> have many and it works as advertised. It can only be
> "experienced" personally at this time but scientific work is
Personal experience which verifies the claims cannot be a bad thing, but they must be verified by stringent scientific testing to be regarded as being a good scientific theory. Otherwise it is just a religious belief.
> A year-or-so ago, an article in AOL News stated, "Science may
> have discovered the Soul!" It was about the energy in the
> blood being the source of life, or the life-force,,, that
> life/God is in the blood. These studies are on-going, as is
> the search for a source for the 223 enigmatic genes, anounced
> in 2001. Experiments within quantum phisics to find a way to
> tie consciousness to measurable fields of energy are also
> on-going. Perhaps the Global Consciousness folks will soon
> have more tools to work with.
All of this is totally unproven. Until we have some verifiable results it is just a faith-based belief - which you are entitled to of course, but to claim that there is anything scientific about it is absolutely false.
"energy in the blood being the source of life, or the life-force,,, that life/God is in the blood"
I dont understand the logic here. Yes there is energy in our blood - its how our body moves energy around. In what sense is that a validation of an astral life-force or of God? Is God made of glucose - I think not.
> The words are different but the game is the same as in the
> works of Steiner, Jung, Castaneda and many others.
Yes and there is an absence of evidence for many or most of their beliefs too.
|A Field Theory of Consciousness..#1||232||Astikapati||07-Jul-02 09:54|
|A Field Theory of Consciousness...#2..#1||195||Astikapati||07-Jul-02 10:00|
|Re: A Field Theory of Consciousness...#3(conclusion)||194||Astikapati||07-Jul-02 10:06|
|Exerpt from a book||96||Fuzzy||07-Jul-02 10:35|
|This is not science||97||B L Zeebub||07-Jul-02 12:48|
|Zee, bub it looks like Science to me :))||117||Astikapati||08-Jul-02 04:39|
|Scientific rigour||94||B L Zeebub||08-Jul-02 09:47|
|Re: Scientific rigour||87||Hoppy||08-Jul-02 11:47|
|Re: Scientific rigour||86||B L Zeebub||08-Jul-02 13:41|
|Re: Scientific rigour||90||mephisto||09-Jul-02 02:50|
|Re: Scientific rigour||112||B L Zeebub||13-Jul-02 12:25|
|Re: Scientific rigour||89||Hoppy||14-Jul-02 21:43|
|Re: Scientific rigour||72||B L Zeebub||14-Jul-02 22:30|
|Re: Scientific rigour||172||Astikapati||09-Jul-02 06:02|