View Full Version : 9 Shades of Gray

9th August 2013, 01:53 PM
The Most Bonkers Scientific Theories (Almost) Nobody Believes Anymore

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...1&viewall=true (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/08/the-most-bonkers-scientific-theories-and-why-you-should-be-thankful-for-them/?pid=9301&viewall=true)

This is a fun read but I'll bet there are a number of us (myself included) who will take issue with one or more of them!

I have no issue with the bazaarness of Homeopathy, but I could and would wax philosophic concerning Metallurgy and Astrology.

What do you think?

9th August 2013, 06:25 PM
well, I'll make the answer how to deal with theses 'kinds of' articles simple:

everything MUST be right or at least have a core of truth against which R@ndi and his like-mindeds + disciples (as in this SKEPTIC (!) article :wink:?) agitate with ridicule and hate

another hint: don't believe wikipedia when it comes to fringe topics either, cuz it's been entirely subverted by skeptic groups

9th August 2013, 07:58 PM
It's still funny, if we can't laugh at ourselves, who can we laugh at?

9th August 2013, 08:06 PM
I’ve had a lot of coffee today so bear with me. BTW, turns out there is evidence that coffee assists with a person’s state of mind, turns negatives into positives kinda thing. I can provide a link if anyone is interested.

Moving on . . .Wired is one of the few magazines I really like. This is a fun article. I had never heard of the sheep growing on trees belief. I think it’s safe to say that our reality a sheep growing on a tree is just not a possibility. I have no doubt people's realities in the 1700’s were far different from ours, so perhaps this was more of a philosophical connotation rather than a literal statement. If this was an absolute truth then sheep growing on trees would have been commonplace then and would be commonplace now. They can grow out of a dish. In the not-so-distant past a person could have been committed over such a statement. Maybe one day they can be picked off a tree and this a prediction. On that note, It could have even been some sort of joke rumour at the time. Unless I have misunderstood, based on what I’ve read in this forum, it is possible to go to a dimension where sheep are growing from trees, or at least a person in that dimension can imagine and create sheep growing from a tree - Right?

Having said that, life on the sun seems pretty ridiculous. So does reading bumps on a head. Homeopathy I think is greatly misunderstood by us Westerners. The article states “Unsurprisingly, study after study has proved homeopathy to be, in more scientific words, totally wack.” I don’t agree with this at all. I personally have had great success with home remedies, but this is my belief, my reality.

I once paid for an astrological reading. It turned out to be a load of crap if you ask me. In a vague way it covered my past, present and future. It was so far removed from what had actually occurred in my past, and seemed to be so inaccurate about my future, I ended up tossing the massive document out. Perhaps my own beliefs get in the way of this one. I believe I am responsible for my condition and that possibly some part of me had something to do with the stars being there and the idea that they are directly responsible for my past, present and future is ridiculous to me.

Turning lead into gold is a terrific fantasy. Perhaps a scientist who is also in touch with their spiritual side could actually rearrange the molecules or whatever, like bending a spoon.

It all makes for a great philosophical discussion if you ask me!

9th August 2013, 08:58 PM
Here's the thing- a lot of 'ancient' knowledge is misunderstood by us westeners, who tend to want to explain them in modern or western terms. Astrology is one that IMO has suffered because of the need to explain things our way. I think if you look as Astrology, not as predictive (which IMO it should never have been taken as such) but as a handy system of statistical analysis, it can make sense, since most eastern systems are analogy-based, something our western brains don't seem to comprehend.
We know that in some people and in some cases homeopathy works, and those who say that it's 'whacked', are not playing fair, by far. Does it mean that all homeopathics work for everything they're supposed to? Probably not, just like you can't fix a broken arm with an aspirin. But I digress.
Some of these beliefs are hilarious, and the article made me laugh.

10th August 2013, 12:33 PM
Well, I didn't know this website or mag called Wired. I just skimmed the article and had enough already after a minute or so. I judge an article by the tone and it is the usual patronising dogmatic-know-it-all scoffer-attitude shining through for me. Using ridicule is one of their favourite weapons.

Therefore I think it is not a case of we laughing at ourselves but yet another scoffer laughing at "us". But okay, maybe I have grown a little cranky and intolerant towards discussions around world-views and about/with skeptics etc. and should take a break from that. On the other hand, I believe it is important in these times now that we know on which side we stand. There is a schism, so I believe. We need to take sides and speak out against "articles" like this. Or better: ignore them if we can, in the first place.

Anyway, just one more comment I cannot do without since it really made me almost throw up: It shows how uninformed and 'scoffish' (my neologism, I know) this author is when he's stating that homeopathy is only for "stupid" people without university knowledge (a knowledge questionable in itself already, imv).

Fact is (at least in Europe): a vastly and almost grassroots-like growing number of studied physicians, yes: medical academic doctors, is using homeopathy as a treatment, tendency unbroken - and all that despite the lies and most probably skewed pseudoscientific statistics (e.g. on Wiki) that should tell all the "learned" people otherwise.

As Mark Twain said: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Says it all, huh?

So the whole approach of this author is already entirely wrong: It is used and prescribed by academic people a lot. Either he does not know better or spreads disinformation deliberately.

Of course, we don't need academia anyway to "know better", do we? One example: In Europe, many mothers (female ingenious intuition I call that!) on a huge scale apply it successfully for their children for a gentle and toxin-free treatment - and without having to read faked statistics and propaganda. They just "know" from their heart-minds that it works and don't need reductionist fake-science statistics telling them how "stupid" they supposedly are.

But I am certain the science will catch up to it soon as the paradigm is breaking and the dogmatic war will end one day. The empirical part is won already if you ask me, we just need to read the right statistics or read statistics right. Although studies with water memory and other kinds of metaphysical memory now show that the experimental proof will follow soon.

You see, it's become grassroots, at least in Europe. And the more "they" try to fight it, with ridicule or faked meta-analyses, the easier it wins. This applies to all of alternative medicine for me.

Let me cite Gandhi here two times:

"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." - Gandhi

"Homeopathy .... cures a larger percentage of cases than any other method of treatment and is beyond doubt safer and more economical and most complete medical science." - Gandhi

I could write a lot more on this topic, including give you lots of links to scientific studies and meta-analyses of compound studies showing that it works even in animals in placebo-group-controlled (!) studies, showing that it does not yield worse or even gives better results than allopathic cures - above placebo effects! All of this is still deliberately ignored or skewed by wiki and all the other slaves of Big Pharma and reductionist materialist medicine.

But as said above, I'm growing a little tired of lengthy discussions of this kind and don't want to go on here any longer in this thread.

So, nevermind. :|

10th August 2013, 03:08 PM
Curious; 4 members have given their input re the Wired article I linked and 4 different takes or opinions were expressed to some degree. We have Sinera on the one end who perhaps 'protesteth too much' - his sensitivities being assaulted he waste no words decrying the legitimacy of the article. Kinkajou, CFT and myself appreciated the fun or funny of it. It appears Homeopathy is the most contentious of the 'spoofed' Theories.

I have spoken to this practice before and my opinion stands.


I cannot emphasize enough that the journal Nature is an august scientific journal published for and by legitimate scientists.

Homeopathy was then and remains a very sensitive issue.

I have been to the Wired website a few times and, to me, it is similar to the old MAD mag and the National Lampoon. It's tongue-in-cheek stuff.

Astrology took a hit from Kinkajou and CFT gave her qualified take on the subject. Alchemy is ‘terrific fantasy’ according to Kinkajou but she leaves open the possibility of science being able to one day manage the transformation of ‘lead into gold’. This is very much my line of thinking, however, I would elaborate to a great extent other reasons for the Alchemist Philosophy.

Particle physicists are now and have been for some time able to manipulate free electrons and free protons so it naturally follows that soon they will be able to manipulate the atom itself. Consider that gold (Au #79 in the periodic table of elements) has a mass of 197.0. Element #78, which is platinum, has a mass of 195.1 and mercury, Hg, has a mass of 200.6. It doesn’t take much of a stretch of the imagination to suppose that atoms of platinum and mercury could be increased or decreased in atomic weight to arrive at a weight/mass of 197.0 which is gold.

Back to Astrology, I know it to be ‘born from the side of’ Kabbalah wherein it has its genesis. If one can accept that there are many powerful cosmic influences at play and these influences modulate over time, then you can imagine that at any given point in time a snapshot of these pervading influences might affect the ‘nature’ of the new-born at that specific point in time.

That’s enough from me, but lastly, I can’t help but point out the humor of Sinera’s Mark Twain quote:
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
After all, Samuel Clemmons was a humorist and here he is only poking fun at statistics. In fact, the science of Statistics is the measure of the probability that an hypothesis has either born the burden of truth and validity or failed by returning a ‘null’ result.

These are nothing but my personal thoughts and should carry about as much weight as a hydrogen atom. Hoho.

10th August 2013, 03:25 PM
I found it humorous that expels truth. i wrote a little somethin somethin, but deleted it for lack of finishing time. been followin the thread. i hesitate this question, "Is God blind without our eyes seeing, or are we blind until we willingly allow God to see through us?" can there be only one true without the other being true as well, such that a hardy laugh suffices to express our inability to word beyond such?

i dunno...

10th August 2013, 04:20 PM
Hi Sinera,

The article does come across as very sarcastic. I agree it was “the usual patronising dogmatic-know-it-all scoffer-attitude shining through.” Nicely put. I also agree with CFTraveler in that I feel some of these beliefs are hilarious.

CFTraveler pointed out that Astrolgy is misunderstood by westerners. I must admit, when I read that comment I stepped back a bit and felt the need to humble myself. It’s a subject I have never studied and have always been a bit skeptical of. I tried it and it didn’t work. I have to slap the back of my own hand for slamming the door so hard. Who am I to condemn that which did not work for me when I have never taken the time to look into it for myself. I am sure there are hundreds of books on the subject. This is the very thing the writer of this article was doing, particularly with homeopathy.

Wired is a technically oriented magazine and will typically have articles about gadgets, inventions or ideas and tosses in an article or two about something non-technical like punk. It tends to feature a particular person e.g., Steve Jobs or Jimmy Fallon. I like it because I find it encourages inventors to express new ideas, even ones that seem unattainable or really out there. I admire a really good imagination. It is unusual to see an article condemning something that is not mainstream.

Astral projection/OBE, psychic ability, tarot reading, past lives etc., is really out there for most people, but it appears to be gaining tolerance, understanding, interest, participation and even making advancements in techniques. I think it’s fantastic a forum like this exists and that research, stories and opinions can be expressed – something you have done so well here!

10th August 2013, 05:48 PM
Wired is a technically oriented magazine Exactly! And, I have to say, they don't have the mindset or information to try to at least understand what these disciplines were trying to do- because they don't all translate to materialism. Some do, but not all.

10th August 2013, 08:20 PM
50 shades of gray , i think chelsea handler was poking fun at with her book titled " 50 Shades of Chartreuse: This Time It's Personal (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/books/story/2012/09/18/chelsea-handler-to-write-50-shades-of-chartreuse/57801518/1). (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/books/story/2012/09/18/chelsea-handler-to-write-50-shades-of-chartreuse/57801518/1) "

it's the heat here (bohat shadeed garmi hai allah ki kassam!), god it's a heatwave making my reality merge with another part of it as if a key turns a lock around smoothly since each bit fits perfectly gliding in smoothly to it's counterpart

10th August 2013, 10:07 PM
I've come to the stage where I feel,
The need to prove or disprove for the media to accept is still wanting .
To accept what we ourselves believe and understand without the need to have acceptance from others is a step forward for .
Susan is n one of her deep thinking modes .

11th August 2013, 12:55 PM
One encore:

Instead of putting here links to placebo-controlled human and animal specific studies (which I could do), I draw attention to these two articles on the Natural News website.

The first is about the disinformation tactics by skeptics, of which this "funny" article is an example, but also including the analyses and "editorials" (=opinion) of so-called "science" journals.

The second one especially debunks amongst others the most often quoted and referenced Shang meta"analysis" - which is probably, not just in my view but also in the view of other scientists and analysts, a very biased "science" where the outcome was intended to be this way and thus results obviously tweaked (One author was a outspoken adversary to homeopathy).

I highly recommend these articles.



As this topic was also posted on the Astral Pulse by Lionheart and s.o. gave a good answer there, I quote this reply, because it shows another good point: There is some type of indirect sneakyness of ridicule in this article by including it into a list with obviously and seemingly silly theories (the sheep), thus trying it to equate it with these theories. This does not do justice to an entire medical system which has its successes - and this also in history (see the great epidemics in the US of the 19th century!).

Homeopathy is the biggie that stands out to me. Science can easily verify a lot of its validity if their wasn't financial money telling them not to (Phizer, Wyeth). To put this in the same debunked category as sheep growing from a tree is an obvious attempt to discredit something that works for millions of people and has been an effective ploy for many other things.
- Astralzombie (Astral Pulse) http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_news_and_media/scientific_theories_debunked-t43162.0.html;msg336763#msg336763

Ok. I'm out again. ;)

11th August 2013, 02:41 PM
What a great discussion!
And yes, I was wrong re the Wired comments I made. Where'd that come from, anyway?
It seems to me we are an eclectic bunch and that is wonderful!!! and healthy.

11th August 2013, 02:41 PM
Summertime Sadness: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXGJDTdJ7uo

not the best quality audio, but the video/graphics rock to the heat of the beat. what is the ole saying, when a butterfly flaps its wings, that the created wind causes a hurricane on the other side...of the world. i'll bet BW remembers it. Butterfly Effect

Better audio...S-s-summertime Sadness: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLyw5QdXlyU

i feel the lyrics do justice to the sub-topic...

some cool poetry videos from "Integration Training", who also have videos on Breath of Fire:

Two videos of poetry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edTwetVcF9g&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PLSP0Y3k1d8RlfB-08NRfYIknYvXX4XWZT

"most extreme high is base jumping into the emotions, the body and/of intimacy..."

however, i disagree with his summa on inheritance of your self vs inheriting the earth/sky. neither may be separated from the other. they are one and the same...forever.

what ya got is what ya got....Right Now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKEgP-DLnOA