wake him! 

 

  We are all on a journey, seeking answers which require an open mind.

wisdom of Buddha.jpg

When I was ready my astrology  teacher was looking for a student. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The video was interesting.  It does not seem like it would be something that TED would ban.  Do we actually know this to be the case?  I would put it past someone to repost a video and claim that is was banned to get more video to make more money.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Troy said:

The video was interesting.  It does not seem like it would be something that TED would ban.  Do we actually know this to be the case?  I would put it past someone to repost a video and claim that is was banned to get more video to make more money.

 

 

 

You can verify this simply by going to Ted. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, save me the effort. If you know why TED banned the video just relate reason why and/or post a link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Delano said:

You can verify this simply by going to Ted. 

 

@Delano

 

I hunted down the details and found them after I watched the video. I am all about verifying anything stated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Troy said:

Please, save me the effort. If you know why TED banned the video just relate reason why and/or post a link.

Because I think you should make up your own mind after reading the evidence.  Plus I am not a executive reader 

10 hours ago, Troy said:

Please, save me the effort. If you know why TED banned the video just relate reason why and/or post a link.

Because I think you should make up your own mind after reading the evidence.  Plus I am not a executive reader 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So @Delano  when you read something written by someone else, you call that thinking for oneself.  But if I think for myself and give you a conclusion you tell me to look over here or there.  This is inconsistent.

 

But I do agree with the idea of seeking information from other more knowledgeable from others, for no one who reasonable thinks completely for themselves as you often advise me to do.  Knowledge expands because it builds upon prior knowledge. 

 

But, given the set of things  have to do, I really do not care if the TED video was banned or not, at least not so much as to spend the time to do the research (I'd rather use the time to express this sentiment).

 

But if you don't want to share why TED banned the video this is completely up to you and has nothing to do with me as your response seems to imply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you dont care to spend the time yo find out why ask me to spend my time. 

9 minutes ago, Troy said:

So @Delano  when you read something written by someone else, you call that thinking for oneself.  But if I think for myself and give you a conclusion you tell me to look over here or there.  This is inconsistent.

 

What you have written isn't very clear to me. If you have the time or the interest you may want to proofread your post. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Delano said:

Cool I am all about people thinking for themselves. 

 

I was crowned Queen of Think-For-Self. LOL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about the pot calling the kettle Black! @Delano of all the posters on this forum, I believe yours are the most riddled with typos. 

 

It would be more productive to relate specifically what was unclear and ask for clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy I believe you said  that you either don't have time or don't care to edit your post. 

 

I had a few people comment that my post were sometimes unreadable. That was two  years ago. 

 

In addition to not being your executive reader I am not your secretary. If you have neither the time nor inclination to be clear that's fine. 

 

It's is better for you, if I say what isn't clear. It is better for you and the forum if you were clearer. 

 

I guess it's more effecient to listen to a clip than to lookup up the info or even click the link about the author. Which didn't seem to be a problem for other people. 

 

I use to have a lot of typos and be  a bit more cryptic. I have upgraded, I proof , post definitions and  the etymological roots of words . I am also a bit more stringent in word usage and meaning. Now this doesn't mean that anyone has to take my definition but it does create a basis for understating. Or not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

{Very deep sigh} @Delano you expect perfection in others but you constantly fail to do exhibit this yourself.  Your last post contains errors, for example what does this sentence, which you wrote, mean ("I use to have a lot of typos and be  a bit more cryptic.")? Don't answer the question; it was rhetorical.

 

I guess I get the gish in what you write most of the time, and only query when I'm really don't understand. However, I would never have pointed your many typos previously, but if you are going to slam me on this issue you should be aware of it in yourself.  

 

Dude, of course you are not my secretary. We all share information here and provide supporting documentation to enlighten others. I just don't have the time to track down supporting information for every relatively inconsequential assertion you make.  So if you want to explain why TED banned the video it is up to you, but by not providing a simple explanation you should appreciate you cast doubt on the statement.  But again I don't care that much.

 

I do however care about our ability to communicate and exchange ideas, which is why I spend time with these replies. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Troy said:

I just don't have the time to track down supporting information for every relatively inconsequential assertion you make.  So if you want to explain why TED banned the video it is up to you, but by not providing a simple explanation you should appreciate you cast doubt on the statement.  But again I don't care that much.

My encouraging you to look it up doesn't cast doubt on my statement. You may not be aware but the above statement makes it sound like I work for you. It is clear that you don't care that much . Therefore I will expend the same amount of energy .

2 hours ago, Troy said:

{Very deep sigh} @Delano you expect perfection in others but you constantly fail to do exhibit this yourself.  Your last post contains errors, for example what does this sentence, which you wrote, mean ("I use to have a lot of typos and be  a bit more cryptic.")? Don't answer the question; it was rhetorical.

No problem bro.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the reason behind TED's banning a video is not a issue that is very important to either of us.  It's only purpose seems to be helping us work through the challenges of communication.

 

I'm not sure why you take it as if I treating you like an employee.  There have been many times you and I have both exchanged information on climate change, for example, to support a point. Why the unwillingness to share sources now?  Again, it make gives me the impression the that information simply does not exist.

 

Recently, Pioneer asked me to support a statement I made on the fiction of race.  I refused to do it and asked him to research it himself. The only reason I took the same position position you have taken with the TED video is that I'd previously provided volumes of information to support my argument, information that was either ignored, rejected, or not understood by Pioneer.  In any event, repeating the process seemed to be a waste of time to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should I spend my time when it isn't that important to you? Or why ask me to do something you can do for  yourself. Because it saves you time by me doing the leg work. Which sounds like I am your secretary or executive assistant .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

@Delano 

 

I went back to double check your original post (to make sure I didn't forget) and I see that you actually did not make the assertion that the video was banned. The video title made that assertion, which is why i went to research it on my own and had no need to challenge you or ask you to explain anything. 

 

Thanks again for sharing the video!!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Troy said:

I guess the reason behind TED's banning a video is not a issue that is very important to either of us. 

It isn't important enough for you to check. It was important enough that I supplied a link and encouragement. 

Not certain why you think our positions are  similar. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original subject of science as dogma,  one of the guest on Dr Oz's show today was a physician, who after considerable research declared that contrary to the medical's community's dogma, salt is not as "poisonous" as they claim it to be.  He said salt-free diets do as much harm as good, and salt substitutes are the real poison.  He further contended that salt is a necessary valuable nutrient, an electrolyte which reduces dehydration from fluid loss. He stated further that it is a generalization to assert that everybody is affected by salt the same way, and the idea that salt exacerbates such diseases as high blood pressure and diabetes depends on a person's metabolism because salt can actually help in deterring these diseases.  He went on to say said that sugar is the real culprit and that salt neutralizes a craving for sugar.  He concluded by saying that  salting to one's taste is not harmful.  Dr. Oz, who is a heart surgeon, acknowledged that he raised valid points but that his claims were controversial and not likely to gain wide-spread acceptance in the near future.  I agree. 

 

Nevertheless, i have been a "saltoholic" all my life  and have never taken any medical advice to cut my salt intake.  i always believed that my body craved salt because it needed it, not to mention that salt makes food taste sooo much better.   As far as i can tell, my liberal use of salt has had no major effect on my health and i've outlived a many friends and relatives who avoided salt.  I don't have a rabid sweet tooth, and i've never used sugar substitutes, so i agree that it just depends on our metabolism and our genes.  We know our bodies better than anyone, and at my age, eating whatever i like to eat, is one of the few pleasure i have left in life, which means i still eat red meat as well as pork, and soul food with all of its calories and cholesterol, is never something pass up.  i gave up smoking because cigarettes cost too much, but i drink when when liquor is available at any social gathering i attend.  i  pop pills that include all kinds of "over-the-counter" supplements, like gingko biloba, fish oil, aspirin, garlic caps, ginger root, and have just recently added magnesium and potassium tablets to the mix, with good results.    

 

i know nobody cares about my health regimen, but if i make it to 85 in August, i can attribute my longevity to being the poster girl for taking medical dogma with a grain of salt.  If i drop dead tomorrow, i will become the "salt of the earth".  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@zaji?!  @Delano made it perfectly clear that the video was banned and accused TED of censorship -- why is this even questioned? 

 

Del you provided a link? Where is it cause I obviously missed it.

 

1 hour ago, Cynique said:

If i drop dead tomorrow, i will become the "salt of the earth".  

 

You are always good for a laugh :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Troy said:

@zaji?!  @Delano made it perfectly clear that the video was banned and accused TED of censorship -- why is this even questioned? 

Troy you are the first person to mention it was banned. I posted it but I didn't mention it was banned. I also stated I hadn't watched it yet. 

@Troy Zahir and Mel both commented on the link. So it should be pretty easy to find. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Troy. Actually, it seemed he was merely repeating the title of the video itself (but much later). When I first saw the post, I watched the video immediately and saw the title where it said it was banned. At that point, he had made no comment on whether it was banned. He didn't need to. The title of the video itself said it all. So I went about looking it up to see if it was banned and found the information about it being taken down on TED's own website. I did that research on my own. AFTER I read the information on TED's website about them banning it (or as they put it, removal from the main area), I saw him begin noting that it was censorship. At least for me, he did not state it was censorship PRIOR to ME finding the information on my own on TED's website. Once again, I researched because of the title of the video, NOT because of anything @Delano wrote.

Edited by zaji
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for clarifying that, Zaji. @Troy is that clear to you now.

On 16/02/2018 at 8:32 AM, Mel Hopkins said:

You probably won't believe I but I wrote about this before ever hearing about Sheldrake...

I would believe it that's your modus operandi. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Del because it completely ignores my request. And I not following Zaji's reasoning at all.  I wrote:

 

On 2/15/2018 at 2:07 PM, Troy said:

TED does not seem to be in the business of censorship, indeed just the opposite.

 

To which you responded:

 

On 2/15/2018 at 3:04 PM, Delano said:

That's the point it is censorship.

 

All I was asking for was a source that explains why TED banned the video; which is why Del called it censorship.  I presume, if in fact TED banned the video, there was a good reason for it. Why is this so hard to understand?

 

@zaji, would you care to share your source; since you already found the answer; it is just a matter of copying and pasting a URL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×