Is there a place for woo in science?

By whom is what I'm asking

What scientist , that we all would respect has gone out into the field , to get a hands on understanding of what is going on , NONE

They all hide behind their desks and walls , and come up with some convoluted theory which has NO real world experience behind it

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Given that most people never get know the name of any particular scientist until he or she has made his/ her name in one particular field then why the f*ck should such a scientist turn to stuff that A) isn't their field and B) hasn't been show to have any validity.
I'm also intrigued as to how, for example, someone like Craig Venter (you have heard of him, haven't you?) could apply genetics to ghost hunting.
Maybe Leon Lederman could entice one into the LHC - trail of cookies? - and zap it with high-speed particles.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So give me one , scientist that you respect that has gone out into the field and actually witnessed any haunting , as I have asked before

I have read Craig Venter's book , book on genome mapping

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You appear to have missed BOTH points that I made.
1) What use would the study areas of famous scientists be in this field? (This is the equivalent of me claiming that genetics is invalid because Stephen Hawking hasn't looked at it.)
2) Why should it be a "famous" scientist. (Is this some sort of claim that only scientists known to the public are "real" scientists?)

This an invention of yours.
You haven't asked that question until now.

Your original claim - that you have now conveniently (since it was shown to be incorrect) forgotten - was "that no scientists have investigated in the field".
Constantly shifting the goalposts is neither rational not honest.

And I have little doubt that you failed to understand it.

 

Thats it , that your best answer ? How lame

I said a scientist that you would respect

Whom ever that would be

So what scientist(s) have actually gone into the field , no names yet

Eh...

 

Wrong.
What is lame is that you will only consider people from an extremely small and select group as valid.
Why should it be someone ONLY from that group that you will consider as a valid investigator?
Don't you think it's somewhat hypocritical of you that you will consider only "famous/ reputable" scientists as valid critics of the paranormal but that you willingly accept "evidence" from Joe Schmoe regardless of his scientific credentials and abilities?
I know I do.

Irrelevant.
If I named one (especially one that you've never heard of) what difference would it make to the premise?

This is another example of you selectively ignoring the facts.One of my previous posts (#134 to be specific) contains two different links.
Apparently you either haven't checked or you've chosen to ignore those links.

Exactly.
Your best "defence" against valid accusations of irrationality and dishonesty is "Eh".

 

No!

Yes!

Does it sell?

 

The post #134 refers to participants in the experiment , which just one ,by the way , and old

But what I'm more interested in , is that the only participants were and are just the scientists themselves

Nobody else involved , other than the supporting crew , technicians

With witnesses on the outside watching the proceedings on the outside

 

I think that for the most part , people understand the mainstream thinking

They have become more knowledgeable however and hence learn other perspectives

Hence question mainstream thinking and authority

Actually its not ' woo science ' as it is , a different perspective on thinking upon this or that

No one here has the definitive answer , although some think they do

Open Minds are better than closed minds

 

So you dismiss "Scientists who have investigated haunted places"?
You dismiss the named authors of the paper who conducted the experiments?
And age of the investigation is entirely irrelevant.
You claim was false.

In other words more goal post moving.

You're not only dishonest you're blatantly so.

A couple more posts and your sole criterion for acceptance of consideration will be "famous scientists who were personally "haunted" and who agree emphatically that ghosts exist".

 

What I would rather see is that the only participants were the scientists themselves

And one experiment does not prove or disprove any theory , you know that

 

Yep.
Those goalposts have shifted.

Correct.
But one paper (as linked to) does show your claim to be false.
(And every time you talk about "proving" theories, it just reinforces the - altogether credible - impression that you don't know what you're talking about).

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Correct.

One paper is meaningless

Give me 20 papers on the most haunted places in America , then you have something to stand on , so far the ground is weak , very weak

 

Here are three:

===============
From Vassar News, 1962:

Professor Investigates Ghosts, Spirits, Mediums, With Scientific Approach

Scientists are often unsympathetic towards the study of paranormal phenomena," said Professor Ducasse in his lecture "Paranormal Phenomena, Science and the After Life." Wednesday night. Many scientists would rather dismiss these phenomena (which include such things as levitation, pre-cognition. clairvoyance and mental telepathy) than admit the possible "narrow-mindedness" of scientific laws. Among the fundamental laws challenged by paranormal phenomena. Professor Ducasse mentioned the following: events in the future cannot have consequences before they occur; physical events can only be perceived as they affect one of the senses; and a person's thoughts can only be known by his physical reactions. An investigation of precognition, clairvoyance and telepathy might very well prove these assumptions unfounded. -Belief is a matter of habit." said Professor Ducasse. "There is just as much intellectual dishonesty among the conservatives as among those who love the marvelous." One should keep an open mind because the path of science is strewn with the corpses of impossibilities." Professor Ducasse cited a long list of distinguished scientists and philosophers who have been interested in paranormal phenomena since the founding of the first society tor research in 1882. Interest has certainly not been limited to "cranks and nuts." he said. William James and Gilbert Murray, among ethers. What is important, said Professor Ducasse, is if any are plausible. He gave many examples of scandals in "spiritualist circles." but at the same time mentioned extremely convincing cases of pre cognition and levitation which have been substantiated by numerous witnesses.
==================

 

http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/mm/articles/PWprofile.html

 

It's not science at all.

This is an outright falsehood.

Wrong again.
You made a specific claim: that scientists haven't investigated in the field.
It requires only ONE example to show that your claim is false.

 

perspective , to finish my quote

It is science , science is knowledge and discussion of these perspectives

The attitude here is more of a dictator of science , follow me because I'm more intelligent than you

Your not , because the simple fact is , is that all the brilliant scientist are not here and never will be

Why ?

Because they have been for years , scooped up by government agentcies and by big business

Both are so far beyond this mainstream science its ......well beyond

I'll leave it at that

 

"Perspective" doesn't come into it.
Woo is not science.

Yeah. Crap.
We're talking about science the discpline/ practice (as you so tacitly acknowledge later in this post).

Unlikely. And, so far, unevidenced. (In fact contra-indicated by the majority of your posts).

Oh look, empty assertions.

It's "beyond mainstream science" because it's not science.

Please do.
Please just leave.

 

Bingo! yet you stand there and rubbish the many giants of the past and present, that have advanced cosmology to the stage it is at at this time.
Supporters of mainstream science are not dictators. They support the generaly accepted mainstream view, because that is the one which makes the most logical sense, and supports the observational data, far better then anything else.
The dictators are the nutty alternative hypothesis pushers, the usual God botherers, that try and shoe -horn in their unsupported drivel whenever and where ever they can.
We have some pretty good reputable people here, but, yes you are correct...the brilliant scientists are not here, and yet we have four of the Alternative brigade, over the last 12 months or so, trying to each ram their ToE's down our throats!...and while doing so casting nothing but derision of the giants I speak of.

As one who generally supports mainstream science, coupled with being only a layman, I find far more knowledge, Innovation, and logic in that procedure, than the alternative/God botherers others and their collective delusions of grandeur and tall poppy syndrome that they present.

And yes, the brilliant ones you do speak of, have been swept up by different agencies, and those agencies have access to all those state of the art equipment on Earth, and the probes in orbit and beyond.
Yet we still get the likes of yourself, coming in out of nowhere, with access to nothing, and with no necessary formal education, proclaiming Plasma Universe or some other discredited hypothesis as fact.
Quite Ironic you should say what you have river.