I have massive gratitude towards science and the boundaries they push here in the physical realms. As many critics of the paranormal – and heavy supporters of fundamental science practices – have told me over and over, if it were not for science, I would not be sitting on the Internet or enjoying much of my luxuries.
This is true, but lets not lose sight of the real discussions that brings up such claims, how can physical science measure non-physical activity?
They may just consider that they are approaching from a rational, logical and very much transparent position. Maybe even saving people from their ignorance, and that they have all the answers to the world mysteries, sewn up in a nice little package.
I mean, if something can be faked, it means all subjects under said topic are fake? Right?
As I replied this morning to a good friend, and a highly thought of colleague, from Indiana in the United States. I was hit with a few realisations with regards to how people think, and what may hold back good proper research and discovery in the paranormal field.
The above-mentioned friend – who is Chris Ratliff from Paranormal Ghost Research Indiana – was very balanced in his thinking towards a piece of software I use, open enough to understand but certainly not swayed till he has experience of such, and can see some building evidence.
Often in circles, relating to pseudo-scepticism and blatant cynicism, with regards to paranormal events, we’ve members who are all too happy to name drop individuals as some type of proof about their rigid belief systems.
Many have even tried to emanate said big names, in the search of big dollars and lots of publicity for their materialist aims in life. Not forgetting massive fame and media performances to boot…
Tell it how it is Ryan, get the pad open and start writing in response to more Pseudo-Sceptical propaganda and flawed interpretations. This is what was ringing in my ears this morning, most likely in reply to what I had read last night before retiring to bed. You see, I had just read an article in The Daily Express, in regards to Why science is taking near-death experiences seriously and was immediately hit with our old friend Dr. Susan Blackmore and more misleading information.
If you are going to put yourself out there, as in producing videos for sites such as Youtube, you need to be prepared to have your work critiqued. This is why at the bottom of nearly every single article I produce, I ask people to leave their comments or constructive criticism.
In this short article, I am going to talk about a video I have just viewed a few times in regards to proof, that Near Death Experiences are just the reaction of brain chemicals and being dismissed by scientific studies. DeityFree Dee seems to have it all figured out on her Youtube channel and this amazes me, as I am nowhere near figuring it out after 9 years of active research and study.
Along with Graham Hancock’s, TED also removed the recent talk by author and bio-chemist Rupert Sheldrake.
In the bold debate about the nature of human consciousness, Rupert Sheldrake stands out for questioning the standing dogmas of modern science and for bringing us his fascinating theory of Morphic Resonance regarding the collective memory and the habits of nature.
There is great concern when you see reported studies that brush aside possible psychic phenomena in favour of left brained theories and pre-judged assumptions from researchers. I have great respect for people who have spent time learning and studying, to then be presented with letters after their name or certificates to proudly show off, its a great achievement. What I have no time for though is lack of forward movement and using own initiative to understand that we may not have all the answers. You see, some would rather just pin a label and medicate via the large and extremely rich pharmaceutical companies….there is something wrong here!!
Who wrote the text books and why do we blindly follow them as gospel?