From: Erin N. (enoonan@kent.edu)
Date: Sun Dec 08 2002 - 18:12:23 GMT
Your reasoning about human behavior is probably
all true but did you reason that you and nonmystics fall into this category.
>The web page for "23 Skidoo" is a good example of confirmation bias.
As it is they do not have this
>"compelling interconnectedness", and deserve ridicule for falsely
>suggesting otherwise.
Actually he introduces the topic as "pattern recognition".
Do you deny that was what he was doing?
>"... They are finding that the isolation and separation of objects from each
>other is more apparent than real; at deeper levels, everything -atoms, cells,
>molecules, plants, animals, people - participates in a sensitive, flowing web
>of information. Physicists have shown, for example, that if two photons are
>separated, no matter by how far, a change in one creates a simultaneous
change
>in the other." From: A Wink From the Cosmos by Meg Lundstrom
>
>Capra, Chopra, and a host of other mystically bent people have said
>something close to this, but none have said it quite so poorly as Ms.
>Lundstrom. Physicists have indeed shown what she says, but they've also
>shown that it's not possible for the two photons to exchange any
>information. So if it's true that all the things she lists in her previous
>sentence "participate in a sensitive, flowing web of information", it's
>not because of what physicists have shown about separated photons.
>Glenn
Glenn,
This is what cracks me up.
It is not known how this is happens.
With that being true, can you be honest just admit you know
jack about it?
Without knowing how it happens you have firm belief
in how it doesn't. Amazes me.
erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 08 2002 - 18:06:23 GMT