Actually (Reply #24) - Democratic Underground

In the discussion thread: Why Bad Science Is Like Bad Religion [View all]

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 12:04 AM

tama (9,137 posts)

24. Actually

You are free to keep any position as you wish, as the evidence in the field stays inconclusive - as in science in general and all that scientific evidence ever offers is various degrees of plausibility, which is always subjective. Motive for my contribution in this thread was that Sheldrake is a good man and a good scientist with whom I've exchanged couple emails, and my cousin who is cognitive scientist knows him better.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

37 replies	Author	Time	Post
Why Bad Science Is Like Bad Religion [View all]	cbayer	Dec 2012	OP
Or as one of my colleagues puts it:	Turbineguy	Dec 2012	#1
Both wise and perceptive, and a viewpoint that needs to be taken to heart. nt	humblebum	Dec 2012	#2
Ahh, that Rupert sheldrake	Confusious	Dec 2012	#3
I'm not that familiar with his scientific work, but I think his take here	cbayer	Dec 2012	#5
His recent resume is very much something to sneeze at	LeftishBrit	Dec 2012	#7
I think you make very valid points.	cbayer	Dec 2012	#9
Actually he's very good experimentalist	tama	Dec 2012	#13
When I was in grad school in the 70's	Speck Tater	Dec 2012	#26
"Observer bias" and "degree of plausibility" combined	tama	Dec 2012	#30
If one were to judge his argument by his resume, that would just be argument from authority....	xocet	Dec 2012	#29
Couple points	tama	Dec 2012	#31
Actually, I first read this without any idea of who he was, and I found it interesting.	cbayer	Dec 2012	#36
Liberal materialism has become the dominant mode	burnsei sensei	Dec 2012	#4
Maybe - but one of the best-known practitioners of bad science is Rupert Sheldrake himself	LeftishBrit	Dec 2012	#6
I wasn't aware of this when I read the article, but have now done some further	cbayer	Dec 2012	#8
He's unorthodox, for sure	tama	Dec 2012	#14
He is not unorthodox - he is a purveyor of Woo	intaglio	Dec 2012	#17
Well then	tama	Dec 2012	#18
Blindfolding has little effect	intaglio	Dec 2012	#23
Actually	tama	Dec 2012	#24
Thanks, tama. I found his writing intriguing, and looking into	cbayer	Dec 2012	#22
While some of Sheldrake's stuff is way outside the box,	Thats my opinion	Dec 2012	#10
And so were/are a lot of crackpots and cultists.	LeftishBrit	Dec 2012	#11
The why don't you	tama	Dec 2012	#15
That's an idiotic comparison...	Humanist_Activist	Dec 2012	#28
Here's a free logic lesson from Carl Sagan:	trotsky	Dec 2012	#35
thats pretty rich coming from rupert sheldrake	Phillip McCleod	Dec 2012	#12
Phillip McCleod is a crackpot	tama	Dec 2012	#16
Which particular site? The Huffington Post?	cbayer	Dec 2012	#21
They are also home to a lot of crackpot woo.	trotsky	Dec 2012	#34
Dishonest and self-serving	skepticscott	Dec 2012	#19
"Bad science gets better. Bad religion stays bad."	cleanhippie	Dec 2012	#20
Sheldrake is a crank who probably has Schizotypal Personality Disorder.	Odin2005	Dec 2012	#25
Well, this man definitely represents bad science, and I can't see a difference...	Humanist_Activist	Dec 2012	#27
Here's my take on Sheldrake	Fortinbras Armstrong	Dec 2012	#32
Message auto-removed	Name removed	Jan 2014	#37
Bad science can be countered (and conquered) by good science.	trotsky	Dec 2012	#33

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.