Mod+ 237. DR. PATRICIA CHURCHLAND SANDBAGGED BY NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE QUESTIONS

#61
Patel

You are just defamatory now.
Why waste my time with this rubbish?

I saw an email from you asking for an apology for saying you lacked manners. Ridiculous.
Can't you read the above?
You smeared Churchland's approach to the interview, along with Don.
I disagree. I said Churchland reacted naturally to an aggressive interview that made assumptions.
Just read and stop being a time waster.

Its good you got access to the book.
You overcame your security blockage, well done.
Indeed I wrote it. I am writing now more sternly, because I am responding to time wasting circularity.

I really think you are trolling me with your comments, whereas I am responding logically to yours!

Anyway, pointless nonsense here is overwhelming, so you're not likely to see another post from me.
I love how he hits [return] after every sentence.
I gotta start doing that myself.
 
#63
Homogeneity, or sameness, depends on what is said to be the same. Pure linear Isotropy about all observers requires models so far from human reasoning as to be impossible. An analogy later is Expanding Rubber. My Isotropy is by linear expansion by coasting in a void, and only pure at a coordinate center. To the extent we have pure Isotropy around Earth, then we are near the center of a puffball, or else expanding Spacetime creates a Hologram in which we live, with pure Isotropy. A void can contain Einstein’s Spacetime, which does not extend beyond “three” spatial dimensions, but that puts an impossible Hologram in a void. It is the impossible versus the outsider. I choose the outsider. No measurement can determine the existence of a void. A correct interpretation of Isotropy is available from our view of recession, depending on our location in the universe. Einstein could not view mechanisms of his universe from the outside, but Newton could, and I will do so later in a view of interfaces that explains “distorted Spacetime” and expansion in a void using a void to view them.

I've copied this piece which is not untypical of the book. Maybe Dr S for brains (Linda) or Arouet could understand it, it's over my head..........
 
Last edited:
#64
Well, i dont know about him being a sock puppet. He seemed to be sincere in stating what he did. But who am i to judge people on a internet forum, right? Cant see his face while hes posting here. Hes even living on another continent(if he wasnt lying at that point), i dont know how people from down under are thinking. I dont even know how they can actually live there with all those dangerous plants and animals. But thats offtopic.

His book seemed to me like that what your average materialist would be saying. I didnt read it though, just looked into it for a few secs.




Thats not exactly related to any of those posts, but i would be really interested on your take of afterlife or something similar to that(i mean like, both of you). Would be most grateful for a answer if you got the time for it(in that thread, private conversation, whatever). Always looking out for more opinions on that, especially here where i dont know what answer i have to expect. Propably should open a seperate thread for that somewhere, but i had bad experiences with that in some other forums.
Hi

Yes, if you would like to start a thread somewhere, I would be happy to discuss afterlife stuff with you. Best, Don
 
#65
Homogeneity, or sameness, depends on what is said to be the same. Pure linear Isotropy about all observers requires models so far from human reasoning as to be impossible. An analogy later is Expanding Rubber. My Isotropy is by linear expansion by coasting in a void, and only pure at a coordinate center. To the extent we have pure Isotropy around Earth, then we are near the center of a puffball, or else expanding Spacetime creates a Hologram in which we live, with pure Isotropy. A void can contain Einstein’s Spacetime, which does not extend beyond “three” spatial dimensions, but that puts an impossible Hologram in a void. It is the impossible versus the outsider. I choose the outsider. No measurement can determine the existence of a void. A correct interpretation of Isotropy is available from our view of recession, depending on our location in the universe. Einstein could not view mechanisms of his universe from the outside, but Newton could, and I will do so later in a view of interfaces that explains “distorted Spacetime” and expansion in a void using a void to view them.

I've copied this piece which is not untypical of the book. Maybe Dr S for brains (Linda) or Arouet could understand it, it's over my head..........
Sounds like a weird gobbly goop. He seems to be talking about what is called "the cosmological principle", which is the idea that outer space is isotropic, meaning the same in all directions. It is an assumption of modern cosmology, accepted by the mainstream, but argued by many. There is a crowd of cosmologists out there who don't take it seriously at all, instead thinking that space is fractal in its structure. Certainly the distribution of matter is not isotropic, and does seem to form a fractal. But the mainstream argues that, if you take a big enough chunk of space (e.g. a cube billions of light years on edge) and average the matter in it, then it is isotropic. This to me is cheating, because averaging always blurs out differences.

Anyway, the stuff in your quote seems to be offering his opinion about isotropy. It doesn't make any sense in the context of modern cosmology, if you are wondering.

Don
 
#67
Sounds like a weird gobbly goop. He seems to be talking about what is called "the cosmological principle", which is the idea that outer space is isotropic, meaning the same in all directions. It is an assumption of modern cosmology, accepted by the mainstream, but argued by many. There is a crowd of cosmologists out there who don't take it seriously at all, instead thinking that space is fractal in its structure. Certainly the distribution of matter is not isotropic, and does seem to form a fractal. But the mainstream argues that, if you take a big enough chunk of space (e.g. a cube billions of light years on edge) and average the matter in it, then it is isotropic. This to me is cheating, because averaging always blurs out differences.

Anyway, the stuff in your quote seems to be offering his opinion about isotropy. It doesn't make any sense in the context of modern cosmology, if you are wondering.

Don
Thanks for the information, Don. Astrophysics is way above my head and not something that particularly interests me because the phenomenon of life and the origins of the universe are so incredibly perplexing it depresses me, maybe literally. But thanks again
 
#69
I followed this interview on Youtube, And want to applaud Alex for his genius, By that I mean, putting these so called authorities who stand as representatives to many, regarding the conclusions we might adopt, simply by them stating their opinions, or so called scientific research. They would have us believe their own ideology, that consciousness is an emergent of the brain, rather than truly stating, they don't really know. or that there is in-fact, positive evidence for the opposition, And that's why Alex, deserves an admirable recognition, as he is a voice of reason, in a world consumed by a materialistic ideology.

He actually puts these easy riders on the back foot, they think they are going to get an easy ride on Skeptiko, but in fact, the scepticism is directed towards them, and they are asked to back up their claims, live, to all types of listeners. When this happens, as we have seen, the intellectual dis-honesty is exposed for everyone to see, Patricia should be ashamed of herself for distorting the views of someone who dedicated a lot of time and energy the field, who's evidence was to establish to opposite.

What an extreme example of foul play by Patricia , using her credentials to calumniate the good works of someone opposed to her worldview. An insult of the greatest magnitude, And when confronted with her remarks, she displayed the behaviour you would expect of a liar, she hid and cowered behind petty excuses.

I am completely disgusted, and hope Alex brings more of these people who are endorsing their own agendas instead of the truth. To light.
 
#70
Oh what a marvelous interview, definitely the funniest I've come across so far (I'm up to #266). It seems pretty clear to me that she was dodging Alex's questions because she had no good response. Really quite pathetic when you think about it. To pretend to not hear, make a whole charade about having phone problems, and then ultimately not respond to the email....well, that sealed the deal. If you legitimately had connectivity issues, why not answer the email?

I love when Alex calls people out for their views and forces them to defend the nonsense. If they (mainstream science / skeptics) want to ridicule parapsychology as nonsense, they certainly have it coming and to not be able to explain why it's "nonsense" and fall flat on your face trying to defend your own views? Priceless.
 
#71
Oh what a marvelous interview, definitely the funniest I've come across so far (I'm up to #266). It seems pretty clear to me that she was dodging Alex's questions because she had no good response. Really quite pathetic when you think about it. To pretend to not hear, make a whole charade about having phone problems, and then ultimately not respond to the email....well, that sealed the deal. If you legitimately had connectivity issues, why not answer the email?

I love when Alex calls people out for their views and forces them to defend the nonsense. If they (mainstream science / skeptics) want to ridicule parapsychology as nonsense, they certainly have it coming and to not be able to explain why it's "nonsense" and fall flat on your face trying to defend your own views? Priceless.
I totally agree, and as I remember it, Alex offered her the chance to re-record the whole interview - so all that nonsense was simply an excuse to avoid what she suddenly realised would be a very tricky interview

She is, of course, a very famous theorist, and it is inexcusable that she can't defend her views better than that!

BTW, Your home page reports it is inaccessible to me in the UK, and I can't even access it by proxy - maybe you should look into what is wrong?

David
 
#72
BTW, Your home page reports it is inaccessible to me in the UK, and I can't even access it by proxy - maybe you should look into what is wrong?

David
Thanks for the reminder, someone else posted about that, I'm behind on working on my website. Should be able to look into it today though. Would you mind sharing what error message you get exactly? Might be helpful to fixing this problem with my hosting company.

And yes, pretty sure he did mention he offered to re-record the interview but since she has no good response, no point in further cementing her indefensible position (from her point of view).
 
#75
Thanks for the reminder, someone else posted about that, I'm behind on working on my website. Should be able to look into it today though. Would you mind sharing what error message you get exactly? Might be helpful to fixing this problem with my hosting company.

And yes, pretty sure he did mention he offered to re-record the interview but since she has no good response, no point in further cementing her indefensible position (from her point of view).
403 Access Forbidden You location (GB) has been blacklisted

David
 
#76
403 Access Forbidden You location (GB) has been blacklisted

David
Thanks David, I've asked my hosting company, they don't know. I've now escalated it to my web developers, hope to have it fixed shortly. Once that's fixed, hope people from this forum check out my site, give me their feedback. There's a ton of ground to cover (much of it still needing to be done), one section of particular relevance to the Skeptiko community is my section on parapsychology that I haven't had time to add. I'll be looking to curate resources mentioned in other threads here and build out that section. In the Skeptiko spirit, I'd venture to say, it's a community effort and I hope to encourage all the critical minds on here to help build out a community of truth seekers and quality knowledge on a variety of topics, not just parapsychology.

Anyway, just glad to be a part of this forum and discussing important matters with like-minded folk. Thanks again for the feedback.
 
#77
Thanks David, I've asked my hosting company, they don't know. I've now escalated it to my web developers, hope to have it fixed shortly. Once that's fixed, hope people from this forum check out my site, give me their feedback. There's a ton of ground to cover (much of it still needing to be done), one section of particular relevance to the Skeptiko community is my section on parapsychology that I haven't had time to add. I'll be looking to curate resources mentioned in other threads here and build out that section. In the Skeptiko spirit, I'd venture to say, it's a community effort and I hope to encourage all the critical minds on here to help build out a community of truth seekers and quality knowledge on a variety of topics, not just parapsychology.

Anyway, just glad to be a part of this forum and discussing important matters with like-minded folk. Thanks again for the feedback.
Can you access your own site via your browser?

David
 
#78
Can you access your own site via your browser?

David
I always could so never realized it was a problem until a couple weeks ago, someone mentioned it to me on this forum. My developers got back to me, it was part of my firewall. It should be fixed now. Can you check if you can access the site now? Thanks
 
Top