IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Ooh! Me next!

First up:

\r\n\r\n

If reality is defined by consciousness, where was all the reality before us conscious slugs of carbon came along to observe it? How did we get to be real without being observed? Whose wave-form collapsed first, the chicken's or the egg's?

\r\n\r\n

Difficulty: no Berkelian cop-out; God's got better things to do with His time than observe a tree in the courtyard just so it can keep existing when everyone's down at the pub.

\r\n\r\n\r\n

Second:

\r\n\r\n

So quantum mechanics could explain action at a distance, all sorts of psychic phenomena. Fine, good, except at the moment there's no evidence that there are any psychic phenomena to explain. Nobody has yet managed to put James Randi's money where his mouth is. Solution in search of a problem, maybe?

\r\n\r\n

Difficulty: hire professional magicians, preferably stage folk and mentalists, to come along and conduct test observations of any claimed paranormal phenomena. Let me know when you find something they can't explain using the standard tricks of their business.

\r\n\r\n

Third:

\r\n\r\n

Johns Hopkins psychiatrist Patricia Newton explains the mechanism: "(Traditional healers) are able to tap that other realm of negative entropy - that superquantum velocity and frequency of electromagnetic energy and bring them as conduits down to our level. It's not magic. It's not mumbo jumbo. You will see the dawn of the 21st century, the new medical quantum physics really distributing these energies and what they are doing"

\r\n\r\n

Tell me what the heck the "negative entropy" and "superquantum velocity" and such are. Because it sure sounds to me like a quack hiding behind big trendy buzzwords. It's "(a+b^n)/n = x, therefore God exists" in new clothing.

\r\n\r\n

Final potshot: author of linked article admits just how much BS there is in this stuff.

\r\n\r\n

Respond!

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
New Re: Ooh! Me next!
First up:

If reality is defined by consciousness, where was all the reality before us conscious slugs of carbon came along to observe it? How did we get to be real without being observed? Whose wave-form collapsed first, the chicken's or the egg's?


AH, it's Reality which you'd like presented, perhaps as MAN-Reality?
Ummm.. "Get Real". Who (ever) said that reality is defined by consciousness -?- Surely Not I.

I'm going to stop with #1, because see.. I was here for The. Religion. Thread., several venues ago. Most of what can be said (even with Sanskrit fix-packs for common words) has been said. Serious enquiries just don't juxtapose popular slogans, imagining that that rote process will ever get beyond simple-minded mechanical logic.

And who.. ever said that Reality would conform to something so simple that nascent bipeds could grok it to fullness -?- perhaps by finding the Reality website and just making a pdf? Surely there need not be any work involved..


I mean ... {sheesh}

     slow sunday? how about a discussion of quantum metaphysics - (boxley) - (54)
         It's bollocks. -NT - (pwhysall) - (48)
             wassamatta u dont understand the math? -NT - (boxley) - (47)
                 There's nothing to understand. - (pwhysall) - (46)
                     ICLRPDx4 - (Steve Lowe)
                     Like string theory and dark energy - (imric) - (1)
                         Yes, exactly like those. - (pwhysall)
                     perhaps you missed a few things - (boxley) - (41)
                         Re: perhaps you missed a few things - (pwhysall) - (40)
                             Careful.. - (Ashton) - (39)
                                 some people dont grok uncertainty as certainty - (boxley)
                                 Oh please. - (pwhysall) - (35)
                                     so physics is wrong? energy dissapates? its not a constant? - (boxley) - (1)
                                         Cold fusion, eh? - (pwhysall)
                                     Spent a lot of time around Jesuits? - (Ashton) - (31)
                                         Re: Spent a lot of time around Jesuits? - (pwhysall) - (30)
                                             It's a Republican thing - (Ashton) - (2)
                                                 Re: It's a Republican thing - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                                                     Agreeable.. - (Ashton)
                                             Science IS Philosophy. - (imric) - (26)
                                                 No it isn't. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                     Good point. Science isn't 'Philosophy' - (imric) - (1)
                                                         Re: Good point. Science isn't 'Philosophy' - (pwhysall)
                                                 You don't understand the scientific method... - (pwhysall) - (22)
                                                     question then - (boxley) - (12)
                                                         My stab at it. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                                             since energy transforms rather than dissapate - (boxley) - (2)
                                                                 The field lines collapse... - (admin) - (1)
                                                                     no mystery, if thats the explaination - (boxley)
                                                         Odd question. - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                                             Agreed - - (imric)
                                                         Ah, geez. - (ubernostrum) - (5)
                                                             1/4 of an ounce, everybody knows that -NT - (boxley) - (4)
                                                                 That's what, 50 bucks? -NT - (imric) - (3)
                                                                     Up here that'll run you at least 65$CDN - (jake123) - (2)
                                                                         is that for the good BC stuff or the ONT ragweed? -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                             It's not ragweed anymore - (jake123)
                                                     Therefore, your PHILOSOPHY - (imric) - (8)
                                                         Please don't misrepresent what I said. - (pwhysall) - (5)
                                                             Horse- - (imric) - (4)
                                                                 Whatever. - (pwhysall) - (2)
                                                                     *chuckle* Justify Quantum Mind? - (imric)
                                                                     ICLRPD (new thread) - (drewk)
                                                                 Dupe, ignore - (pwhysall)
                                                         I'm reminded of Willard Van Orman Quine - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                                                             omigawd___ the tragedy of psoriasis^h^h_ ab != ba -NT - (Ashton)
                                     Bzzzzzt - (drewk)
                                 Ooh! Me next! - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                                     Re: Ooh! Me next! - (Ashton)
                     Another article. - (Another Scott)
         It's a surd - (Ashton)
         See. - (ubernostrum) - (3)
             wassamtter you quit drinking ? :-) -NT - (boxley) - (2)
                 Nah. - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                     ICLRPD. (new thread) - (Another Scott)

Back off, man! I'm a scientist!
148 ms