ESP in the GD??? Link to Mark Morford article.

[japple]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x227612

[MorningGlow]

1. Most righteous

I am enjoying the article and will avoid revisiting the GD thread because all too soon it will be shat upon--as usual. :eyes:

This is the nut of it (emphasis mine): "Look! Here are the selfsame scientists, throughout the ages, baffled and entranced, confounded and enthralled; countless times have they been convinced that a huge range of formerly strange and magical phenomena -- dark matter, black holes, bacteria, a round planet, gravity, anal sex, Portland -- must be total bunk because, well, the phenom simply could not be proven by the sundry scientific models of the time, until they could."

That is what those clinging so desperately to "science only" refuse to admit, no matter how many times they're called on it--that we might not have the science/technology to understand it YET. Amazing, the hubris, to think that we know everything there is to know.

[OneGrassRoot]

2. "beyond current human comprehension"

Can't get that phrase out of my head over the last few weeks, for the very reason you explain, MG.

Thinking way outside the box. Being open to things that are currently beyond human comprehension.

It's really difficult to find and engage adults who are truly open-minded, and open-hearted.

I'm going to focus on the children. Their dreams and visions are not limited.

:)

[Celebration]

3. Love it

I suggest everyone here read the MM article.

[MorningGlow]

4. But not the GD thread

The shitting has begun. Funny how people mocking Morford's point are simply proving his point. :rofl:

[silverweb]

5. You beat me in posting it.

One of Morford's best, IMHO. :)

Direct link to the article _here_ for those who want to avoid the negativity in GD.

[Fire Walk With Me]

6. ...

Connie: I think I'll have some Tang.
Prymatt Conehead: Ah Tang, the drink astronauts took to the moon.
Beldar Conehead: Astronauts to the moon?
(Beldar and Prymatt laugh)

[kentauros]

7. Thanks for that :)

It reminds me I need to buy Dr. Charles Tart's book "The End of Materialism", like, tonight! ;)


This little question stood out (among other insights) :

"What will happen to our funding?"

This is a very key and important question, the answer of which lies at the base of many a sceptic. Not that they would ever truly admit it, but it's still there, ever-present, held over their heads to keep them in their places. That, and the other heinous "crime" within the scientific community: discovering something outside of your field!!11! They hate that, too :P

One of the biggest (or maybe the loudest) objections to Pons and Fleischman's cold fusion discovery wasn't so much about whether it worked or not, but the fact that they were "meddling" in a field outside of their own degreed fields. I didn't understand that then and I don't understand it now. Knowledge is knowledge. Who cares where it comes from?

As for the part about some things being "beyond human comprehension", I've seen a few posts "debunking" UFOs simply because if they are using known physics, they wouldn't be traveling beyond the speed of light. Of course, if they are advanced enough to build craft that don't use human-established means of propulsion, then who are we to determine what their technology is, simply because we haven't discovered the means yet?

I think that for some of these sceptics some of this stems from their inability to "suspend disbelief". I've seen more than a few on the other forums get into arguments with other sceptics on this subject, and even the ones that can suspend disbelief come away shaking their heads at the "stronger sceptic's" need to disbelieve anything (including fiction!) that is not provable by known means.