In Reply to: This is your mind on drugs posted by geoffkait on February 16, 2013 at 15:00:52:
lack of reading comprehension skills again:
I wrote I do not agree with his theory, with the implication that no "proof" was forthcoming nor revealed. You, on the other hand, are proclaiming "proof" when in fact there is none, and that so called "proof" you proclaim was refuted by the originator of the theory himself. That is pretty pathetic, and, as I have pointed out, the backfire effect's primary example would be YOU.
Not agreeing with a theory has nothing to do with right or wrong in reality. I believe there are many other much more rational explanations for his supposed examples and, as a matter of fact, many of his examples are not universally true. A theory is just that, a theory, a presumed supposition. Proof is another animal entirely. I can disagree with the theory because I do not see sufficient proof. You on the other hand see proof when there is NONE. Just because you can see no other causality, does not constitute "proof", simply a refusal to open your mind.
LOL !
Einstein's theory remained simply a theory for many years, until visual confirmation was made during an eclipse. There were many doubters before the visual observation backed his prediction. The fact that there was visual and photographic confirmation which fell in the mathematically predicted range and that there were no other plausible explanations would constitute proof for me.
Sheldrake has nothing to show. Geoff Kaitt has nothing to show, but, at least, Sheldrake is MAN enough to admit the failure of his experiment. I have far more respect for Sheldrake because of the admission.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Duhhhh..... - unclestu 15:54:53 02/16/13 (2)
- Theory and Practice - Tony Lauck 08:48:42 02/17/13 (1)
- I believe we are - unclestu 12:24:44 02/17/13 (0)