h a l f b a k e r yRIFHMAO
(Rolling in flour, halfbaking my ass off)
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I was wondering if humans had any residual
magnetic direction sensitivity from a long ago
evolution branch. Some mammals are also
reckoned to have the ability to navigate using the
Earth's magnetic field.
The first step might be to increase sensitivity by
training. The subject has other
sensory input
reduced/eliminated and is rotated gently and
randomly. Every time they are looking North, they
are informed by a small sound. This continues
as much and often as possible.
Finally, with the same conditions, the subject is
asked to indicate by pressing a switch when
looking North. This is repeated many times to
see if the result is random or not.
All about chryptochrome
http://blogs.discov...ields/#.V20hzHopDqA
[RayfordSteele, Jun 24 2016]
The James Randi Educational Foundation's Million Dollar Challenge has been terminated
http://web.randi.or...llar-challenge.html
Day late... and a million short. [2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jun 25 2016, last modified Aug 15 2016]
Amazing Randi Paranormal Challenge
https://en.wikipedi...aranormal_Challenge
Randi has said that few unsuccessful applicants ever seriously consider that their failure to perform might be due to the nonexistence of the power they believe they possess [bungston, Jun 25 2016]
Feelspace belt
http://www.feelspace.de/navibelt/
Why wait for biology to get this extra sense? [AusCan531, Jun 25 2016]
//The pineal gland controls the circadian rhythms of even profoundly blind individuals//
http://www.ncbi.nlm....gov/pubmed/1619000
Eew-aww. Bollock alert [MaxwellBuchanan, Jul 02 2016]
remote control sharks
Shark_20Whistle
[bob, Jul 04 2016]
Help yourself, [lurch]
http://www.paulhdea...g/PUBLICATIONS.html
[MaxwellBuchanan, Jul 06 2016]
heh
http://imgur.com/gallery/cVUSD
[2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jul 08 2016]
Pineal calcification due to fluoride.
http://meridianener...f-the-pineal-gland/
[2 fries shy of a happy meal, Jul 13 2016]
Social conformity.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=AegLdB7UI4U
I'm the guy still sitting. [2 fries shy of a happy meal, Sep 02 2016]
Magnetoreception in humans
http://www.eneuro.o...ENEURO.0483-18.2019
alpha event-related desynchronization (alpha-ERD) [lurch, Mar 20 2019]
[link]
|
| |
In the last stage, administration of a painful electric shock or other distasteful stimulus will improve the test subject's focus on the task. |
|
| |
would this be (kinda) related? |
|
| |
when I was in my teens my parents had one of those old big clunky microwaves, on the other side of the wall it sat against was the hallway to the front door |
|
| |
I was sure I could feel a kind of pressure in my head when the microwave was on & could even "feel" it through that wall.. |
|
| |
couldn't get either parent or my brother to switch it on & off while I stood in the hall calling out if I thought it was on or off to test the idea so no idea if I really could |
|
| |
// I was sure I could feel a kind of pressure in my
head when the microwave was on // |
|
| |
Mwahahahaha...my first victim.....come into my
laboratory... |
|
| |
* logbook entry 1: South pole location is probably
not the best idea. Move laboratory somewhere
warmer. |
|
| |
// Finally, with the same conditions // |
|
| |
umm.. you know that small sound we were using during the training stage, I can still hear it, might that effect my latest 100% success test score? |
|
| |
Haha... that's training for you. Ok, if you can still
hear strange noises, I'll introduce you to some nice
guys in white coats. They'll take care of you. |
|
| |
You might want to begin testing with us folks that can witch water.
I also don't use a compass in the bush. I haven't figured out yet though if that is just from picking up on subtle subconscious cues in plant growth and lay-of-the-land stuff or if it's a sense.
It 'feels' like a cord stretched back to where I was that I can re-trace. |
|
| |
It is certainly worth spending the money to research... unless it's already been researched and suppressed, in which case, good luck. (+) |
|
| |
//unless it's already been researched and
suppressed// Yes, because that would be both easy
and an obvious thing to want to do. We have regular
lab meetings to tell us what's being suppressed,
which is fine because scientists are so very obedient. |
|
| |
Correct me if I am wrong about this, but scientists are bound by the confidentiality agreements which they sign with whomever is funding their research are they not? ...and some breaches of confidentiality come with stiffer penalties than others correct? |
|
| |
I can't find any credible research on people being able to witch underground aquifers and yet I've both seen it done and can do so myself given a couple of lengths of coat-hanger. |
|
| |
It is too interesting a not to have been researched.
Where is the data? |
|
| |
I figure that the results of these studies, (which have almost certainly been conducted) should be mine to examine by right of being able.
By what right are they withheld? |
|
| |
//Correct me if I am wrong about this, but
scientists are bound by the confidentiality
agreements which they sign with whomever is
funding their research are they not? ...and some
breaches of confidentiality come with stiffer
penalties than others do they not?// |
|
| |
Happy to correct you. You're wrong. At least no
scientist I know in academia has had to do so.
Commercial research is of course very different,
but usually for remarkably dull reasons. |
|
| |
// I can't find any credible research on people
being able to witch underground aquifers and yet
I've both seen it done and can do so myself //
Well, there is a remarkably large body of research
on it, so I'm not sure where you've looked. If you
look on PubMed (try "Dowsing" instead of
"Witching"; and obviously ignore all the hits by
authors called Dowsing), that would at least show
you've made a small effort. |
|
| |
However, if by "witching" you mean "dowsing" then
no, you haven't seen it done and no, you can't do it
yourself. |
|
| |
Of course, lots of science _is_ suppressed. For
instance, we've known for ages that you can cure
cancer using a drawing pin and a magnet; but all
cancer researchers have agreed to keep this
secret. We'd like the big pharmas to keep making
money, because they pay for all those Ferraris that
most scientists drive these days. |
|
| |
We've also suppressed findings related to
tangerines. We're not sure why, but someone told
us to, and we all just do what we're told. |
|
| |
Fortunately, scientists are never interested in
personal gain, fame or fortune: this is why it is so
very easy to suppress things. |
|
| |
It might be a novelty to Britain, but in countries
where the sun is actually present, you can usually
tell the direction. |
|
| |
One would think that the Brits ought to have better
trained magnetoreceptivity, then. But I fear that
would be wrong: it could be that the north is defined
by an undetectably darker shade of grey and sound
of bagpipes, but it remains unproven. |
|
| |
I find that I lose much of my directional sense when indoors
of any largish building. |
|
| |
//However, if by "witching" you mean "dowsing" then no, you haven't seen it done and no, you can't do it yourself.// |
|
| |
Dowsing eh? Well I guess somebody had to have the vanity to name it after themselves... |
|
| |
I... I find it vexing to keep having things I've seen and know to be true not even questioned, just denied as given fact when I know better. |
|
| |
Yes, I have seen people witch water lines, and yes I have so done this myself. |
|
| |
// findings related to tangerines. We're not sure why, // |
|
| |
Cold fusion. It's a stitch-up by the oil companies. Mr. Fusion generators run best on citrus fruit, and tangerines are the equivalent of high-octane. |
|
| |
[Skewed] If you thought the microwave was on, it may
not
have been. Microwaves only have one power setting,
because that makes them more efficient. So whatever
power setting they're set to, they actually switch on
and off every few seconds to give an average power
output over the total cooking time. At full power I
think a modern microwave is actually off for about
about
half the cooking time. This allows heat to dissipate
through the food from 'hotspots' caused by uneven
distribution of microwave energy. |
|
| |
//Deal with it// Thanks, but I have no need to. I
just don't believe it, and can deal with that instead.
You don't need to deal with my disbelief either, of
course. |
|
| |
// I think a modern microwave is actually off for about about half the cooking time. // |
|
| |
You think incorrectly. Your unjustifiable violent beating will commence shortly. |
|
| |
A microwave oven on full power runs the magnetron continuously. For lower powers, it's gated on and off - the timescale is of the order of many seconds. This is because the supply is usually switched by a relay, which is cheap but can't take rapid switching. |
|
| |
It is, however, possible to gate a magnetron on very fast - radar does this - but it would require high power triacs with zero-crossing switching. Rather more expensive than a 50¢ relay. |
|
| |
<Rayford> interesting link. Maybe results would be
more forthcoming with appropriate training. |
|
| |
Is it time to adminster the painful negative stimuli yet ? We have the cattle prod right here ... |
|
| |
I think that would probably boost sensitivity to high
voltage fields instead. Better than driving people
around in a bus. |
|
| |
<wonders aloud why 8th has a cattle prod but no cattle...> |
|
| |
//I just don't believe it, and can deal with that instead. You don't need to deal with my disbelief either, of course.// |
|
| |
Deal.
You drive a hard bargain Hoss. |
|
| |
I gotta tell you though. It wasn't some side-show type person who showed me this trick but a landscaper who used two bent coat-hangers as a tool to map out underground water lines before digging into anyone's property. He'd hold these two rods in his pinky fingers pointing straight out and when he passed over a water line they would cross.
It worked for me too even with my eyes closed. |
|
| |
'That' is a thing which should be documented.
Since I have both seen and done this thing which has been scientifically debunked... I already know that the propaganda surrounding this debunking is utter horseshit... and am happy to prove it. |
|
| |
//He'd hold these two rods in his pinky fingers
pointing straight out and when he passed over a
water line they would cross// |
|
| |
If he knew where the water lines were, why did he
bother with the dowsing? |
|
| |
You never know where the water lines are buried on a property you didn't install. Even on one's you did. |
|
| |
I just know it worked... and yet it doesn't exist, just like a bunch of other shit I've seen and done that doesn't exist. |
|
| |
I figure that if you were in my shoes, you'd be calling bullshit too. |
|
| |
Wel then, how do you know the water lines were
where he said they were? |
|
| |
But, to return to the earlier point, did you go on
PubMed to look at those references? |
|
| |
We would flag the lines and sometimes needed to expose them. If I recall correctly it worked for gas lines too. |
|
| |
I haven't had time to check references yet but it looks like I've go a free hour or so before anyone is home so I'll get right on that. Maybe you could link to the references you are referencing.
<little bit later>
Yeah, every hit I seem to find for dowsing + water on pubmed returns with a "no abstract" to check out. Perhaps I must pay them to see these. |
|
| |
Try PubMed ID# 754193, "Anatomical localization of human detection
of weak electromagnetic radiation: experiments with dowsers."
Harvalik, ZV; Physiol Chem Phys. 1978;10(6):525-34. |
|
| |
It's got an abstract; let me know if you can't get the full article, I can go
give it a try. I can often find the right trick to pull free articles out of the
stack. |
|
| |
Interesting [lurch]. No, I can't seem to get the full article.
Wow, I was ten when that study was conducted.
Everything just keeps coming full circle back to this pineal gland business doesn't it? |
|
| |
Future generations should not be limited by senses their predecessors do not possess. |
|
| |
I know it pisses me right off, I have no idea what effect it will have on them, but I'm betting their reaction will be, less... internalized than my own has been. |
|
| |
Sad really. Such squandered potential. |
|
| |
I have seen pigeons navigating their way home by
some mechanism, but I have never seen them find
water with dowsing rods. |
|
| |
// <wonders aloud why 8th has a cattle prod
but no cattle...> // |
|
| |
I concur, 8th seems to be more of a taser mind set. |
|
| |
// If I recall correctly it worked for gas lines too.
// |
|
| |
Ah, right. So, not one but two different senses - one
for water and one for polypropylene. Isn't pre-
emptive evolution wonderful? |
|
| |
// 8th seems to be more of a taser mind set // |
|
| |
Cattle prod seems more likely to me - a sturdily built cattle pod can make a serviceable billy club when the charge runs out & looks far nicer with a pair of nice shiny jackboots |
|
| |
he probably has both though |
|
| |
// I have seen pigeons navigating their way home // // but I have never seen them find water with dowsing rods // |
|
| |
That's only because they've no hands to hold them, with a suitable harness to hold the rods they could be a godsend in parched areas |
|
| |
Some of the Dorkbot gang have had tiny magnets surgically implanted in their hands. With the 'sixth sense' they're capable of sensing interesting things.. |
|
| |
//So, not one but two different senses - one for water and one for polypropylene// |
|
| |
It would seem to work with fluids in general. Not two senses at all, just adaptations of the same extra sense... which I happen to have been born with. |
|
| |
Demonstratable and reproducible, yet my abilities don't exist in this cozy little society of folks with their eyes shut tight and with their fingers shoved in their ears. |
|
| |
"Grab your torches and pitchforks! Burn the witch!" |
|
| |
Might be about time y'all had your filters removed.
I think that it would be best for all concerned if those filters were removed voluntarily rather than by force. |
|
| |
Would anyone care for some more fluoride?
No need to take your fingers out of your ears, we've provided this handy straw to make it easier for you. |
|
| |
The Amazing Randi had a standing $ offer to anyone who could demonstrate dowsing ability. Lets see if I can link this up.
I saw Randi in a parade last year. 2 fries if your water witchery is in good shape maybe you should claim that prize. |
|
| |
Day late, and a million short. |
|
| |
// Would anyone care for some more
fluoride?// Are you crazy? Don't you know the
Gubment puts it in water for mind control, because
of Reasons? They want to block your dowsing
capabilities, because of the obvious implications for
National Security. |
|
| |
Someone has created an artificial way to sense North [link]. |
|
| |
^ Ah, artificial extra senses. Yes that might help ease the transition. |
|
| |
// Are you crazy? Don't you know the Gubment puts it in water for mind control, because of Reasons?// |
|
| |
What is the level of fluoride overdose before it's effects are detrimental?
How many types of fluoride are there?
Which of those types are introduced to public water supplies?
What food and drug regulations are in place to ensure public safety in this regard?
Which food groups contain the most fluoride?
Would it surprise you to learn that those foods are soda-pop and pablum?
How much fluoride does it take to overdose an infant?
Are the parents of small children given informed consent before their dental hygienists open micro wounds at the gum-line allowing their children to have a fifteen minute fluoride "treatment" every few months introduced directly into their blood-stream nice and close to the brain so that it can collect in their child's pineal gland causing its premature calcification and a cascade effect of their child's entire endocrine system which is asymptomatic for each individual and so misdiagnosed by a majority of the fucking medical establishment unless they happen to have a background in psychoneuroendocrinology? |
|
| |
...and if not,
...why not? |
|
| |
Yes, you're absolutely right, [2fries]. And of course
there's a great reason why the gubment wants to do
this, as I'm sure you'll explain. |
|
| |
Unless, of course, they've got to you too. It's possible
that you're a CIA plant, here to distract us from the
real issue of Area 54. |
|
| |
Yay! Junior high school bully tactics. "Please sir, could I have some more?..." |
|
| |
No [Max] I don't have answers, just questions that make people want to stick their fingers further into their ears and shut their eyes tighter... like you're doing. |
|
| |
Our Gubments are corrupt and in need of an extensive overhaul, but we should probably look into why there is a percentage of kids under five with calcified pineal glands before we tackle that problem. |
|
| |
//Our Gubments are corrupt and in need of an
extensive overhaul.// |
|
| |
There ya go - I knew there'd be something we
agreed on. |
|
| |
The main difference is that you believe that your
corrupt gubment is suppressing your ability to
dowse for gas lines by feeding you fluoride, and
developing sophisticated mind-control and flying
saucers. |
|
| |
I, on the other hand, believe that my corrupt
gubment is
lining its own pockets and couldn't suppress a fart
(or 'trump' as they're called here). |
|
| |
When in doubt, incompetence is always a safer bet
than malicious cleverness. |
|
| |
...but before we check into the calcified pineal glands of five year olds, we should probably investigate why there are a percentage of kids under the age of two with prematurely calcified pineal glands. |
|
| |
...and the increasing cases of precocious puberty in our societies. |
|
| |
...and the fact that osteoporosis doesn't exists in the animal kingdom unless induced by pinealectomy. |
|
| |
"Then" we can work on politicians on the take. |
|
| |
Just how much fluoride do your kids injest?
Any clue? |
|
| |
//prematurely calcified pineal glands// Ah yes,
that well-known phenomenon. It's probably a
communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of
our precious bodily fluids. |
|
| |
//increasing cases of precocious puberty in our
societies// Yes, well, obviously the gubment is
doing this, because [insert reason here]. They try
to cover it up as being due to better nutrition and
childhood obesity, but we know better. Now, what
were those reasons? |
|
| |
//and the fact that osteoporosis doesn't exists in
the animal kingdom// actually, it exists in horses,
elephants, and most of the great apes if they
reach old age. But that's not important, of course.
What's more important is the reason the gubment
wants us all to get osteoporosis. |
|
| |
//Just how much fluoride do your kids injest?//
Was that "inject", "in jest" or "ingest"? We use
fluoridated toothpaste, which is partly responsible
for the dramatic decline in dental caries over the
last couple of decades, at least here in the UK. |
|
| |
But enough of this trifling talk. You were about to
explain exactly why the gubment wants our teeth
to undergo premature puberty and develop
osteoporosis, and I interrupted you. Floor's yours,
bud. Sock it to us. |
|
| |
I keep talking about the pineal gland, 'you' keep bringing up the government as a distraction tactic, not me.
If you could stop bringing them up maybe we could discuss magnetosensitivity in humans like the author intended instead of browbeating me over the words you are putting in my mouth. |
|
| |
We had to fight to get fluoride taken out of our drinking water supplies here.
The dosage was set in the 1940's at 1mg/day, presuming
that the average person drinking four glasses of water a day could obtain this "optimal" dose. This has now been lowered to 0.07 mg/day. Some infant formula contains more than the old optimal dose per serving.
I've no idea why this would be allowed. |
|
| |
This all started when you flat out called me a liar for claiming to be able to witch water, which is true.
Since I know that this is true, it would appear to tie in with many of my other abnormalities which all seem to revolve around being born with an enlarged pineal gland, delaying my puberty until twenty, and allowing me to sense and do things that a majority of people don't seem to be able to sense and do. |
|
| |
It seemed to be on topic. |
|
| |
How does premature
puberty caused by this pineal
calcification (is that even a thing?) relate to your
delayed puberty? I thought it was all about
precocious puberty? |
|
| |
And no, I didn't call you a liar over your claim to be
able to witch (dowse?)
water. I simply said that you could not witch
water, which is the case. That's not quite the
same thing. |
|
| |
You seem to have many superpowers yet, despite
these or because of them,
things have not worked out brilliantly. And you
believe that the government
wants to suppress these and many other things,
and to cover up yet more
things, despite their manifest inability to conceal a
5-minute blow-job in the
Oval Office*. I have yet to hear a convincing
reason as to why they would
want to do this**, but I am sure a reason is not
really necessary. |
|
| |
Let me be frank, here. I think you're a complete
and utter whacko (unless
you're doing this stuff just for our mutual
entertainment, which I don't think is
the case but could be). I feel I should be honest in
telling you that. I bear
you no ill-will as a result, and I am sure the
reverse is true. As the
manufacturers of Licorice Allsorts so wisely tell us,
it takes all sorts. |
|
| |
I also enjoy our periodic discussions here - they are
invigorating. All the more
so because, of course, there is no prospect of the
matter being resolved in
either direction. I don't consider it bullying, since
we are both equally
eloquent and, at least on the internet, equally big. |
|
| |
However, as you rightly pointed out, the original
topic here was human
magnetoception. It has been investigated quite
extensively, but if it exists it
is quite weak and perhaps varies from person to
person. |
|
| |
If it does exist, it probably uses the same
mechanisms found in birds. It's
quite a cool system, which seems to work by the
effect of a very weak
magnetic field on a triplet state of a molecule
called cryptochrome, and
thence on its chemical interactions with other
molecules. For it to work, the
cryptochrome has to be excited by light; so, if you
transport pigeons in a
completely dark box, they can't monitor the
magnetic field, and therefore
can't navigate home very well. If they have light
(even a lightbulb) while
they're being transported, then the light-excited
cryptochrome can respond to
the magnetic field, and they can map their way
out (and hence back). |
|
| |
As far as I know, the government has never
particularly tried to suppress
research into human magnetoception, and it's hard
to figure out why they
would. The field was pretty dormant for a long
time, until the mechanism
behind magnetoception in birds was figured out. |
|
| |
It's also interesting to note that fruit-flies can
sense magnetic fields, using the
same mechanism. If you knock out their own
cryptochrome they lose the
ability; but if you replace it with either avian or
human equivalents, they
regain the ability. So, we at least have one of the
molecules needed for
magnetoception; and we may or may not have
vestiges of the other machinery
needed to make it work. |
|
| |
(* It may have been less - I don't know Mr. Clinton
that well.) |
|
| |
(**i.e. to conceal or suppress these things;
obviously the blow job was a good idea at the
time.) |
|
| |
// I thought it was you who raised the pineal gland and its calcification? But perhaps I'm wrong. And how does premature puberty caused by this calcification relate to your delayed puberty? // |
|
| |
I did bring up the pineal gland. It was cited as a possible center for the sense being used to "dowse" underground water for the fourteen confirmed cases in [lurch]'s PubMed address. |
|
| |
My delayed puberty was not caused by pineal calcification but by its opposite, hypermalatoninism. |
|
| |
We can keep humans prepubescent indefinitely as long as melatonin levels don't drop below those of a child. They are using this therapy to keep transgender children prepubescent until their age of consent before undergoing surgery so that their hormones align with gender choice post op. |
|
| |
I did 'not' bring up the gubment. That's all you. |
|
| |
//And no, I didn't call you a liar over your claim to be able to witch (dowse?) water. I merely said that you could not witch water. That's not quite the same thing.// |
|
| |
Same shit, different pile. |
|
| |
// You seem to have many superpowers yet, despite these or because of them, things have not worked out brilliantly. And you believe that the government wants to suppress these and many other things, and to cover up yet more things, despite their manifest inability to conceal a 5-minute blow-job in the Oval Office*. I have yet to hear a convincing reason as to why they would want to do this**, but I am sure a reason is not really necessary. // |
|
| |
Not super powers, just differences from the norm, and I resent being left behind educationally while coming to terms with unfiltered perception with no teacher. Getting kicked out into the adult world prepubescent and uneducated was no picnic either... all because the pineal gland and its effects on the human endocrine system wasn't taught to the general medical practitioners at the time.
Is it taught to them now? |
|
| |
You're bringing up the government again and telling me what I think.
Please stop that. It's rude. |
|
| |
//Let me be frank, here. I think you're a complete and utter whacko (unless you're doing this stuff just for our mutual entertainment, which I don't think is the case but could be). I feel I should be honest in telling you that. I bear you no ill-will as a result, and I am sure the reverse is true. As the manufacturers of Licorice Allsorts so wisely tell us, it takes all sorts.// |
|
| |
I'll be frank as well then.
I bear you no ill will. I'm one of the most easy going guys you'd meet.
I'm also extremely envious of your education and my lack thereof makes me defensive to begin with. Finding out so late in life that intellectuals are my group of choice, (who knew?), makes me feel vastly inferior. You don't seem to have any trouble keeping me on the defensive with your proclamations and twisting that knife while professing no ill will.
I both like and respect you and think this behaviour beneath you. |
|
| |
// I also enjoy our periodic discussions here - they are invigorating. All the more so because, of course, there is no prospect of the matter being resolved in either direction. I don't consider it bullying, since we are both equally eloquent and, at least on the internet, equally big. // |
|
| |
I would enjoy them more if my words were given the slightest benefit of the doubt.
There is no doubt in your mind that what I claim is false... and so there is no benefit to be had from that on my end. |
|
| |
You don't listen. You berate. |
|
| |
Every claim I have made on this site is true.
Yes I realise how improbable that is. Try living it and staying sane in our modern society. The chip on my shoulder is massive as it is for a good reason. I've had to fight tooth and nail to keep my psyche intact while being able to perceive things nobody I've met seems to be able to perceive, and as big as you are you're not likely to dislodge it with your skepticism. |
|
| |
I can't do much about that other than keep telling it like it is, but I can assure you that amusing you with the truth of my reality is not a priority. |
|
| |
// However, as you rightly pointed out, the original topic here was human magnetoception. It has been investigated quite extensively, but if it exists it is quite weak and perhaps varies from person to person. |
|
| |
If it does exist, it probably uses the same mechanisms found in birds. It's quite a cool system, which seems to work by the effect of a very weak magnetic field on a triplet state of a molecule called cryptochrome, and thence on its chemical interactions with other molecules. For it to work, the cryptochrome has to be excited by light; so, if you transport pigeons in a completely dark box, they can't monitor the magnetic field, and therefore can't navigate home very well. If they have light (even a lightbulb) while they're being transported, then the light-excited cryptochrome can respond to the magnetic field, and they can map their way out (and hence back). |
|
| |
As far as I know, the government has never particularly tried to suppress research into human magnetoception, and it's hard to figure out why they would. The field was pretty dormant for a long time, until the mechanism behind magnetoception in birds was figured out.// |
|
| |
That was kinda my point before we diverged off on the whole government conspiracy tangent. |
|
| |
The pineal gland is light sensitive which means that any electro magnetic sense a human being might possibly have would be housed there. Being born with an enlarged gland might very well account for sensing waves not normally perceived by a majority of the population. |
|
| |
You gotta cut me some slack guv. I'm an uneducated guy trying to self diagnose shit the doctors themselves haven't been taught and I work by intuition, (another non-existent male trait). |
|
| |
I figure I'm doing one hell of a lot better than you would have in my shoes... and I can't help but wonder how well I would have done in yours. |
|
| |
If I may throw in a bit of a 3rd party perspective: |
|
| |
2 fries, be less self-absorbed and people won't actively try
and pry the chip off. Explore other people's weirdness. |
|
| |
Max, you do have a tendency to come off as an arrogant
know-it-all at times. Don't worry, it's a common trait here,
one that I've been accused of as well. Magneto sensitivity
may or may not be a thing. Jury's out. I'm remaining more
skeptical of dowsing but that's just me. |
|
| |
If I were a drinking person I'd have a beer with either of
you. |
|
| |
Incidentally I do better at corn mazes without a map, and
have a pretty good sense of direction. What environmental
clues I might be using to do that I haven't paid that much
attention to. |
|
| |
[-2fries] - will try county library Monday a.m. |
|
| |
I was always very proud of my sense of direction. I just always
knew which way was north; I thought anybody that could get lost
just had to be dumb. Until I found a place where it didn't work. |
|
| |
That first place was Caineville, Utah. I went there to help haul hay
on a relative's farm. I think I fell asleep on the trip down; we got
there pretty late. Woke up the next morning, and the sun came up
in the south. It was the weirdest feeling - I was wrong, I could tell I
was wrong, but the body-compass was firmly fixed so that "north"
points due east. |
|
| |
No matter how I try (and it's been at least a hundred occasions over
the past 40 years) I haven't been able to fix the self-compass. I've
even walked the last 5 miles with both compass and GPS and
found the spot where my perception diverges from reality - there's a
45 degree bend in the road, and my internal compass turns 135
degrees going around it - but (it seems to me, anyway) whatever
internal sensor I have locks into first impressions of geography.
They then become indelible. I just have to apply a conscious
correction whenever I'm there. |
|
| |
I think the light-sensing that you mentioned sounds very likely,
given other places and situations where I've gotten messed up.
Osaka, Japan turns me around just a bit more than 90 degrees the
other way - my north points real west-south-west there (my first
time there, I rode the Shinkansen, northbound, facing backward,
and going through all those crazy tunnels) - and Telluride, Colorado
flips me around almost precisely backward (that trip involved eight
college students in a station wagon in a blizzard - and if I hadn't had
a crush on one of them, I swear I damn well would have let them
out to walk the last 25 miles). |
|
| |
Nowadays I find I can lose it just walking through a shopping mall. I
hate living in the city. Artificial lights are damned liars. |
|
| |
Well, [2fries], all fair and well enough. |
|
| |
To address the facts first: dowsing was invented in
the 1400's or 1500's as a
way to find metals - it's not some ancient art. The
idea that it would work
for water came later. Your suggestion that it works
for "fluids" including
gases takes it further, and I wonder how you pick
out a 2-inch gas pipe
given that there are a few feet of fluid between
you and it anyway.
Dowsing has been very extensively tested; in most
cases, the "dowsers"
reported themselves as being very confident of
their abilities. In all cases,
they failed completely. Many of them,
presumably, were honestly
confident in their abilities - that is the difference
between lying and being
wrong. |
|
| |
In short, I am utterly confident that dowsing does
not work. It is simply
not a thing. |
|
| |
Now on to more interesting things. Yes, I do
berate and argue viciously. It
is my vice. I am the same (in suitable
circumstances) about astrology,
alien abductions, religion and precognition. In
part, this comes from
believers in those things making accusations about
people like me
(scientists) - such as the accusation that scientists
have never tested
"dowsers"; that we sign //confidentiality
agreements// to //suppress//
certain areas of research; that we have "closed
minds", and so forth. Science
has generally bent over
backwards to test these claims, at its own
expense, and I at least find such
comments deeply insulting. Perhaps you don't
realize that making those
comments about science and scientists can be as
offensive to scientists as
mine are to you. |
|
| |
As [Rayford] pointed out, I do indeed come across
as arrogant. In fact, I would go further and say
that I _am_ arrogant on this type of topic. But, as
I
mentioned, this particular type of topic is my vice. |
|
| |
Finally, to return to magnetoception in humans. It
definitely exists in some animals; we think we
understand the mechanism behind it; humans have
at least some of the components necessary for it;
so far, it has not been shown convincingly that
humans have this sense; but it is within the bounds
of plausibility and would be very cool if it were the
case. |
|
| |
Thanks [lurch] I would appreciate that. I am very interested. |
|
| |
//Your vice... my life. // |
|
| |
And not mine?? I have spent my life as a scientist,
you have spent your life as you. In your discussions
in various ideas here, you request that I and others
disregard what we understand (which is fine - it is
always good to consider extreme possibilities), and
then invariably imply that science has either
suppressed or disregarded your unusual abilities;
and that there is some sort of conspiracy to do so;
and that we and our opinions can be bought on a
global scale. |
|
| |
I find _that_ as offensive as you find my
comments. |
|
| |
I was quite careful _not_ to call you a liar
regarding your unique ability to dowse/witch. I
believe that you believe you can do so. Yet you
repeatedly imply that scientists are, as a
profession, liars and suppressors of the truth. |
|
| |
So, maybe your life. Mine too, chum. |
|
| |
Based on [2 fries]' link to the PubMed article in the 'So you think you're a psychic?' idea, it would appear that the discussion of pineal involvement is only half of the story. The study also claims that kidneys must be involved. |
|
| |
I wonder: is this the origin of the quaint Appalachian saying 'I feels it in my water'? |
|
| |
Perhaps a small percentage of humans (and other critters) possess both an enlarged pineal gland AND the renal sensitivity (and maybe some magnosensitivity apparatus) required for the feedback loop...it's starting to sound all Vagus nerve-y, too. |
|
| |
[Max], send the research funds to my post box in Canada, c/o Sgt Teacup, Outlier Performance Assessment Office. |
|
| |
[MB] I am guilty as charged... to greater and lesser degrees... just not on this thread. Semantics really. |
|
| |
...and I've got no beef with science. serfdom on the other hand... |
|
| |
...anyway, I would just as soon discuss it with you further with fewer beers under my belt. |
|
| |
So good-day to you sir. I'm off to bed. |
|
| |
// I have spent my life as a scientist, you have spent your life as you. In your discussions in various ideas here, you request that I and others disregard what we understand (which is fine - it is always good to consider extreme possibilities), and then invariably imply that science has either suppressed or disregarded your unusual abilities; and that there is some sort of conspiracy to do so; and that we and our opinions can be bought on a global scale. |
|
| |
I find _that_ as offensive as you find my comments.// |
|
| |
It is true I have asked everyone to suspend their disbelief. I think it's necessary in order to be able to understand since I was given no words to go with whatever I went through I have no definitions for any of it.
Without suspending disbelief it will not be possible to even imagine the possibility that I'm not full of shit. |
|
| |
I don't really have the option of not listening to my gut like most people seem to be able to do. My intuition and gut-feelings were what I was left to work with so those are the things I developed.
I can ignore my gut, but that has pretty much always led to disaster. It is connected to my subconscious mind and my subconscious mind knows things my conscious mind does not. |
|
| |
I don't think that it is 'my' abilities being supressed, I think that it is human abilities in general being suppressed, but not by science. |
|
| |
I like science, but I think that research seeming to support claims which are paranormal are buried and that scientists wishing to explore them are either denied funding or outright blackballed into pursuing other things. |
|
| |
So while you and you individual opinions may not have been bought on a global scale, your time and energies certainly have been since you've got to do what your bosses tell you to do just like the rest of us. |
|
| |
See, I've "actually" seen dowsing and done this thing myself. It was a neat trick, but absolutely nothing compared to some of the things I've seen.
I linked to a peer reviewed publication from a credible source confirming proof of this ability in humans and yet no doubt at all exists that I am wrong about this.
If this one tiny little spark of the gift is enough to make you go all "pistols-at-dawn" on my ass, then any further claims would surely have you lighting my pyre. |
|
| |
It makes discussion of a topic extremely difficult when my words get me attacked and placed on the defensive from the get-go. |
|
| |
You used the word vice to mean habit, but the image that popped into my head was that of my life getting squashed within a vice. So "Your vice...my life", was probably a bad choice of words, yet somehow seem totally appropriate. |
|
| |
See, everything I've told you is true, and its kind of hard to explain anything while fending off attack. |
|
| |
//your time and energies certainly have been since
you've got to do what your bosses tell you to do
just like the rest of us.// |
|
| |
Actually, I have very rarely been told what to do -
what to research - in my career. At the moment, I
have no boss (I am my own boss, so to speak).
When I did have bosses, their only requirement
was that I do something ambitious and/or cool. If
there had been the faintest prospect of discovering
something that fundamentally overturned what we
know, they would have wished me well and told
me to go for it. |
|
| |
And the bosses I have had, have themselves very
rarely been told what to do. Perhaps you don't
know many good scientists very well. |
|
| |
As for blackballing, there are only a couple of
common reasons why it can happen, at least in
good labs (which tend to be the least
conservative). The first is data fabrication,
obviously. The second is flogging a very dead
horse. |
|
| |
If "dowsing" were "discovered" today, there would
be a reasonable amount of funding for research
into it, because it would represent a possible new
and unexplained sense. The enthusiasm for finding
something new would be balanced against
skepticism, but the research would be funded and
would get done. |
|
| |
If the research (I mean real research - double-blind
trials etc) found there was something there,
money would pour into the field - imagine, a new
sense! Think of the possibilities, both scientific
and commercial! It would be immense! |
|
| |
If, however, the research showed that there was
nothing there - for example, that large numbers of
people who were confident of their dowsing
abilities did not, in fact, have those abilities - then
funding would dry up. There's only so much time
and effort you can waste if it turns out to be a
wild goose chase. |
|
| |
Scientists are happy to look carefully and with
open minds. If they do good science, they can tell
if there's anything there. If they are first to show
there _is_ something there, that's pretty much
their dream. |
|
| |
For dowsing, it's been done. There's nothing there.
So, in persisting, you are asking us to believe that
of all the people who claim to be able to dowse,
only you have the ability. |
|
| |
It's possible, but given what we've found so far it
makes no sense to waste more time, money and
effort on debunking it again, and again. |
|
| |
If there's any reality to this, fine, it'll emerge
eventually, despite the incredulity of everyone. So
that's fine. Just like if there's anything in cold
fusion, sooner or later it'll come out. Just don't
complain about not having been given a fair crack
at it. Go and dowse some underground water in a
place where people are dying of thirst - that sort
of thing gets attention. |
|
| |
In fact, I'll make you a deal, [2fries]. You and I will
figure out a test of dowsing which (a) you think is
fair and (b) would convince me. You come here,
do the test. If you pass the agreed test, I will pay
your travel and accommodation tests PLUS £10,000
in hard cash. Or if you prefer I will donate £10,000
to your favourite charity. |
|
| |
If you fail the agreed test, you go back home -
you're out of pocket by your travel expenses, but
you won't owe me anything at all. |
|
| |
How's that? If you want to discuss this offline
(though online would be more fun), my email
address is on my profile page. |
|
| |
Did you even look at the link about dowsing? Some humans have already shown to be able to detect electromagnetism. |
|
| |
If you get to pick and choose your own projects indiscriminately I think that's great.
what do you think they'd say if you wanted to pursue a project looking into the pineal glands role in the human production of dymethyltryptamine and its relation to visual snow?
I know of a willing test subject with an enlarged pineal gland you could probably talk into participating.
You could even write up the proposal as a lark just to see what the reaction would be... |
|
| |
If life doesn't chuck too many kicks to the teeth my way in the coming year we've tentatively planned a family trip to the UK next summer. |
|
| |
// Some humans have already shown to be able to detect electromagnetism. // |
|
| |
This is correct. Experimentation has shown wavelength-specific sensitivity to E-M radiation in the 400 to 800 nm band, and more generalized surface detection in the 1000 - 2000 nm band. |
|
| |
//Did you even look at the link about dowsing?//
Which link? The Randi link isn't the one you mean,
I'm assuming. |
|
| |
And yes, as noted, humans can detect
electromagnetic radiation (light, heat; and if
someone tells me they can feel the low-frequency
EM from power lines, I would not dismiss it out of
hand). And as I mentioned, it's plausible that
humans can detect static magnetic fields. |
|
| |
//pineal glands role in the human production of
dymethyltryptamine and its relation to visual
snow?// |
|
| |
I know nothing much about endocrinology, but
apparently the pineal gland does produce or
contain DMT (at least in rodents). And since it's
neuroactive, it's not unreasonable that it could
impact vision. |
|
| |
// a family trip to the UK next summer. // Do
you know when, approximately? |
|
| |
Presumably, when the ambient temperature rises above an average 22 C. Below that, scaly reptiles become noticeably torpid ... |
|
| |
// when the ambient temperature rises above an
average 22 C// Ah. Counting on global warming,
then? |
|
| |
So, to be clear, you're saying that scientists
disregard or dismiss the possibility of dowsing
out of hand; and that you can dowse. Yet, when a
scientist (I could show you the paperwork) offers
you the chance to show that you can dowse, under
conditions to be agreed by you; and to pay not
only your expenses but £10,000 if you succeed; and
asks for nothing in return if you fail - you decline
the invitation. |
|
| |
[-2fries], I've checked Ebsco, PubMed Central, Medline, and my
county library; no luck yet. Not certain when I'll get to the University,
will let you know. |
|
| |
[lurch] if you do get a copy, I'd also be interested to
see it. |
|
| |
// Counting on global warming, then? // |
|
| |
More like hoping for an ice age... |
|
| |
//Did you even look at the link about dowsing?// Which link?// |
|
| |
On the idea you posted to make fun of me, "So You Think You're A Psychic." |
|
| |
// I know nothing much about endocrinology, but apparently the pineal gland does produce or contain DMT (at least in rodents). And since it's neuroactive, it's not unreasonable that it could impact vision. // |
|
| |
Try explaining that to your teachers at ten years old. |
|
| |
// a family trip to the UK next summer. Do you know when, approximately?// |
|
| |
My daughter will be graduating high school, (first of her bloodline to do so, <pat's own... and her mothers' back>) and has her heart set on seeing England, France, Germany etc... all the old architecture and get all worldly and such, so her mother and I started squirreling away money for the trip last year. I think we've probably got a couple grand set aside so far. No idea when, or if the nest-egg might evaporate in a single downfall.
Y'know... life's what happens when you're making other plans and all that. |
|
| |
// So, to be clear, you're saying that scientists disregard or dismiss the possibility of dowsing out of hand; and that you can dowse. Yet, when a scientist (I could show you the paperwork) offers you the chance to show that you can dowse, under conditions to be agreed by you; and to pay not only your expenses but £10,000 if you succeed; and asks for nothing in return if you fail - you decline the invitation. |
|
| |
I haven't declined the invitation. I just don't want your money. You can set up whatever tests that you think will get people to stop squishing kids going through what I did, and I'm all yours. Free of charge.
I hope to meet you and as many halfbakers from the area who can possibly show up... I challenge anyone to commute farther than I have to do so though, muhahahahaha. |
|
| |
Thanks lurch. It Is pretty cool isn't it? |
|
| |
//On the idea you posted to make fun of me, "So You
Think You're A Psychic." // |
|
| |
Ah, right. I presume you've got a copy of that one -
can you email it to me? I would be interested to
read it. And apologies for the fun-making. |
|
| |
[Ian] If you mean magnetic sense, it's unlikely to
be related to balance. As far as we know, every
organism that senses magnetism (at least every
multicellular organism) uses the
cryptochrome/triplet-state mechanism, which is
more closely allied to vision. |
|
| |
I agree it would make more "sense" to have
something like a compass needle, and that that
needle would be related to the otoliths used for
balance. But the observation is that that isn't the
case. |
|
| |
[2fries] (a) If you've got a copy of that paper,
please email me (PDF or whatever), as I would be
interested. (b) When you visit the UK, and
assuming we can meet up, what sort of test of
dowsing would you consider fair and doable? |
|
| |
No worries. My hide is pretty tough and I totally understand. I wouldn't believe my shit either if I hadn't lived it.
The kids that are coming that are like me are not going to be able to take it though. They... they just won't, and if they are compressed to the point of exploding then that weirdness is going to erupt in places you can't predict. |
|
| |
The weird stuff I've seen comes in spurts, so my life has been as boring a thing as you can possibly imagine interspersed with, completely random off-the-chart bizarreness. That's why I kind of laugh when you bring up paranoia. If there are people being paid to watch me... then they must be going out of their minds waiting for something... ANYTHING, to happen in my boring little life and it makes me chuckle.
It's been 99.99% boring... and .01% cool stuff. |
|
| |
Ha! If I am being watched, I sure hope they brought pillows... |
|
| |
The cool stuff I've seen with other people I trust. The cool stuff I've seen alone just makes me doubt my sanity.
I figure that doubting it must be a good sign since everyone else I've ever seen slip into madness has absolutely no doubt whatsoever that they're fine.
I've been doubting mine daily for over forty years now.
Yay, the super power nobdy ever gets to see. |
|
| |
It's funny, right? It's gotta be funny 'cause the alternative is tears, and ain't nobody got time for that shit. |
|
| |
I much prefer the boring parts of life.
The bizarre parts are, taxing.
For the longest time I just wanted to be like everybody else... but I'm not, and I'm alright with that.
I just get a little ornery when I feel backed into a corner and lash out because that's my conditioned response. Too many communal school shower episodes with entire junior hockey teams whipping towels.
I need to work on that. |
|
| |
I have no need to lie to any of you for attention though. I've spent my life trying to avoid attention since it has usually come with an ass-kicking attached.
I just refuse to not be myself here. I want to be friends and if you can't be yourself around friends... then what's the point? |
|
| |
I can't get you a transcript of that paper because [lurch] hasn't tracked it down yet. |
|
| |
Hell, I couldn't even find a copy of the abstract itself. I really wasn't kidding you when I said that information about the pineal gland and its weirdness is disappearing... at least from public view. |
|
| |
I think it's been going on for a while now. |
|
| |
If the abstract doesn't suddenly show up as debunked then the point of whether I can dowse water or not is sort of moot, and honestly it is just something I saw some guy do like thirty years ago and then did myself a few times that summer... and then never did it again.
I've never had to. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a puddle in Canada. It was just something neat that I socked away in case it ever came in handy. I have no idea if it would still work now, or what metal was used to make the coat-hangers back then, or what plastic was in the pipes... none of it.
I just know what I saw and what I did back then isn't a false memory because I wasn't alone. |
|
| |
I would much prefer if you could test the pineal related claims I've made which can be clinically verified. It's like "literally" a light sensitive third eyeball in your head. Doesn't it make sense that some folks are able to receive information from this gland/organ while others are not? |
|
| |
Sounds to me like something which should have been tested up the whazoo by now. |
|
| |
...but I can't find the info. |
|
| |
Maybe it just hasn't been researched yet, this only spot in the entire brain that is singular and on this side of the blood/brain barrier where it can be chemically affected and is physically tied to the responses of the rest of the entire human endocrine system, yet thought to be disposable... like tonsils or an appendix. |
|
| |
If dowsing ends up being no longer an issue with you I would opt for an FMRI scan. |
|
| |
You have access to these machines yes?
I'm pretty sure that by going to that place in my head where the ideas are I could light that puppy up like a Christmas tree. |
|
| |
// I couldn't even find a copy of the abstract itself. I really wasn't kidding
you when I said that information about the pineal gland and its weirdness
is disappearing... at least from public view.// |
|
| |
If you mean that Harvalik reference, the abstract is in your own link. |
|
| |
As for other scientific publications disappearing - not really. If anything,
it's going the other way, with more journals going open-access. Also, more
research institutions now require their scientists to publish only in open-
access journals (or to pay to release their publications as open access). |
|
| |
This is a good thing - I hate the old model whereby even publicly-funded
research is pay-per-view. |
|
| |
When you encounter a topic that only has a handful of publications several
years old, it usually means that it turned out to be a red herring. In the
case of dowsing, it makes a few appearances in bona-fide journals a few
decades ago; then there are a few publications where it's tested properly
and gave negative results; then no more publications in bona-fide journals.
If somebody says "I've got a unicorn in this box!", everyone will rush to
look. If somebody says it again, people will come back for a second look.
But after a few times, people will stop looking - there isn't enough time to
look in empty box more than a few times. |
|
| |
Also, if you find a few negative-result publications, that generally means
that there are a lot more studies that gave negative results, but never got
published. Most journals are reluctant to publish negative results (arguably
a bad thing, since they are important). |
|
| |
Most of these topics, having flared up briefly in the normal journals,
eventually move on to the fringe publications. These are either journals
with a clear penchant for this stuff (for example, Harvalik published most
of his stuff in the journal of the American dowsing society - of which he is
or was president, I think) aimed at the popular market; or the new wave of
so-called "predatory journals" which sound plausible but exist only to
extract publication fees from authors, and generally aren't peer-reviewed.
This is becoming an increasing problem. |
|
| |
Can't help with your pineal gland. First of all, I haven't a clue about
endocrinology. Second, I don't have an FMRI scanner (at least, not last
time I checked). I do believe (I haven't read up on it) that the pineal organ
has some connection to the optic nerves. But if light is hitting your pineal
gland directly, you probably ought to check for unexpected holes in your
head. |
|
| |
// If you mean that Harvalik reference, the abstract is in your own link // |
|
| |
[lurch] found that I just linked to the address he provided earlier. |
|
| |
// Can't help with your pineal gland. First of all, I haven't a clue about endocrinology. Second, I don't have an FMRI scanner (at least, not last time I checked). I do believe (I haven't read up on it) that the pineal organ has some connection to the optic nerves. But if light is hitting your pineal gland directly, you probably ought to check for unexpected holes in your head. // |
|
| |
Yeah, that was a long shot. |
|
| |
The pineal gland controls the circadian rhythms of even profoundly blind individuals and in many species can be seen through their skulls.
It secretes melatonin, serotonin, tryptophan, and dimethyltryptamine.
It starts off in two pieces and fuses into a single gland early in life and is on this side of the blood/brain barrier. |
|
| |
Premature calcification of this gland from things like fluoride collecting there causes disruption of the sleep/healing cycle and brings the onset of old age, so the amount of fluoride you ingest is kind of important since turning this gland into a little stone in your head is basically the same as a slow drawn-out death sentence. |
|
| |
No trepanation necessary. |
|
| |
//The pineal gland controls the circadian rhythms
of even profoundly blind individuals//
Well, actually no. Even a cursory Google
("circadian rhythm blind people") threw up
numerous hits; the first one I happened to look at
(I can link if you like) refers to the fact that many
blind people have disordered circadian rhythms.
The final sentence of the abstract is: "The high
incidence of abnormal circadian rhythms in blind
people underscores the importance of the light-
dark cycle as an important environmental
synchronizer for the human circadian system." |
|
| |
So, where did you get _your_ information from?
Seriously, dude, talk fewer bollocks. |
|
| |
However, if somebody suffers from central
blindness (ie, blindness caused by problems in the
visual cortex) but still has at least some retinal
function, there's no reason why it wouldn't feed
into the pituitary. |
|
| |
//and in many species can be seen through their
skulls// That's possible. However, in humans it's
located in about the most inaccessible part of the
head. |
|
| |
// So, where did you get _your_ information from? Seriously, dude, talk fewer bollocks.// |
|
| |
From lots of places. Give me a second. |
|
| |
Take as long as you need. It's just that you keep
coming out with stuff which is, like, complete
bollocks. Like: |
|
| |
//scientists are bound by the confidentiality
agreements which they sign// Nope. |
|
| |
//osteoporosis doesn't exists in the animal
kingdom unless induced by pinealectomy.// Nope. |
|
| |
//and am happy to prove it.// Apparently not. |
|
| |
//Demonstratable and reproducible// Apparently
not too. |
|
| |
//The pineal gland controls the circadian rhythms
of even profoundly blind individuals// Nope. |
|
| |
Also, //I have no idea if it would still work now, or
what metal was used to make the coat-hangers
back then, or what plastic was in the pipes... none
of it.// So, you're now no longer asking us to
believe there's a unicorn in the box. You're asking
us to believe that there was a unicorn in the box
but, gosh darn it, it's escaped. Perfect. |
|
| |
I've done far more than a cursory search on the subject. |
|
| |
Ok, so this is from a book called Neuroendocrinology: The Normal Neuroendocrine System. p.130 |
|
| |
Substantial progress has been made in the last decade in our understanding as to how environmental light relates to the biological clock. Of great interest is that the conventional retinal photoreceptors, that is rods and cones, have only a minor role in the light-mediated inhibition of pineal melatonin production. Rather a highly specialized group of retinal ganglion cells constitute 1-2% of the total number of neurons in the ganglion cell layer is responsible for detecting and transducing the critical wavelengths of light that result in pineal melatonin synthesis inhibition(Brainard et al., 2008; Jasser et al., 2006). This alternative set of photoreceptors is endowed with a unique photopigment, melanopsin, which only responds to a relatively narrow band of visible blue wavelengths (roughly 460-480 nm) that regulates the SCN (suprachiasmatic nucleus) and suppresses pineal melatonin synthesis (Kumbalasiri and Provencio, 2005).
Thus, the mammalian retina has essential two visual systems, one of which subserves vision (visual vision) and one which influences the biological clock (circadian vision) (Foster and Hankins 2007). As a result individuals who are profoundly blind due to degeneration of the outer retinal layer, (the rods and cones) still have circadian vision which is capable of regulating the SCN and the diurnal melatonin cycle. Conversely, surgical removal of both orbital globes eliminates both vision and circadian vision. |
|
| |
Profoundly blind people have their circadian rhythms regulated through light collected by their pineal glands. |
|
| |
...and calling me out over and over again will not change that. |
|
| |
//surgical removal of both orbital globes
eliminates both vision and circadian vision.// That
was exactly my damned point. The pineal organ
responds to light via the eyes. |
|
| |
//Dowsing is a thing. // So are unicorns. |
|
| |
//Profoundly blind people have their circadian
rhythms regulated through light collected by their
pineal glands. // Try reading what you wrote.
Especially the bit that says //surgical removal of
both orbital globes eliminates both vision and
circadian vision//. "Orbital globes" means "eyes". |
|
| |
" individuals who are profoundly blind due to degeneration of the outer retinal layer, (the rods and cones) still have circadian vision which is capable of regulating the SCN and the diurnal melatonin cycle." |
|
| |
What part of that sentence am I misunderstanding?
You can be born with both eyeballs and still be profoundly blind. So my statement is entirely true.
I never said that the pineal gland collects light through the skull, just that it is a light sensitive third eyeball in your head. It regulates your sleep and health, and Fluoride collecting there causes premature calcification and is an early death sentence, yet the shit is in baby formula. |
|
| |
I've never seen a unicorn so I wouldn't know if they exist. I have seen dowsing. |
|
| |
You are trying your best to make me lose my composure and that is not going to happen, so please, I will discuss any subject with you in a rational adult manner and answer any question you might have to the best of my ability.
Will I be wrong about things? Sure. Will you prove me misinformed about things? Of course. |
|
| |
But know this. I respect almost everyone on this site and have no desire to make myself into a pariah by flinging shit all over the art. |
|
| |
So again, please, just the teensiest bit of slack. |
|
| |
//What part of that sentence am I
misunderstanding?// |
|
| |
Ah, right, I see the confusion. Blind people of
course have a circadian rhythm, but in many cases
it free-runs. That is to say, they have the same
natural cycle as the rest of us, which is
approximately 24hr long, but that cycle doesn't get
entrained to day/night as it does in sighted
individuals. That's the difference between having
a circadian rhythm, and have a circadian rhythm
entrained to the 24hr light/dark cycle. |
|
| |
If you take sighted people and put them in an
environment with no external time cues, they will
still maintain a circadian rhythm, and will
sleep/wake on a cycle of about 24 hours (usually a
bit longer); but their cycle will gradually drift out
of sync with the outside world. I can find
references if you like - it's interesting stuff. |
|
| |
Not all blind people have "free-running" circadian
clocks. This might be because there are other
cues that can entrain the circadian rhythm (like
eating at a certain time, for instance); or I imagine
that in some cases the connections between the
eyes and the pineal gland (or other bits of the
brain) are intact, even though vision is lost. |
|
| |
The pineal gland is not //a light sensitive third
eyeball//, at least in humans. It doesn't get
exposed to light except in cases of severe trauma.
It's the eyeballs that are light sensitive, and that
signal is eventually relayed to the pineal. |
|
| |
I understand that there are species in which the
pineal gland is close enough to the surface of the
head to receive light directly; and in humans
perhaps it retains much of the machinery needed
to respond directly to light (I don't know). But,
since it's buried deep in the human brain, in
humans it has to get its light-related signals
indirectly. |
|
| |
I think we are talking at cross-purposes here. |
|
| |
Yes, that's right (I mentioned it above: //a cycle of
about 24 hours (usually a bit longer)//. |
|
| |
Basically, the internal circadian clock is an
ingenious mechanism (it relies, if I remember
correctly, on the accumulation and then
destruction of a particular class of RNAs in a
particular cell type). But no biochemical reaction
is going to be precisely regular - it happens that
humans' cycles are naturally a bit longer than 24hr
- which is why there's a mechanism for external
cues to adjust it and keep it in sync (or to bring it
into alignment with a new time-zone, if we travel
east or west). |
|
| |
Mayhaps that RNA was adopted in the cell when the
days were longer? |
|
| |
//Mayhaps that RNA was adopted in the cell when
the days were longer?// |
|
| |
The mechanism probably did arise many hundreds
of millions of years ago, when days were longer.
Certainly it's present in a huge range of organisms. |
|
| |
However, I don't think it's the case that it evolved
to cope with longer days and then became stuck,
so to speak. The periodicity could evolve much
faster than that. It's more likely (and this is
speculation) that it's better to have a too-long
cycle that can be nudged into sync. |
|
| |
//many hundreds of millions of years ago, when days were longer.//
Oooops. |
|
| |
It would probably be a good idea to double-check such a factoid. In
fact, just running a thermodynamics swab over it - "let's see, there's
no energy inputs; is it likely to speed up on its own?" - makes for a
pretty good proofreading tool. |
|
| |
Damn, but you're right, [lurch]. Elementary error.
Head is hanging in shame. |
|
| |
//Blind people of course have a circadian rhythm, but in many cases it free-runs. That is to say, they have the same natural cycle as the rest of us, which is approximately 24hr long, but that cycle doesn't get entrained to day/night as it does in sighted individuals. That's the difference between having a circadian rhythm, and have a circadian rhythm entrained to the 24hr light/dark cycle.// |
|
| |
Cool. That probably should have been specified. As for my statements being a total bollocks fest, that's quite another matter. |
|
| |
...got any feedback on my statements about fluoride collection and pineal calcification being an early societal death sentence? |
|
| |
//got any feedback on my statements about fluoride
collection and pineal calcification being an early
societal death sentence?// |
|
| |
Nope. Wouldn't know where to start on that one. |
|
| |
But... they're about the only things I've said that you haven't screamed bollocks about. |
|
| |
Shirley you could find out the side effects of a prematurely calcified pineal gland in minutes. |
|
| |
Even with just a cursory search... |
|
| |
//they're about the only things I've said that you
haven't screamed bollocks about.// |
|
| |
That's probably because I have no reason to
assume it's bollocks. Calcification of the pineal
gland doesn't break any laws of physics (hence, it
doesn't require extraordinary proof for me to
believe it happens); and seems to be fairly well-
known by mainstream science. |
|
| |
Wikipedia tells me that calcification of the pineal
gland is fairly common. Whether it's influenced by
fluoride or anything else I don't know. And
whether it has any clinical significance, I also don't
know. I wouldn't be surprised either way. |
|
| |
If there is any truth that some humans have more sensitivity to Electro Magnetic Fields and the disruption of those fields a.k.a dowsing, then the ability, (if it exists) would be found amongst those humans with a more developed Pineal gland. |
|
| |
I was born with an enlarged pineal gland, and can do some... really strange things at times, none of which apparently exist, like being able to build novel inventions, test them, and play with them entirely in my head until they work.
That's about the only one I might be able to convince you about since many of my ideas posted to this site would seem to support this claim, so let's forget about intuition, or sensitivity, or knowing things without knowing 'how' I know them, and all of the other claims I might make and concentrate on just that one verifiable knack for now. |
|
| |
It is 'that' gift which is being suppressed in our societies, and I'd bet my ass that Nichola Tesla and Einstein probably had pineal glands of epic proportions.
(it's enough to give a guy a serious case of pineal envy) |
|
| |
Throughout history and across cultures the pineal gland has been tied to creativity, intuition, inner sight, and the ability to use the minds eye to imagine vividly... does sound to you like anyone we both know? |
|
| |
Now the UK is having this fucking industrial waste poison added to its drinking water supplies under the guise of being good for your teeth. This is false and Every study shows it. Overdose causes fluorosis and rots the teeth out of your head, and don't think that you are safe by drinking bottled water because the shit is absorbed through the skin and inhaled with the steam of your shower or swimming, bathing and even by washing the dishes.
In areas which are declining fluoridated water it is being added to salt and other foods to make sure as few people as possible fall through the cracks and avoid being poisoned. |
|
| |
I meant what I said when I said that I both like and respect you as a person, at least I like and respect what I know of you from what I have managed to glean from your writings here.
(that may be a bit more than you'd be comfortable with btw given, your... verbosity here on my favorite little hang out, and these other knacks I possess which we are ignoring for now)
As a scientist I figured you might appreciate the opportunity to be able to keep your children and grandchildren from having their immune systems, IQ's, and ability to think for themselves from being compromised by government policies being used to chemically attack its citizens by... who knows?
THEY I guess.
The practice doesn't seem to be eugenically motivated since it's a fairly global phenomenon which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. |
|
| |
If, by some quirk of fate, it happens that your children or grandchildren begin displaying traits of excessive creativity, intuition, or the odd little seemingly physics (as we know them) defying knacks, well, maybe you'll remember me and be able to overcome your conditioning enough to cut them the slack they'll need to figure themselves out. |
|
| |
//As a scientist I figured you might appreciate the
opportunity to be able to keep your children and
grandchildren from having their immune systems,
IQ's, and ability to think for themselves from being
compromised by government policies being used to
chemically attack its citizens by... who knows?// |
|
| |
Phew. I was worried we'd be getting into conspiracy
theories or something here. Good to know you're as
sane as ever. |
|
| |
Well, if Fluoride is actually harming people as studies would seem to indicate, and if the cases of fluorosis are higher in fluoridated areas then non-fluoridated areas with lower IQ's in children, and the scientists studying the problem are completely ignored... then yep, by deductive reasoning, something's fucky Ricky. |
|
| |
Adults continuing to trust in authority when that authority is being used to harm their kids. |
|
| |
Absolutely, [2fries]. Remind me of the reasoning
behind this desire to lower national IQs? |
|
| |
"You'd have to be really stupid to vote for [the government | those in
power] to have more power" |
|
| |
That one is pretty straight-forward. There are others, however, which
may lie more upon the lines of unintended consequences. |
|
| |
Some decisions have bad effects. Those decisions may be made by
persons (or groups) who are malicious, stupid, greedy, clueless, vain,
or misled. Does their motivation justify the action? Or ameliorate the
result? |
|
| |
OK - the good news: I found the requested article in the stacks
index at my local university. It's from 1978, so it's in hardcopy. |
|
| |
The bad news: the university discarded all of the hardcopy books
and journals from their medical library stacks in the summer of
2014. Everything is now digital, available on-line. |
|
| |
"Everything", that is, if it's in the library's subscriptions: 10 year
rolling subscriptions from Springer and Reed-Elsevier, a 5 year from
Taylor & Francis, and (I think) a 5 year deal with Sage. Anything not
from those publishers - gone. Anything not in those time frames,
even from those publishers - gone. |
|
| |
They used to go all the way back to the 1890s issues of the journal
"The Lancet", all the issues for each half-year bound in leather. At
least a hundred journals were kept from the 1910s to present.
Where did it all end up? A dumpster. Dustbin. Whatever you call it,
it went on a truck, went to the landfill, and was burned. No
recycling, because somebody was afraid there might be
"repercussions" if some plebe got his dirty mitts on, say, a 1966
Journal of the Kansas Medical Association, without the copyright
clearance being paid for. |
|
| |
So how's the current supply? Well, let's just say I pick at non-
random an author, and see how we do. |
|
| |
"Genomic analysis of the causative agents of coccidiosis in
domestic chickens.", published in Genome Research in 2014, for
which Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press is the publisher. Boo!
Oh, wait - it's available for free through PubMed Central. Dodged a
bullet. |
|
| |
"IRS2 is a candidate driver oncogene on 13q34 in colorectal
cancer.", 2013 in the International Journal of Experimental
Pathology, again the wrong publisher, this time Wiley-Blackwell
(one of the Big 5), but again PubMed Central saves the day. |
|
| |
"Digital PCR strategies in the development and analysis of
molecular biomarkers for personalized medicine.", published in
Methods, 2013, this time in Elsevier, so that one's available. At
least until 2023, from which time it won't be. |
|
| |
"Insights into the genome structure and copy-number variation of
Eimeria tenella.", 2012 in BioMed Central. BMC is open access, so
I commend the authors for their choice of journal. (With the
reservation that there are those claiming that the "open" in "open
access" is a verb, not an adjective) |
|
| |
"Numts help to reconstruct the demographic history of the ocellated
lizard (Lacerta lepida) in a secondary contact zone." 2012 in
Molecular Ecology, a Wiley journal. Bzzzzt. Can't get that one. |
|
| |
"Single-molecule genomics." 2010, the Journal of Pathology. Wiley
again. Not available. |
|
| |
"Copy-number variation: the end of the human genome?", Trends in
Biotechnology, 2009, CellPress. No... Oh, look, they seem to have
some affiliation with Elsevier. Good to go - for 3 more years
anyway. Then pfffft. |
|
| |
"Microdissection molecular copy-number counting (microMCC)--
unlocking cancer archives with digital PCR." 2008, the Journal of
Pathology; Wiley, again. Don't some people learn? (Oh, wait, I'm
going backward here, never mind.) But anyway - no. |
|
| |
"Multiplex amplification of ancient DNA." 2006 in Nature Protocols.
A Nature journal, not available. |
|
| |
In case anyone is wondering, that's far from an exhaustive list -
there's more than three dozen I didn't select. And to be fair, there
are more of the total available for free than not, and of those
remaining, most are available for a fee. (Except that doctors are not
encouraged to purchase journals outside the subscriptions the
hospital already has. No need to break anyone's thumbs; if Dr.
Smith wants something from another journal, it's paid for with Dr.
Smith's money.) |
|
| |
Still, I can sit in the medical library of the primary teaching hospital
in the Intermountain West and watch publications disappearing off
the virtual shelves. |
|
| |
//As for other scientific publications disappearing - not really.//
[MaxwellBuchanan] |
|
| |
Quantified, specified, identified. Your career is being rolled up
behind you and discarded. Call it //bollocks// if you want to - just
keep your eyes tight shut. |
|
| |
Uh, [lurch], if you'd care to visit my website, all of
my 50-odd publications are there as PDFs for free.
Let me know if any are missing and I'll add them.
(There may be a couple of recent ones I haven't
yet added.) |
|
| |
I agree, though - the long history of journals (not
authors, by the way) putting publications behind
paywalls is wrong. That's why the MRC (for
example) _now_ requires that all researchers
funded by it either publish in open-access journals,
or pay the fees necessary to make their particular
publication open access. I believe the NIH does
the same. And it's the reason I
make all my publications freely available myself.
It is also the custom, in science, to send reprints
(or, nowadays, PDFs) to anyone who asks for one
(for free, obviously). |
|
| |
In short, [Lurch], please don't go vilifying me for
the publication policies of journals; especially as I
have gone to the trouble to make my publications
freely available as far as I can. |
|
| |
As for stuff disappearing - nope. The first paper I
authored (which must
be 30 years ago now) is still there, as are
practically all papers. If I want
to read an article from Nature in 1880, I can. Now,
whichever trade you
belong to, tell me how easily I can read things
written by members of that
profession 140 years ago. |
|
| |
What actually _is_ a problem is the vast number of
bogus journals which
offer rapid publication with very lax peer review,
for a fee; these
"predatory journals" are a fairly new phenomenon;
they generally sink
without trace, taking all their publications with
them. |
|
| |
//Remind me of the reasoning behind this desire to lower national IQs?// |
|
| |
I don't think that is necessarily the goal, just a side effect.
It is the pineal gland which is being attacked.
The result is asymptomatic and since GP's aren't taught this their patients fit no profile and so they are written off as hypochondriacs or offered any number of treatments and pharmaceuticals until they eventually die at a far earlier age than they would have had their pineal glands remained healthy. |
|
| |
To the tune of several trillion dollars a year for the various PharmaCo's out there. |
|
| |
Even that though is just gravy. It's about power. Pineal gland robustness comes with... abilities. (only one of which I can demonstrate to you) You can't beg, buy, borrow or steal these abilities and so I believe that certain wealthy and powerful families have conspired to make sure that if they can't ensure that 'their' descendants retain power, so they would rather that there is no chance in hell that some third world countries children can attain power over them.
Simple as that. Same game it's always been. |
|
| |
Fluoride is poison. Every study proves it. |
|
| |
So why are governments forcing this treatment on their citizens against their collective will and ignoring all scientific evidence against any good it may be doing? |
|
| |
The shit they are putting in the water isn't even the same as the naturally occurring fluoride found in water supplies where supposedly people's teeth last longer.
It's a con.
Having been raised by a con-man, I refuse to blindly follow authority. |
|
| |
Personally I would rather that my children retain their faculties than their teeth.
I can teach them to keep their teeth without fluoride. I can not fix their endocrine systems once their government has poisoned them. |
|
| |
Follow the money, find out which politicians from which countries lobbied hardest to introduce fluoride to drinking water in the first place, then find out who was lining their pockets at the time, and that will point to the culprit/s. |
|
| |
Researching that is quite beyond my scope. Intuiting it is not. |
|
| |
//several trillion dollars// Soooooo, bigger than
the global pharmaceuticals market, eh?
Wowwwww, dude. |
|
| |
//Pineal gland robustness comes with... abilities.
(only one of which I can demonstrate to you)// |
|
| |
I was going to make a smart-alec remark, but I
think
you've made my point better than I ever could. |
|
| |
//don't go vilifying me for the publication policies of journals// I'm
not; authors are typically the victims, not perpetrators. |
|
| |
//[...] especially as I have gone to the trouble to make my
publications freely available as far as I can.// Makes me happier
than you can possibly know. |
|
| |
// if you'd care to visit my website, all of my 50-odd publications are
there as PDFs for free.// I'll assume you've done your due diligence
and are permitted to self-host your articles. I've known authors who
have gotten into trouble for that; not all publishers grant hosting
rights back to authors, even though they may claim "open access".
(I looked up Wiley-Blackwell's author rights; I was very pleased to
note that they do (now) permit self-archiving. I may even have to
take back something (or maybe even a couple somethings) evil I
have said about them.) |
|
| |
There's still a disconnect, though. If somebody taps into PubMed,
they'll find all the requisite citations, but there's nothing that says "If
otherwise unavailable, look on lead author's personal website". |
|
| |
Thank you, [lurch], and my apologies. |
|
| |
No, I didn't check whether I had the right to host my
own articles (they are, as you mentioned, generally
copyright-owned by the journal not the authors), but
I
figured what the hell. Many of my colleagues do the
same. |
|
| |
//Pineal gland robustness comes with... abilities. (only one of which I can demonstrate to you)// |
|
| |
// I was going to make a smart-alec remark, but I think you've made my point better than I ever could.// |
|
| |
That's all you have to say?... that I didn't check to see if it was billions rather than trillions?
Seriously? |
|
| |
What do you want from me?
If the supposedly non-existent ability to create intricate novel inventions entirely in my head without math which work when I build them without a background in... anything isn't enough of a knack to convince you that I have other knacks, which I can't demonstrate from thousands of miles away using only text on a computer, well then... then maybe there's no pleasing you. |
|
| |
Can you do this thing that I can do? To be able to invent working machines without math and without having been taught how.
Ever met anyone else that can do this thing that I can do? |
|
| |
I'll see if I can get dowsing to work for me before we get to England, since that seems to be the stick you have up your ass, but if I do, will you even believe it if you see it for yourself? |
|
| |
Fluoride is poison. It's coming your way. It will turn an extremely important portion of your descendants brains into stone. You might be able to head this off at the pass if you pull your head out of your ass long enough to think for yourself and research a bit. |
|
| |
//That's all you have to say// Yep. |
|
| |
//If the supposedly non-existent ability to create intricate novel
inventions entirely in my head without math which work when I build
them without a background in... anything // Yes, that's a knack. If you
can do it then that's great, and I hope you have made good use of it.
Some people are intuitive engineers or inventors, and good for them.
Yes, of course I've met people who can do that. |
|
| |
//I'll see if I can get dowsing to work for me before we get to England//
Excellent. If it does, you and I can work out a mutually-agreed test.
Keep me posted. |
|
| |
//Fluoride is poison. It's coming your way.// Perhaps. It's clearly not a
huge issue, but I have no particular stance on fluoride. So far me and
my descendants seem to be holding up OK. |
|
| |
// It's clearly not a huge issue, but I have no particular stance on fluoride. So far me and my descendants seem to be holding up OK.// |
|
| |
You have been conditioned well. |
|
| |
Thanks, [2fries]. Didn't realize you could see my
hair from there. |
|
| |
Personally, I find it helpful to just get on with life.
Yes, there's various shitty things about it, and it
might turn out that my tapwater, underpants or
mobile are going to kill me. |
|
| |
But the alternative is monomania and paranoia. If
your beliefs have driven or enabled you to achieve
all the things you wanted to in life, and to make a
difference in the world, then clearly they're
working for you. |
|
| |
I find that the fluoridation in my toothpaste and drinking
water makes me feel much less paranoid about it than
those that refuse it. Must be the evil fluoride overlords... |
|
| |
Not really. "Pants beliefs" would work, though. |
|
| |
//Personally, I find it helpful to just get on with life.// |
|
| |
It's like that old saying;
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.” |
|
| |
By doing nothing, you as a parent are consenting to let your children be given a chemical pinealecotomy.
So, I guess the question would then be, is your consent informed?
If not.
Why not? |
|
| |
That's not monomania or paranoia, it's just a damned good question. |
|
| |
Well, my daughter is now 21 and seems to have
grown up normally, but thanks for asking. Our dog's
doing fine too. |
|
| |
It's cumulative and you don't have fluoride in the water there. I assume you'd like your grandchildren to grow up as healthy as your daughter has. |
|
| |
Seriously, read a few of the studies about fluoridated areas compared to non-fluoridated ones.
Then crack as many jokes as you like about it. |
|
| |
To be honest, [2fries], I'm not that concerned, but I'll
bear it in mind. Presumably, if we see a high
incidence of pituitary dwarfism in the next
generation of Americans, we'll know. |
|
| |
But given that water here isn't generally fluoridated,
would one not expect all Englishmen to have //
Pineal gland robustness// and therefore to possess
//... abilities// ? |
|
| |
<strikethrough>abilities</sr> cavities |
|
| |
Englishness is generally a suppressant, and so might
naturally suppress abilities. |
|
| |
// It is true I have asked everyone to suspend their disbelief. |
|
| |
This is an unreasonable thing to ask. You claim to have abilities which have not been shown possible. You can't be surprised when people don't believe you. Human perception can be fooled easily, and anecdotal evidence is not evidence. |
|
| |
This has been a fascinating read, but at this point, [MaxwellBuchanan] it appears that engagement is just encouragement. |
|
| |
// But given that water here isn't generally fluoridated, would one not expect all Englishmen to have // Pineal gland robustness// and therefore to possess //... abilities// ? // |
|
| |
No. It's an abnormality. One which is going to become more normal. I'm just a freak. |
|
| |
//This is an unreasonable thing to ask. You claim to have abilities which have not been shown possible. You can't be surprised when people don't believe you. Human perception can be fooled easily, and anecdotal evidence is not evidence.// |
|
| |
I am not surprised to not be believed. Nobody ever believes until they see the strange stuff for themselves.
I just strongly question that they have not been shown to be possible. They have been supressed since the burn-the-witch days. |
|
| |
Funny how eradicating anyone displaying novel traits for generations will tend to cause those traits to diminish in a society... |
|
| |
//I'm just a freak.// How disappointed would you
be if you
turned out to be normal? |
|
| |
//burn-the-witch days// Ah. [2fries], old bean, I
think you
may be operating under a misapprehension here.
As far as I know, witches were burned because
_other_
people believed they had supernatural abilities;
the witches
presumably denied having these abilities. In your
case, the situation is pretty much the
reverse. You
are the one claiming to have the supernatural
abilities; it's
everyone else who is (to put it politely) skeptical.
Still, I'm sure your //robust pineal// will win out in
the end. |
|
| |
How did your dowsing tests go? Are we still on for
a formal
demonstration of your abilities? As you said,
//Nobody ever believes until they see the strange
stuff for themselves.// So, show me already. |
|
| |
A video upload to YouTube would be beneficial here. |
|
| |
Nobody is going to believe any stinking you-tube video. |
|
| |
//How disappointed would you be if you turned out to be normal? // |
|
| |
//You are the one claiming to have the supernatural abilities; it's everyone else who is (to put it politely) skeptical. Still, I'm sure your //robust pineal// will win out in the end.// |
|
| |
I do not think that my knacks are supernatural, (that's your word getting put in my mouth again), just suppressed... and I would probably recant having them too if I was seeing people like me getting torched. Hopefully we are all a bit more mature as a species by now. |
|
| |
//How did your dowsing tests go? Are we still on for a formal demonstration of your abilities?// |
|
| |
I haven't tried again yet. No time. I'll let you know if I get it to work. I'm having a hard time figuring out how I 'can' test it. I had thought to ask my one of my neighbours if I can try dowsing their water lines but then I would have to dig them up to determine if it's working and that's a bit much to ask.
I could try dowsing my own water lines but I would never know for sure if it was working or if I was subconsciously remembering where I buried them a decade ago. |
|
| |
I'll hit a bunch of the second hand stores this weekend and buy a bunch of older looking coat hangers. |
|
| |
It would be nice I suppose if I can pull it off again, but honestly I don't really care one way or the other.
I've seen what I've seen and I've told it to you all the way it happened. Not being able to replicate what I saw will only invalidate the memory for you not for me, and it sure as hell won't invalidate the fact that fluoride is being used to fuck up peoples' endocrine systems for profit, that it's no good for your teeth like you're being told, or that its only use is to calcify the pineal gland. |
|
| |
// It would be nice I suppose if I can pull it off
again, but honestly I don't really care one way or
the other.// |
|
| |
OK, so what you're saying is that if you fail, then
there *was* a unicorn in the box, but it must have
escaped. Well, gosh darn it, aint that always the
way? The fact that it _always_ fails when put to a
real test is unfortunate, because it makes
"dowsers" look like either fools or fraudsters. |
|
| |
//it sure as hell won't invalidate the fact that
fluoride is being used to fuck up peoples' endocrine
systems for profit// |
|
| |
Maybe I should have made myself clearer. As to
whether fluoride is good or bad, I have no
particularly strong views. I doubt that there's a
sinister global conspiracy, but that is not really
relevant here. It is, a priori, possible that fluoride
is good, bad or indifferent - neither finding would
imply anything supernatural, and there's probably
evidence on both sides. |
|
| |
//Done any research yet?// Quite a lot, thanks.
Oh - you mean on fluoride? Nope - not interested. |
|
| |
How does fluoride calcify your pineal gland but avoid
calcifying the parts of your body that are contain the
highest concentrations of calcium, and are the most
frequently and directly exposed to it? Abandon this line of
thought, it contains no logic. |
|
| |
"Fluoride does not accumulate in brain. Of all tissues, brain has the lowest fluoride concentration [Jenkins, 1991; Whitford, 1996; Ekstrand, 1996]. It is generally agreed that the blood-brain barrier restricts the passage of fluoride into the central nervous system. The human pineal gland is outside the blood-brain barrier [Arendt, 1995]. It is one of a few unique regions in the brain (all midline structures bordering the third and fourth ventricles) where the blood-brain barrier is weak. Cells in these regions require direct and unimpeded contact with blood [Rapoport, 1976]. Therefore, pinealocytes have free access to fluoride in the bloodstream. This fact, coupled with the presence of HA, suggest that the pineal gland may sequester fluoride from the bloodstream." |
|
| |
//Abandon this line of thought, it contains no logic.// |
|
| |
Oh it's logical all right, but I was led to the information by intuition.
The fuckers are poisoning our children. It has nothing to do with their teeth and everything to do with keeping their minds' eyes shut tight. The treatment of symptoms deriving from premature pineal calcification is big business since it is asymptomatic for each individual, and our doctors are not taught about it in med school. |
|
| |
It is not in my nature to abandon them.
The truth isn't easy to hear is it? |
|
| |
//It is not in my nature to abandon them.// |
|
| |
That is very noble. I trust that you are using your
//...powers// to help them. |
|
| |
To suggest that fluoride in drinking water may have
adverse effects is entirely reasonable
(a priori) as a possibility. There is certainly
research, and not all the findings point in
the same direction. |
|
| |
To suggest that fluoride is used as part of a
worldwide conspiracy to suppress some
latent and mystical pineal ability is, frankly,
guaranteed to make most reasonable people
dismiss you as a complete nutter, or fall about
laughing. I know I do; but then again
there's no guarantee that I'm a reasonable person. |
|
| |
I'm not sure you really answered a question I raised
some time ago. Given the track
record of governments in general when it comes to
keeping secrets, do you honestly
believe that there is an international conspiracy,
involving the successive (and often
politically opposed) governments of at least 28
nations, not to mention several thousand
scientists and their friends and families, and
umpteen doctors, which has been sustained
for a period of several decades? Or, to put it
another way, are you seriously asking us to
seriously believe that you seriously believe it? |
|
| |
//The truth isn't easy to hear is it?// |
|
| |
You're right there. I'm in danger of losing my G&T
via my nostrils. I seldom actually LOL, but I am
very close to chuckling here. No doubt the chem-
trail
agents have reduced my capacity for paranoia.
You are a hoot! |
|
| |
//That is very noble. I trust that you are using your //...powers// to help them.// |
|
| |
//To suggest that fluoride is used as part of a worldwide conspiracy to suppress some latent and mystical pineal ability is, frankly, guaranteed to make most reasonable people dismiss you as a complete nutter, or fall about laughing.// |
|
| |
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. |
|
| |
//Given the track record of governments in general when it comes to keeping secrets, do you honestly believe that there is an international conspiracy, involving the successive (and often politically opposed) governments of at least 28 nations, not to mention several thousand scientists and their friends and families, and umpteen doctors, which has been sustained for a period of several decades? Or, to put it another way, are you seriously asking us to seriously believe that you seriously believe it?// |
|
| |
Governments are corrupt. Politicians are for sale. Scientists are being ignored about the threat of fluoride while five-year-olds-and-up are given fluoride "treatments" every few months because the dentists and hygienists are not taught that they are dispensing poison under the guise of dental care.
Fluoride does not help your teeth, so you tell me why the shit is everywhere.
Then tell me what purpose fluoride has in baby formula?
Maybe it is to make the infants teeth stronger... |
|
| |
Look, either get off your ass and look into it for yourself or sod off.
I outgrew your juvenile bully tactics by grade five or so.
It's water off a ducks' back to me, so you can help me find answers, or you are nothing more than another obstacle for me to overcome in a very long string of obstacles. |
|
| |
Meanwhile enjoy your gin and tonic sir. Make it a double, it does wonders for the nasal passages. |
|
| |
//First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they fight you, then you win. // |
|
| |
Excellent. You've made it to stage two. |
|
| |
//Look, either get off your ass and look into it for
yourself or sod off.// Nah, I'm enjoying this. Like
I said, I have no particular view about - nor
interest in - fluoride. But I do enjoy arguing with
conspiracy nuts. It's a sport. Of course, no
conspiracy nut ever changed their views as a result
of anything, but that's half the fun. |
|
| |
//juvenile bully tactics// You see, that's one of
the things I honestly don't get. We have
diametrically opposed views, and we are each one
human being with an equal ability to type. So, it's
not really bullying - you're the one with the
//...powers//. I just think you're a loony; you're
free to tell me I'm a nut too, if you like. However,
I do like your use of the phrase "sod off", which is
very British of you. I don't intend to, but it's a nice
turn of phrase, I always think. |
|
| |
//you can help me find answers, or you are
nothing more than another obstacle for me to
overcome in a very long string of obstacles.// I
am proud to be that obstacle. I am not remotely
interested in helping you research fluoride - I have
already indicated several times that it is of no
particular interest to me, and frankly you can do
your own research. |
|
| |
However, to help you out a bit, I checked out
fluoride in baby formulas. You are trying to imply
that it's an additive. I'm not sure if that's an error
on your part or just a game-tactic, but it turns out
that fluoride is there either due to its presence in
the other ingredients, or because the water where
its made is fluoridated. Point being that it's not
put there "for a purpose" like you implied. |
|
| |
Sometimes, [2fries], it does pay to actually try to
learn a little about what you're blathering on
about. Reading is a good first step. Otherwise you
come across as either lying or dumb, and I am sure
neither of those is the case. |
|
| |
//Make it a double// I know of no other type. |
|
| |
Yes but, [Ian], surely that's because the US was
secretly in bed with the USSR? The conspiracy was
just bigger than you thought. |
|
| |
Obviously I'm kidding. The _real_ conspiracy is not
that the moon-landings were faked, but that the
moon itself is faked. That's one of the reasons it
looks like a coin-sized disc rather than a huge sphere. |
|
| |
Happy to entertain. People learn better when they are amused. I am sorry to hear that you won't look into fluoride effects for yourself though [MB]. |
|
| |
Good thing you aren't the only person on this website. |
|
| |
//Good thing you aren't the only person on this
website. // Be very dull if I were. |
|
| |
You may have missed the bit where I said: |
|
| |
//However, to help you out a bit, I checked out
fluoride in baby formulas. You are trying to imply
that it's an additive. I'm not sure if that's an error
on your part or just a game-tactic, but it turns out
that fluoride is there either due to its presence in
the other ingredients, or because the water where
its made is fluoridated. Point being that it's not put
there "for a purpose" like you implied. |
|
| |
Sometimes, [2fries], it does pay to actually
try to learn a little about what you're blathering on
about. Reading is a good first step. Otherwise you
come across as either lying or dumb, and I am sure
neither of those is the case.// |
|
| |
I don't give a fuck 'why' it is in the baby formula.
It shouldn't be there. Where are the regulations? How much fluoride does it take to overdose an infant? How soon in life is this cumulative poison introduced to our species? ...and by whom? |
|
| |
You might want to learn what I'm blathering on about. Reading is a good first step. |
|
| |
Someone please explain the assertion that fluoride
isn't good for teeth. Intuition that presupposes
such vast conspiracies isn't trustworthy. Sorry. |
|
| |
Fromthe ADA q and a about
fluoride: |
|
| |
"The same researcher has theorized in unpublished
reports posted on the Internet that the
accumulation of
fluoride in children’s pineal gland leads to an earlier
on-
set of puberty. However, the researcher notes that
there
is no verification that fluoride accumulates in
children’s
pineal glands. Moreover, a study conducted in New-
burgh (fluoridated) and Kingston (non-fluoridated),
New
York found no statistical significance between the
onset
of menstruation for girls living in a fluoridated
verses
non-fluoridated area.253" |
|
| |
Baby formula is typically powdered. You mix it with
water. Amazingly, the fluoride from the tap water does not
instantly
vaporize upon contact with said formula. |
|
| |
//I don't give a fuck 'why' it is in the baby
formula.// |
|
| |
Well, my point was that you are suggesting some
kind of global conspiracy, and strongly implied that
they _added_ fluoride to baby formula as part of
this conspiracy, and that evidence of harm caused
by excess fluoride is being suppressed. |
|
| |
The fact is that (a) they don't add it - they just
don't remove it; perhaps they should, but that's
not the same thing and (b) there is plenty of
discussion in reputable, peer-reviewed journals
examining the adverse effects of excess fluoride. |
|
| |
My main point is that your idea of a global
conspiracy to suppress "pineal robustness" is just
loopy. For that reason I think it's reasonable to
point out cases where your "evidence" for such a
conspiracy is simply wrong. |
|
| |
Yes, that "why" should have been a "how". |
|
| |
// My main point is that your idea of a global conspiracy to suppress "pineal robustness" is just loopy. For that reason I think it's reasonable to point out cases where your "evidence" for such a conspiracy is simply wrong. // |
|
| |
My gut doesn't believe you. I trust my gut.
Trying to explain the sensation to those without it is like trying to explain colors to blind people. |
|
| |
//please explain the assertion that fluoride isn't good for teeth// |
|
| |
"BACKGROUND:
Fluoride intake at optimal level decreases the incidence of dental caries. However, excessive intake, especially during developmental stages can cause adverse effects such as dental and skeletal fluorosis.
RESULTS:
The overall prevalence of dental fluorosis was found to be 41.73%. An increase in the community fluorosis index (CFI) was higher among those living in high water fluoride area.
CONCLUSION:
A significantly positive correlation was found between CFI and water fluoride concentration in drinking water." |
|
| |
"OBJECTIVE:
To investigate the prevalence of fluorosis and related control measures on drinking water type of endemic fluorosis in China.
RESULTS:
The overall prevalence of dental fluorosis among children aged 8-12 in all the villages under monitor program, was 28.58% (7 950/27 817), with the dental fluorosis index (DFI) as 0.58. Among them, the prevalence was 22.28% (3 917/17 583) and DFI was 0.44 in the'water-improved projects' villages that under normal operation and with qualified fluoride contents. The prevalence appeared as 38.74% (1 926/4 971) with DFI as 0.84 in those villages with 'water-improved projects' but mal-operated or with excessive fluoride. The prevalence was 40.03% (2 107/5 263), and DFI was 0.81 in those villages without 'water-improved projects'. The prevalence rates of dental fluorosis in children from the three types of endemic areas were significantly different. For 'water-improved projects', the normal opration rate was 93.77% (286/305) and the qualification rate of fluoride content was 76.77% (228/297).
CONCLUSIONS:
Dental fluorosis in children living in the drinking-water-born endemic fluorosis areas was on the edge of epidemics in China. Effective improvement on the quality of drinking water can significantly reduce the severity of dental fluorosis in children. The rate of proper operation on 'water-improved projects' was near to 95% in the endemic area. However, rate that met the criteria on qualified fluoride contents of these projects was still below 80%." |
|
| |
The list goes on.
Pineal calcification data: |
|
| |
"BACKGROUND:
Pineal calcification is associated with symptomatic cerebral infarction in humans. However, there are limited data on the association of pineal calcification and intracerebral hemorrhage. We evaluated this association of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and pineal calcification by computed tomography of the brain.
RESULTS:
There were 2140 CT scans of the brains during the study period. Of those, 1071 scans (50.05%) met the study criteria. Intracerebral hemorrhage and pineal calcification were found in 77 (7.2%) and 689 (64.3%) patients, respectively. Pineal calcification was a significant risk factor for intracerebral hemorrhage with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.36 (95% confidence interval of 1.22-4.54). Other significant factors were age>50 years, hypertension, and diabetes.
CONCLUSION:
Pineal calcification is associated with symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage." |
|
| |
"PURPOSE:
To investigate the relation between circadian saliva melatonin levels and pineal volume as determined by MRI. Plasma melatonin levels follow a circadian rhythm with a high interindividual variability.
RESULTS:
Solid and uncalcified pineal volume correlated to melatonin maximum (r = 0.28; P < 0.05) and area under the curve (r = 0.29; P < 0.05). Of interest, solid and uncalcified pineal volume correlated negatively with the sleep rhythm disturbances subscore (r = -0.17; P < 0.05) despite a very homogenous population.
CONCLUSION:
Uncalcified solid pineal tissue measured by 3D-T2-TSE and SWI is related to human saliva melatonin levels. The analysis of the sleep quality and pineal volume suggests a linkage between better sleep quality and hormonal active pineal tissue." |
|
| |
"BACKGROUND:
Pineal calcification and low melatonin have been shown to be risk factors for stroke in animal studies; however, there are limited clinical data on the association of pineal calcification and stroke in humans.
METHODS:
All computed tomographic (CT) scans of the brains of patients >15 years of age during the year 2011 at a university teaching hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Patient medical charts were used to obtain the risk factors for stroke, including diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, age, and sex. Cerebral infarction was identified by having clinical syndromes of stroke and a positive CT scan. Patients with embolic or hemorrhagic stroke were excluded. Pineal calcification was evidenced by the CT scans. The association of various stroke risk factors and cerebral infarction were calculated using logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS:
A total of 1614 patients were included, and symptomatic cerebral infarction was identified in 620 patients (38.4%). Regarding stroke risk factors in symptomatic cerebral infarction patients, the majority of patients were male (356 [57.4%]), >50 years of age (525 [84.7%]), and had hypertension (361 [58.2%]); some had diabetes (199 [32.1%]) and dyslipidemia (174 [28.1%]). Pineal calcification was found in 1081 patients (67.0%), with a male:female ratio of 1.5:1. Significant factors related to cerebral infarction by univariate logistic regression were age >50 years, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and pineal calcification. Pineal calcification as a risk factor for cerebral infarction had an adjusted odds ratio of 1.35 (95% confidence interval 1.05-1.72).
CONCLUSIONS:
Pineal calcification may be a potential new contributor to cerebral infarction." |
|
| |
"OBJECTIVE:
Melatonin plays a key role in the proper functioning of the circadian timing system (CTS), and exogenous melatonin has been shown to be beneficial in cases of CTS and sleep disturbances. Nevertheless, the concept of "melatonin deficit" has yet to be defined. The aim of our study was, therefore, to determine the relationship between the degree of pineal calcification (DOC) and a range of sleep parameters measured objectively using polysomnography (PSG).
METHODS:
A total of 31 outpatients (17 women, 14 men, mean age 45.9 years; SD 14.4) with primary insomnia were included in our study. Following an adaptation night, a PSG recording night was performed in the sleep laboratory. Urine samples were collected at predefined intervals over a 32-h period that included both PSG nights. The measurement of 6-sulphatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) levels was determined using ELISA. DOC and volume of calcified pineal tissue (CPT) and uncalcified pineal tissue (UPT) were estimated by means of cranial computed tomography.
RESULTS:
UPT was positively associated with 24-h aMT6s excretion (r=0.569; P=0.002), but CPT was not. After controlling for age, aMT6s parameters, CPT, and UPT did not correlate with any of the PSG parameters evaluated. In contrast, DOC was negatively associated with REM sleep percentage (r=-0.567, P=0.001), total sleep time (r=-0.463, P=0.010), and sleep efficiency (r=-0.422, P=0.020).
CONCLUSION:
DOC appears to be a superior indicator of melatonin deficit compared to the absolute amount of melatonin in the circulation. High DOC values indicate changes predominantly in the PSG parameters governed by the circadian timing system. DOC may thus serve as a marker of CTS instability." |
|
| |
"Melatonin has been postulated to have diverse properties, acting as an antioxidant, a neuroprotector, or a stabilizer within the circadian timing system, and is thus thought to be involved in the aging process and Alzheimer's disease (AD). We used computed tomography to determine the degree of pineal calcification (DOC), an intra-individual melatonin deficit marker, as well as the size of uncalcified pineal tissue, in 279 consecutive memory clinic outpatients (AD: 155; other dementia: 25; mild cognitive impairment: 33; depression: 66) and 37 age-matched controls. The size of uncalcified pineal tissue in patients with AD (mean 0.15 cm(2) [S.D. 0.24]) was significantly smaller than in patients with other types of dementia (0.26 [0.34]; P=0.038), with depression (0.28 [0.34]; P=0.005), or in controls (0.25 [0.31]; P=0.027). Additionally, the DOC in patients with AD (mean 76.2% [S.D. 26.6]) was significantly higher than in patients with other types of dementia (63.7 [34.7]; P=0.042), with depression (60.5 [33.8]; P=0.001), or in controls (64.5 [30.6]; P=0.021). These two findings may reflect two different aspects of melatonin in AD. On the one hand, the absolute amount of melatonin excretion capability, as indicated by uncalcified pineal volume, refers to the antioxidant properties of melatonin. On the other hand, the relative reduction in melatonin production capability in the individual, as indicated by DOC, refers to the circadian properties of melatonin." |
|
| |
"RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES:
To evaluate the prevalence of physiologic pineal calcification, estimate observer variability, and examine the association with choroid plexus calcification.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
A retrospective review of hard copy head computed tomography films of 242 patients age younger than 16 years by two independent observers.
RESULTS:
Physiologic pineal calcification was present in 20% of the whole group, in 39% of those 8-14 years age, in 8% of those younger than 10 years age, and in 1% of those younger than age 6 years. Observer agreement was very good (kappa = 0.72). Choroid plexus calcification was present in 16% and was four times as common in those with pineal calcification (38% versus 10%, P = .005), with very good observer agreement (kappa = 0.74).
CONCLUSION:
Physiologic pineal calcification is more common in children than previously reported, mostly because of improving computed tomography technology. There is an association with choroid plexus calcification." |
|
| |
"This hypothesis suggests that industrialization alters the human neuroendocrine system. The neuroendocrine changes come about because of changes in environmental stimuli. It is further proposed that changes in neuroendocrine function can account for the contrasting pattern of non-communicable diseases in traditional and industrialized societies. The hypothesis is based on subtle clinical differences in traditional and industrialized societies, and the evolving concept of neuroendocrine regulation of physiological processes. Compared to traditional societies, individuals from industrialized communities tend to have lower pain tolerance, slower gastrointestinal transit-time, and a greater chance of having a calcified pineal gland. These changes parallel the increasing incidence of non-communicable diseases in industrialized societies. There is sufficient reason to suspect the variations in pain tolerance, gastrointestinal transit-time and pineal gland calcification represent changes in neuroendocrine function. Programming of the neuroendocrine system by environmental events early in life is one possible mechanism whereby these changes might be effected. Understanding the physiological changes that occur with industrialization, and how environmental stimuli interact with the developing neuroendocrine system might lead to new strategies for the prevention and treatment of non-communicable diseases." |
|
| |
I could go on, but you get the picture right?
Either "They" are killing us slowly and for profit... |
|
| |
...or we are all governed by idiots who just don't give a fuck about anything but their next pension. The result is the same. |
|
| |
//My gut doesn't believe you. I trust my gut.// |
|
| |
Ah. I believe we may have uncovered the problem
here. Guess what guts are full of? |
|
| |
//or we are all governed by idiots who just don't
give a fuck about anything but their next pension.
The result is the same.// |
|
| |
Ah(2). Once again, you are beginning to make a
vestige of sense. |
|
| |
You've been asserting for ages, quite vehemently
(or appearing to be quite vehement for the
purposes of kayfabe - one can't tell) that we are all
victims of a global conspiracy to suppress our
//...powers// by tampering with our vital fluids. |
|
| |
To suggest instead that we simply the unwitting
victims of mundane vested interests and/or
ineptitude borders on the entirely plausible. |
|
| |
Ah(3). You've also been blithering on about how
research into the adverse effects of fluoride is
being suppressed. But then you go on to quote (I
assume) several publications on the harmful
effects of excess fluoride. |
|
| |
I am puzzled, [2fries]. You are citing research to
support your conspiracy theory that research is
being suppressed? |
|
| |
Do try and be a little more consistent. |
|
| |
//You've also been blithering on about how research into the adverse effects of fluoride is being suppressed.// |
|
| |
No. I said that information about the pineal gland and its "weirdness" is disappearing, and that scientists are being ignored about its premature calcification.
If you are going to throw my words in my face then please make an effort to get them right. |
|
| |
//I said that information about the pineal gland
and its "weirdness" is disappearing// |
|
| |
Ah, right. Can you give an example of what you
mean by "weirdness", and anything to support your
belief that the information has been
"disappearing"? |
|
| |
//and that scientists are being ignored about its
premature calcification// That's odd. I could
have sworn you said such information was being
suppressed. But I didn't have much trouble in
finding papers about pineal calcification (it's an
ancient phenomenon). |
|
| |
//Can you give an example of what you mean by "weirdness", and anything to support your belief that the information has been "disappearing"?// |
|
| |
How about that PubMed article on dowsing?
Did I ever mention that I've seen it done with my own eyes? |
|
| |
//That's odd. I could have sworn you said such information was being suppressed.// |
|
| |
I see your memory is starting to go old chap. Maybe you need a new hobby other than picking my ass. |
|
| |
//(it's an ancient phenomenon).// |
|
| |
Yes, in the elderly. Not in two year olds. |
|
| |
// picking my ass.// Well, given that you think
with your gut, it seemed the most efficient way of
figuring out what you're on about. |
|
| |
//Did I ever mention that I've seen it done with my
own eyes?// Well, whose eyes would you expect
to see it with? I've seen David Blaine levitate -
does that count? |
|
| |
//How about that PubMed article on dowsing?//
Ah, so not an article on pineal woo-woo, than.
And clearly that PubMed article has not
disappeared - it's on the same journal pay-site as
before. As we've already discussed, I don't like
research being behind a paywall, but that's a
different story. Take it up with Elsevier, Wiley or
whoever. |
|
| |
Can you actually give any actual examples of
actual articles
actually disappearing? <NOTE: citing a PubMed
article as proof that it has disappeared doesn't
really make sense now, does it?> |
|
| |
//Yes, in the elderly. Not in two year olds.// Fine.
Can you cite any papers showing that "premature
calcification" is on the increase? Or has this
knowledge only been channelled directly to you? |
|
| |
I've already provided the information, you just need to read it. |
|
| |
Picking my ass to reach my gut won't teach you how to use your own intuition.
As I've said before, intuition and gut feelings were what I was left to work with so that's what I developed. |
|
| |
Society does not get to both educationally hamstring me and then bitch about how well I can get around on my home-made crutches. |
|
| |
To stick to the facts, then, and avoid ass-picking,
can you answer two of my specific questions: |
|
| |
(1) Can you give an example of research which has
"disappeared". |
|
| |
(2) Do you have any evidence to support the idea
that pituitary calcification in young people is
increasing in prevalence? |
|
| |
// (1) Can you give an example of research which has "disappeared".// |
|
| |
No I can't. When this pineal gland stuff first started tickling the back of my head there were articles to be found like the PubMed study on dowsing. Now they are nowhere to be found, hence my choice of the word "disappearing". Whether they are disappearing because things are being buttoned up to make money, or whether they are being systematically removed for other reasons I can't tell. |
|
| |
// (2) Do you have any evidence to support the idea that pituitary calcification in young people is increasing in prevalence? // |
|
| |
I have not researched pituitary calcification. If you meant pineal gland calcification then; |
|
| |
"Physiologic pineal calcification was present in 20% of the whole group, in 39% of those 8-14 years age, in 8% of those younger than 10 years age, and in 1% of those younger than age 6 years. Observer agreement was very good (kappa = 0.72). Choroid plexus calcification was present in 16% and was four times as common in those with pineal calcification (38% versus 10%, P = .005), with very good observer agreement (kappa = 0.74).
CONCLUSION:
Physiologic pineal calcification is more common in children than previously reported, mostly because of improving computed tomography technology. There is an association with choroid plexus calcification." |
|
| |
"Age-related incidence of pineal gland calcification in children: a roentgenological study of 1,044 skull films and a review of the literature. |
|
| |
Anterior-posterior and lateral skull roentgenograms of 1,044 children aged 0-18 yr were examined for pineal gland calcification. Eighty children with pineal calcification were identified. Cranial computed tomograms (CCT) existing for half of the 80 cases provided confirmation. In contrast to existing reports on pineal calcification in the first decade of life, we found a significant percentage of "physiological" calcification even between 0 and 6 yr of age (range 2.9-4.2%). Contrary to current opinion we were not able to detect any signs of pineal gland tumors in these cases. We were able to confirm other reports which note a steep rise of the incidence of pineal calcification during the second decade of life." |
|
| |
(1) // there were articles to be found like the PubMed
study on dowsing. Now they are nowhere to be found// |
|
| |
Well, that is hard to believe - PubMed generally doesn't
remove content, and nor do journals except in the very,
very rare cases where an article is retracted (and even
then, there will be a statement saying that it has been
retracted, and why). In fact, I have to be honest with
you, I don't believe you. Do you have anything,
anything at all, to support your claim? |
|
| |
(2) Uh, [2fries], perhaps I wasn't clear what I meant by
"evidence to support the idea that pituitary
calcification in young people is increasing in
prevalence". Of the two papers you quote, the first
says: |
|
| |
"Physiologic pineal calcification is more common in
children than previously reported, mostly because of
improving computed tomography technology." |
|
| |
In other (simpler) words, they are saying that it's more
common than previously reported, mostly because of
better ways to detect it. |
|
| |
The second says that pineal calcification is commoner
than thought in young children, and that it increases
steeply during the second decade of life. In what
possible way is this suggesting that pineal calcification
in young children is becoming more prevalent? |
|
| |
Come on, [2fries], you are better than this. |
|
| |
I found a whack of old coat hangers, but it's been pretty wet here this weekend. I don't imagine that dowsing twixt the puddles works all that well. |
|
| |
I can only pick and choose from the literature left to find fer ye guv... thousand pardons m'lud. |
|
| |
//So are you. // Thank you. This is an exciting
debate, is it not? |
|
| |
However, to emphasize what I said above, I would
be very surprised if publications in legitimate
journals "disappeared". You may find many of
them behind journal pay-walls (which, I have said,
I hate) - but they will have been behind those pay-
walls since publication. |
|
| |
And, again, do you have evidence to suggest that
premature calcification of the pineal gland is
increasing (rather than just being more common
than people had believed)? |
|
| |
Yes.
Fluoride calcifies the pineal gland, and it never used to be in the water, salt, food, pablum, and breast-milk before, and it didn't get there on its own. |
|
| |
hmm, I wonder who made sure it was put there?
Gosh darn it, how on Earth would one go about figuring out which portion of society was bent on poisoning the pineal glands of the rest of the planet while pretending to care about all the poor little babies teeth, 'and' with enough capital to instigate such a wide-spread dosage while also being able to keep western medical and dental professionals in the dark about the dangers? |
|
| |
I know what my gut's telling me, but then that 'can't' be right.
There's no such thing as intuition. |
|
| |
//Yes.
Fluoride calcifies the pineal gland, and it never
used to be in
the water, salt, food, pablum, and breast-milk
before, and it
didn't get there on its own.
// |
|
| |
<sigh> [2fries], now you're just doing this to wind
me up.
What I asked was whether you have any evidence
to show
that premature calcification of the pineal gland is
any more
prevalent now than it was, say, 50 years ago (or
whenever
they started fluoridating drinking water). Do you? |
|
| |
So far, what you have offered is: |
|
| |
(1) A paper saying that calcification of the pineal
gland is
more common than previously thought, "mostly"
thanks to
better detection methods. |
|
| |
(2) A paper saying that it's more common in young
children
than previously thought; and that it becomes more
likely as
you get older |
|
| |
(3) Your assumption that fluoridation of drinking
water (and
hence of products made with drinking water)
increases
calcification of the pineal gland. |
|
| |
So, to be quite clear, do you have any evidence to
support
your assumption? I can further clarify what I mean
by "evidence", if it
helps. |
|
| |
I get what you're saying, it's just incredibly hard to find information for something nobody seems to be tracking from abstracts. I had read on one site that pineal calcification was unheard of in anyone under nineteen in the 1950's and now its in 2 year olds, and no I can't find the article again. |
|
| |
About the closest I can find are two other PubMed abstracts; |
|
| |
"Calcification in pineal region had a close relation with age by increasing with aging. The youngest patient was 8 years old. There was a striking increase in number of patients aged from 10 to 39 years. There was a gradual increase in those aged over 40 years. Of patients aged from 70 to 79 years, calcification was found in 81.5%. The incidence was noted no changes in patients aged over 80 years. As for patients aged over 20 years, calcification was observed in 75.1% (82.6% males and 68.0% females). In patients aged from 20 to 79 years, the calcification was significantly higher in male than female. Although there was a different incidence of calcification examined by three types of CT scanners, it was not significant. There was no significant difference between thickness of 8 mm section and 10 mm." |
|
| |
I found the "striking increase in number of patients aged from 10 to 39 years." interesting. |
|
| |
"A prospective study to ascertain the incidence of normally calcified pineal gland, was carried out in 1000 consecutive patients from different parts of Uttar Pradesh (India), undergoing cranial computed tomography for reasons other than a pineal or parapineal pathology. A total of 167 (16.70%) patients were found to have calcified pineals. Of these 128 were males and 39 females. The incidence rose from 1.16 per cent in the first decade to 31.88 per cent above the age of 50 yr. The percentage incidence of normal pineal calcification was lower than that seen in the Western population. No significant difference was found between men and women in any age group. Although calcification appeared as early as the first decade, this percentage was significantly lower than in the higher age groups. Significantly higher incidence rates were seen in the second decade, third decade and sixth decade onwards." |
|
| |
Which isn't evidence but, "percentage incidence of normal pineal calcification was lower than that seen in the Western population." would seem to indicate we're doing something wrong. |
|
| |
The point is that we know that fluoride calcifies the pineal gland. I shouldn't have to be proving that it isn't the problem. |
|
| |
Whoever is arbitrarily putting the fluoride in everything should have to prove that it's safe Before we make sure every baby on the planet gets a good old overdose of the poison. |
|
| |
//I had read on one site that pineal calcification
was unheard of in anyone under nineteen in
the 1950's and now its in 2 year olds, and no I can't
find the article again.// |
|
| |
Well, that's a pity. However, one of the articles
you cited previously pointed out that the
greater-than-thought prevalence of calcification in
young children was thought to be due to
better imaging techniques. There wasn't much in
the 1950s. |
|
| |
If, now, calcification is known to become more
prevalent as you get older, there is an
interesting possibility. Perhaps the recent
fluoridation of drinking water actually prevents
calcification, so that it is seen more often in
people who grew up without fluoride. That's
almost certainly not the case, but it's an equally
valid interpretation. |
|
| |
//About the closest I can find are two other
PubMed abstracts// Your first abstract says that
calcification is
common, and gets commoner as you get older. It
neither suggests that the prevalence is
increasing over time, nor makes any connection to
fluoride, mobile phones, or any other
putative causative agent. It is, quite simply,
irrelevant. |
|
| |
You will, however, note that the abstract you cite
depends on CT scans to get estimates of
prevalence. CT scans were not around in the
1950s. |
|
| |
The second abstract does indeed say that pineal
calcification is less common in Uttar Pradesh than
in Western populations. I wonder if there are any
differences, other than fluoridation of water,
between Uttar Pradesh and the West? Incidentally,
pineal calcification is about as common in the UK
and in France as it is in the US, and bears no
relation to the prevalence of fluoridated drinking
water. |
|
| |
(1) People (real people) are obviously aware of the
potential harm caused by excess fluoride,
at least in terms of dental (and systemic) fluorisis.
One of the papers you referred to earlier
emphasized that baby food manufacturers had
purposefully reduced fluoride concentrations
in milk-based baby foods for this very reason.
(Soya-based baby foods are more difficult
because compounds in soya bind fluoride). So, to
say that medical profession is unaware of
potential problems caused by excess fluoride is
poppycock*; to suggest (as you have) that it's
being added to baby foods is also nonsense. |
|
| |
(*I use this phrase in its original Dutch meaning of
"soft shit") |
|
| |
(2) I have seen nothing whatsoever to suggest that
fluoride is responsible for pineal
calcification. If anything, calcium is responsible
for pineal calcification. Yes, pineal calculi
contain fluoride, but any mineral deposit in the
body (including tooth enamel and bone) will
accumulate fluoride. So what? |
|
| |
(3) I have seen nothing whatsoever to indicate that
pineal calcification is more common (at
any age) in areas with fluoridated water than in
areas without; nor that there has been any
increase in pineal calcification in areas that have
started fluoridating water. |
|
| |
(4) The idea that fluoride does something to the
pineal gland appears to be one of those
urban legends that arose from either a
misunderstanding or propaganda about Nazi plans
to
use fluoride in some evil scheme. As far as I can
tell, there was no such scheme (nor would
such a scheme have made sense, given the
knowledge then or now). So at least the origin of
the myth is known. |
|
| |
(5) If you Google "fluoridation and pineal
calcification", about 95% of the hits are to loony,
mystical sites and/or conspiracy sites. The pineal
gland is the subject of a huge amount of
woo-woo, for reasons that are very hard to make
sense of. |
|
| |
(6) I could equally well start a myth that the
dramatic increase in somatic DNA mutations
since the late 1990s is caused by environmental
exposure to carbon fibre. (Spoiler alert: we
have only really had the tools to look at somatic
mutations since the 1990s.) |
|
| |
(7) There is no chemical reason why fluoride
should particularly cause calcification. In fact,
if you know your chemistry, you would know that
the other halogens - chlorine and iodine -
are equally (un)likely to be the cause. Chlorine
has been added to most drinking water in
far larger amounts than fluorine for a long time,
yet it's not the subject of woo-woo
conspiracy theories. Salt has been iodised for
quite a while too, but again nobody seems to
worry about that. |
|
| |
(8) At the end of the day, all these conspiracy
theories (fluoride in your pineal gland;
chemtrails; Roswell aliens; yada yada) are just so
fucking predictable and unimaginative.
They all follow the same script; they all attract
similar people; they are all so lacking
in...well, anything, really. |
|
| |
(9) I have to finish by being completely frank. I
think you're a gullible nut who has joined a well-
publicized but not very creative conspiracy theory
and made it part of the focal point of your
existence. Dowse me some water using your
//...powers// and I will eat my words, both to you
and here on the HB. |
|
| |
My only problem with the brush off though is that I'm not a conspiracy theory nut.
I am quite literally trying my best to self diagnose my own condition and keep slamming up against pineal gland conspiracies over and over again, such as the word Hypermelatoninism being scrubbed from the internet before I stumbled on quite by accident. It's pretty hard for the doctors to diagnose that which they are not taught. |
|
| |
Many of the articles I've copied above prove that fluoride does indeed collect and calcify the pineal gland yet, to your reasoning, those poisoned need to prove they are being poisoned before the poisoning stops. |
|
| |
That's completely insane! |
|
| |
I say prove that the shit doesn't cause adverse health effects or get it the hell gone until it 'is' proven.
Not the other way around. |
|
| |
//Hypermelatoninism being scrubbed from the
internet// |
|
| |
That's interesting. Can you give any examples (eg,
use the Wayback machine to illustrate a case of
"hypermelatonism" being scrubbed from the
internet)? |
|
| |
//Many of the articles I've copied above prove that
fluoride does indeed collect and calcify the pineal
gland // |
|
| |
Well then, that's progress. Can you show me the
bits that prove that fluoride does indeed calcify
the pineal gland? |
|
| |
Incidentally, this is how we feel about the development of
some EU regulations concerning 'GM' foodstuffs. |
|
| |
//Incidentally, this is how we feel about the
development of some EU regulations concerning 'GM'
foodstuffs.// Are you for or against? |
|
| |
I find that some of them are just based on fear-mongering
similar to the fluoride scare, with likely a protectionism
racket backing. |
|
| |
First off, like I said, it should not have to be proven that fluoride "isn't" a health risk, it should be assumed until proven otherwise, but yes there is conclusive evidence that fluoride causes pineal calcification. |
|
| |
"After half a century of the prophylactic use of fluorides in dentistry, we now know that fluoride readily accumulates in the human pineal gland. In fact, the aged pineal contains more fluoride than any other normal soft tissue. The concentration of fluoride in the pineal was significantly higher (p <0.001) than in corresponding muscle, i.e., 296 ± 257 vs. 0.5± 0.4 mg/kg (wet weight) respectively. The low fluoride content found in muscle in the current study was in agreement with the low fluoride content in soft tissues – less than 1 mg F/kg (WHO, 1984). This indicates that the method used in the present study had been properly executed; that fluoride in the pineal gland was endogenous and had not been introduced to the cadavers since the time of death, e.g., via the preserving formalin fluid. However, the pineal gland is unique in that it can be classified as a soft or as a mineralizing tissue. In terms of mineralized tissue, the mean fluoride concentration in the pineal calcification was equivalent to that in severely fluorosed bone and more than four times higher than in corresponding bone ash, i.e., 8,900 ± 7,700 vs. 2,040 ± 1,100 mg/kg, respectively. The calcification in two of the 11 pineals analysed in this study contained extremely high levels of fluoride: 21,800 and 20,500 mg/kg." |
|
| |
Checking the wayback machine for the day I stumbled on Hypermelatoninism will have to wait for after work. I've never used the program before so that could be difficult.
There was about a month-long period between finding the word and disclosing here on my Pinealopoly Game posting.
When I found the word there were only two coherent hits left and two pages of hits that read something like word-soup with random hyperlinks to various pharmaceuticals scattered throughout each document. For example: |
|
| |
Tree Wednesday with not having forklift [Abilify] denting mango December from uphill going because front garbage [Abilify] hosed rubber machine speaking hammer thought todays many [Abilify]... |
|
| |
Every hit after that was the same word soup, but different drug name.
On the day I mentioned this here every one of those word-soup pages redirected to various locations in Pittsfield Illinois for about a twenty minute period before disappearing entirely. |
|
| |
That mention here has since disappeared but if someone able to read content deleted from the halfbakery searches deleted postings for the term "Pittsfield Illinois" that will narrow down the wayback machine search to the exact day that the shenanigans went down and they can see it happen after-the-fact for themselves. |
|
| |
NOW you're getting warmer. The link is to what appears to be a
thesis extract, reproduced on a site calling itself "Meridian
Energies" - that is not a very encouraging sign. However, it's a
start. |
|
| |
I presume you have already checked PubMed for her actual
publications. As far as I can see, there is one (in Caries Res.!),
reporting that fluoride accumulates in the calcium-based deposits
in the pineal gland. |
|
| |
//shenanigans// I assume what you saw was related to search-
engine optimisation-type stuff. I don't know much about it, except
that it is or was common to hide lists of random words on web
pages so that they would be found by search engines. |
|
| |
If you want a laugh, watch their presentation on 'Water -
The Great Mystery.' Lots of hype mysteryish-sounding
nonsense claiming that water is some strange compound
that scientists don't really understand thrown in with
religion, mysticism, random old people with beards, and
the prerequisite Indian music for authenticity, because
despite their ineptitude with democracy and corruption,
Indians are wise and stuff with regards to mystical
hocus-pocus. Really great marketing job. Looks like an
optimized, target-screening job, like a highly polished
version of a Nigerian 419 scam for the gullible. |
|
| |
Still, the laughability of the host site doesn't necessarily
invalidate the paper I suppose. |
|
| |
//I find that some of them are just based on fear-
mongering similar to the fluoride scare, with likely
a protectionism racket backing.// |
|
| |
Yep. I agree, and Europe is paying a price
(literally) for its attitude toward GM crops. On the
other hand, I'm not a fan of the main commercial
players in GM. |
|
| |
Strangely, synthetic biology is far more radical
than old-style GM, but has a much better image, at
least here in Yurp. |
|
| |
Just wait 'til you ask someone to eat it. Sure, they'll
implant a heart printed from a CAD model and grown out of
a petri dish, but just try and
feed them a steak from a cow who was fed Soylent Green... |
|
| |
//I presume you have already checked PubMed for her actual publications. As far as I can see, there is one (in Caries Res.!), reporting that fluoride accumulates in the calcium-based deposits in the pineal gland. // |
|
| |
Yes, and I find it strange that there are not many studies to derive information from. |
|
| |
// I assume what you saw was related to search- engine optimisation-type stuff. I don't know much about it, except that it is or was common to hide lists of random words on web pages so that they would be found by search engines.// |
|
| |
No. I waited for a month to see if was just some glitch that would fix itself.
To redirect en-masse to Pittsfiled Illinois for twenty minutes, and then vanish on the exact day that I decide to mention information here is too coincidental to be passed off as hashtag bombing.
If that was the case those pages would have remained because nobody would care.
Apparently somebody cared. |
|
| |
You can obfuscate the facts, redirect attention, and straw-man the poisoning of childrens' entire endocrine systems to the Nigerian Prince scam all you want, but the point is it should have to proven that fluoride 'is' safe before being put in bloody everything.
Instead the opposite is demanded while our kids are absorbing poison and their endocrine systems are being compromised. |
|
| |
Nobody is bothering to look into it...but we should all trust authority on this matter like good little sheeple. |
|
| |
//You can obfuscate the facts, redirect attention,
and straw-man the poisoning of childrens' entire
endocrine system// |
|
| |
You see, [2fries], __that__ is why there is not more
work on the effects of fluoride on the pineal gland. |
|
| |
Any serious researcher looking at the subject will
just be horrified by all the conspiracy theories,
woo-woo, mysticism and third-eye crap that's out
there - certainly there is a huge amount of it. So,
no researcher is going to touch it with a barge
pole. |
|
| |
Yes, it's possible that fluoride has adverse effects
on the pineal (or, indeed, the adrenal, the
pancreas, the anal sphincter or anything else). It's
also possible that additional research is warranted.
But if I were in that field, I would find something
else to work on, that is not the subject of so much
tombollockry. |
|
| |
It would be ironic, would it not, if the infantile
woo-woo of adults deterred serious researchers
from looking into something that might impact on
infants' health? |
|
| |
//Apparently somebody cared.// |
|
| |
Either that or it just picked up the word from, say, recent
postings here due to your recent activity as bots do, and
then dropped it as not that useful as a magnet. |
|
| |
To suggest that there's a conspiracy theory is nutty
but not remarkable. However, to suggest that there's
a conspiracy theory in which people put information
on the web in plain view, but then take it down as
soon as [2fries] searches for it, is creative insanity. |
|
| |
//Any serious researcher looking at the subject will just be horrified by all the conspiracy theories, woo-woo, mysticism and third-eye crap that's out there - certainly there is a huge amount of it. So, no researcher is going to touch it with a barge pole.// |
|
| |
I know. That's the problem.
Fling enough (you don't wanna be like that guy do ya?) propaganda and you can get people to ignore almost anything... even their kids getting poisoned. |
|
| |
//But if I were in that field, I would find something else to work on, that is not the subject of so much tombollockry.
It would be ironic, would it not, if the infantile woo-woo of adults deterred serious researchers from looking into something that might impact on infants' health?// |
|
| |
See?
Your conditioned response controls you. Woo-woo shouldn't sway you from forming your own opinion regardless of the majority consensus. This isn't junior high school anymore. |
|
| |
////Apparently somebody cared.////
//Either that or it just picked up the word from, say, recent postings here due to your recent activity as bots do, and then dropped it as not that useful as a magnet.// |
|
| |
At the time I was researching visual snow and attempting to determine if there were visual capabilities other than the eyes which might be overlaying normal sight.
Nothing pineal related before I stumbled on the word hypermelatoninism which led to researching the pineal gland itself which lead to researching fluoride as a cumulative neurotoxin-yet-dished out like candy by dental hygienists to prevent this, quite literal, third eyeball from being open in other people the way mine seems to be. |
|
| |
I see things in my head.
They seem to be accurate for the most part.
So I am not so quick to dismiss "all" of the pineal associated woo-woo. |
|
| |
I got to experience some of that woo before I started trying to figure out why. |
|
| |
//However, to suggest that there's a conspiracy theory in which people put information on the web in plain view, but then take it down as soon as [2fries] searches for it, is creative insanity.// |
|
| |
The conspiracy nobody wants to look at has to do with the pineal gland, not me.
I just happen to be somebody who's circumstances put me in the position of coming at the subject from the far end of the spectrum (Murphy must really like me...) and so I seem to keep colliding with crap that is disappearing. |
|
| |
I am disseminating the information I find and the conclusions I have jumped to from the evidence I have stumbled across with the tools I have at my disposal. |
|
| |
My gut might not be right, but I trust it over my conditioned responses every time.
It knows things I don't so I follow it around like a puppy and learn from it. |
|
| |
It's just kinda what you learn to do when tossed to the wolves as a babe and don't get et... {shrugs}
For me... I can't get the words cumulative Neuro-fucking-Toxin out of my head. |
|
| |
Your'e soaking in it Madge! |
|
| |
So, when you go to Vegas, do all of the machines
flake out and start throwing quarters at you? Have
you ever tried levitating? Controlling the weather
with your mind? |
|
| |
Nope. Never needed to.
Cleaned up at the poker tables though. Felt a bit guilty about it afterwards. Everybody's tells might as well have been written in marker. |
|
| |
Is there no limit to your pineal //...powers// ? |
|
| |
{shrugs} Learning as I go.
I imagine I could probably do a while lot more than I now can if I had only had a teacher... |
|
| |
Have you considered contacting Yoda? The farce is
strong in this one. |
|
| |
Cumulative neurotoxin. Calcified pineal gland. Asymptomatic cascade effect of entire endocrine system. Doctors not taught. Dentists not taught. |
|
| |
No news on the dowsing, then? |
|
| |
Not yet. I'm in no rush to prove anything to you.
Just hear me now, you can always believe me later. |
|
| |
So, not working then. Ah well. I'm in no rush to
believe you. |
|
| |
Given your thoughts on fluoride, doesn't it seem
strange for you to say that I should believe you
pending proof? |
|
| |
Don't believe me.
Just go right on believing that authority has your best interests at heart. |
|
| |
You seem to be getting confused, [2f]. I'm talking
about dowsing now, not fluoride. As I indicated, I
have no strong position on fluoride and its
potential effects. |
|
| |
With regard to dowsing, my opinion is that you are
lying either to us or to yourself, and will require
evidence to the contrary if I am to change my
opinion. |
|
| |
I hope that doesn't sound too unreasonable. I am
simply trying to be clear. |
|
| |
// As I indicated, I have no strong position on fluoride and its potential effects.// |
|
| |
I know. You should form one. |
|
| |
//my opinion is that you are lying either to us or to yourself, and will require evidence to the contrary if I am to change my opinion.// |
|
| |
Copy that.
Y'know... If you were to put a fraction of the energy into questioning authority that you put into questioning my claims we all might just be able to dig ourselves out of this shit our great Grandpappy's got us into. |
|
| |
I have a list of things that people want me to have
strong opinions about. They include, but are by no
means limited to: |
|
| |
Whether the moon landings were faked
Whether water has a memory
Whether alien abductions are routine
What's at Roswell
Whether GM crops are the work of satan
Whether mobile phones cause cancer
Whether my star-sign can tell me anything
useful
Whether telekinesis is possible
Whether an overly-clean environment is linked to
asthma
Whether aluminium saucepans cause Alzheimer's
disease |
|
| |
and about, oh, maybe three million others. |
|
| |
I therefore find it necessary to filter things,
roughly as follows: |
|
| |
(a) Is this person two fries short of a happy meal,
either literally, figuratively or nominatively? |
|
| |
(b) If not (a), is it remotely plausible that they are
right? |
|
| |
(c) If (b), is it something that is likely to have an
effect on me? |
|
| |
(d) If (c), is it more likely to have a more serious
adverse effect on me than, say, being hit by a car,
getting a smoking-related illness, or simply getting
old? |
|
| |
(e) If (d), is there anything useful I can do about it? |
|
| |
(f) If (e), do the aforementioned risks and effort
justify my giving a toss? |
|
| |
So far, you have failed at (a). With regard to
fluoride, if you made it past (a) you would possibly
pass (b), but then fail at each of (c), (d), (e) and
(f). |
|
| |
Finally, I don't think we share any great
grandparents. |
|
| |
Well then hopefully there are people here who have read our feisty little exchange who do not suffer from the conditioned apathy of our generation and are looking in the direction my gut has pointed me, because you're like no help at all man. |
|
| |
Thank you. I am pleased to be of no help. I think
you are a fruitloop, and helping fruitloops in their
pursuit of further fruitloopiness is most unlikely to
benefit you or, more to the point, me. I also doubt
whether it would benefit mankind, but I am happy
to let posterity prove me wrong on that one. |
|
| |
I also make a point of never looking in the
direction people's guts have pointed, at least not
until they've flushed. |
|
| |
But do let me know how the dowsing works out, at
your leisure. You'll know where to find me. |
|
| |
// helping fruitloops in their pursuit of further fruitloopiness is most unlikely to benefit you |
|
| |
But that is the whole point. You can't be a special snowflake if no one is paying attention. |
|
| |
Yep, whole point right there tell y'hwut. I'm just such a little attention whore. |
|
| |
//...powers// will do that to a man. |
|
| |
Again guv, yer word, not mine.
Big difference between abilities and "powers". |
|
| |
You're quite right. It appears that your //robust
pineal// gives you //...abilities//. |
|
| |
Well, that's something that I'm sure we're all in
agreement with. |
|
| |
Bedtime for me and my own robust pineal here in the
fluoride-free world. Same time tomorrrow? |
|
| |
It really doesn't need your agreement to be true sir. I didn't ask for the cards I was dealt, but dealt them I was. |
|
| |
Has it stopped raining yet, [2fries]? |
|
| |
It stopped raining some time ago, but I haven't bothered Max. I've seen what I've seen, done what I've done, and told it like it was.
I don't need more proof that I've actually seen what I've actually seen, but you seem to need proof in order for me to have the right to say that I've seen what I've seen. |
|
| |
I already possess the right to speak my mind without your permission thankyouverymuch. |
|
| |
...but in the interests of letting you see for yourself, perhaps you could help me to figure out a way I can test it that would stand up to scrutiny.
I can't very well witch my own water lines because I laid them and I'm not about to go asking my neighbours if I can dig up their lawns to satisfy the disbelief of some stranger on the internet.
I'd thought to have someone hide balloons filled with water under the sand on a beach, but the nearness of the water-table would make that useless. |
|
| |
Anybody worked out magnets sensitivity to humans? |
|
| |
// I haven't bothered Max.// Well, there you go then. |
|
| |
The standard test for dowsing seems to be to have a
series of pipes concealed below a floor, with water
flowing only through one. Or a moveable pipe below a
floor. However, since nobody who claimed to be able to
dowse has ever passed these tests, you can draw your
own conclusions. The unicorn in the box seems to be
quite capricious. |
|
| |
[-2fries], do you have a service in your area that you can call prior to
digging for construction work - the ones that come out and mark utility
lines before you dig? I'm sure not all of their jobs would be appropriate
for walking into, but there's a chance some of them might make a
good test ground. |
|
| |
How about this: You are presented with a table with
100 sealed, opaque plastic containers on. Of the
containers, 50 contain 1 litre of water; the other
50
contain 1kg of sand. The test is to say which
containers have sand in and which have water in.
The
test is officiated by someone who does not know
what
is in the containers. This person will mark the
containers "W" or "S" following instructions from
the
test subject. At no time can the test subject touch
the containers. I'll leave it to others more
practiced in the statistics of test protocols to
say what result would be significant but this
should be a cheap and easy test to set up and
indeed, one which [2fries] could practice at home,
given a willing volunteer who can fill and shuffle
the containers. |
|
| |
//I'll leave it to others more practiced in the
statistics of test protocols to say what result would
be significant// |
|
| |
Well, you'd expect to get 25 out of 50 by chance,
with a standard deviation of about 5 (square root of
25). You'd want at least 3 s.d., so something like
40/50 or better. If it were an actual sense, you'd
expect 50/50, of course. |
|
| |
Thanks [Max] and one addition to the instructions -
the test subject *has* to designate 50 they think are
sand and 50 they think are water. |
|
| |
I like it, but I was thinking more along the lines of fifty containers and only one of them contains water. If it works the coat-hangers should cross over that container every time. I could even have a helper change containers to rule out a marked-deck. |
|
| |
The containers don't have to be the same either as long as they're opaque. Might have to put a cardboard sleeve around each one too so I can't use backlighting to pick out the water visually. |
|
| |
For that matter why have containers of sand at all?
I just need fifty identical boxes but only one has a water filled container within it.
I don't think it would work if half the boxes contained water unless they were all strung out in a single row apart from one another. |
|
| |
//fifty containers and only one of them contains
water.// Sure. In that case you'd need to do it three
times in a row to get reasonable proof (1x = 1 in 50;
2x = 1 in 2500; 3x = 1 in 125000). |
|
| |
Cool.
60% of the time it should work every time. |
|
| |
Why is 1 in 125,000 the threshold for proof?
...and at which point does repetition conclude an ability rather than just freakish chance? |
|
| |
As you yourself said: // If it works the coat-
hangers should cross over that container every
time.// |
|
| |
First point: you're claiming to have a sense. Either
you have it or you don't. |
|
| |
Second point: you are claiming something
extraordinary which, if true, would be remarkable
and would demand a large re-think of major areas
of biology and physics. You would not reasonably
expect people to believe your claim on the basis of
what could be a statistical fluke. 1 in 50 or 1 in
2500 is not remarkable (people have won lotteries
with far worse odds). Even 1 in 125,000 is
marginal under the circumstances. |
|
| |
[2fries], you are giving all the indications of not
even believing in this ability yourself. |
|
| |
I told you, I saw it done and did it myself like thirty years ago. No idea if I can do it again. |
|
| |
You are the one requiring proof.
I'm good. |
|
| |
Well, I once saw a guy cut a woman in half and put
her back together again. The medical profession
didn't seem that interested in his techniques. |
|
| |
Shh... don't give the airline industry any ideas... |
|
| |
//Well, I once saw a guy cut a woman in half and put her back together again.// |
|
| |
Did he get written about in a peer reviewed article of PubMed which seems to have disappeared? |
|
| |
//Did he get written about in a peer reviewed
article // Nope, that was kinda my point. |
|
| |
//of PubMed// Ah, this is a pity because I'd
thought we'd covered this, but maybe not.
PubMed
does not publish anything. It is an indexing service
for journals. |
|
| |
//which seems to have disappeared? // Ah yes.
These are those mysterious articles which you
claim you saw once but now believe have been
spirited away, and can no longer remember the
details of. Wrong, sadly. |
|
| |
Also, just out of interest, even if PubMed for some
reason removed the indexing of an article, and
even if
the original journal (in whichever country)
conspired with them, how would the journal
archives
be modified to cover up this gap? Would someone
have to fake a complete article of the same
length to be inserted in the electronic back-copy?
Would the journal also retrospectively change
any editorial or correspondence relating to that
article? |
|
| |
Also, assuming the "vanished" paper had been cited
in other papers, would all those papers then
have to be edited to remove the citations? How
would all of the authors of those papers react? |
|
| |
And then of course the journal would need to find all the people who'd
downloaded the article and secretly delete their PDFs. |
|
| |
And then, assuming the journal also had a print edition, they'd have to
send secret agents out to every library that subscribed; razorblade out
the pages; and splice in some new pages invisibly. |
|
| |
Would I be correct in assuming that you have never
actually read any article published in a peer-
reviewed journal, but have only browsed PubMed? |
|
| |
Would I further be correct in assuming that you
have not got the remotest forking idea of how scientific
publishing works? I ask only for information. |
|
| |
Yep, that sure is an awful lot of red-tape to wade through to see anything but an abstract of a scientific study which specifically mentions dowsing and the areas of the human body responsible for sensitivity to dowsing.
Yes indeedy. |
|
| |
I think you just like to argue.
But see, I didn't ever do any debate club stuff so you're the only one having fun here.
I've only got my word.
I stand by it.
If I tell you I've seen or done something it's because I've seen or done that thing... and I'm the same guy on and off the net. |
|
| |
The only purpose I've ever been able to see for red-tape is to obscure whatever that shit is wrapped around. |
|
| |
I have both seen dowsing and successfully dowsed/ (witched) water myself decades ago.
You really have a problem with that don't you?
Like it just shakes the very foundations of all of everything you've been told or something.
I find that amazing.
This one teeny little thing... |
|
| |
I'll see how much fifty take-out boxes costs.
If I get this crap to work again you have to reimburse me for them when we meet, and If I can't then, the boxes are on me. |
|
| |
I'll toss in the margarine dish full of pure Canadian spring water... gratis..and if that works I'm trying maple syrup next. |
|
| |
...that one's gonna cost ya though. shipping, handling, friggin taps take Forever.
You understand. |
|
| |
//Yep, that sure is an awful lot of red-tape to
wade through to see anything but an abstract of a
scientific study// Yes, although your local library
should be able to obtain whatever article you're
interested in. However, that wasn't the point I was
making, was it? |
|
| |
//I didn't ever do any debate club stuff// Nor me. |
|
| |
//The only purpose I've ever been able to see for
red-tape is to obscure whatever that shit is
wrapped around.// Ah. I fear you are making a
fundamental mistake here. The "red tape"
(paywalls - that's all) is there to protect the
journal's financial interests - just like you can't
watch a new movie without paying for it. I don't
like it and I don't agree with it, but that's life. Out
of interest, does it bother you as much if you have
to pay to listen to a piece of music or read a novel? |
|
| |
//I have both seen dowsing and successfully
dowsed/ (witched) water myself decades ago.// I
simply do not believe you. Whether that means
you are lying or simply misunderstand is not
something I can decide. |
|
| |
//Like it just shakes the very foundations of all of
everything you've been told // No, not really; if
there was any evidence that dowsing worked - any
evidence at all - it would be great. We would have
a whole new aspect of biology and/or physics to
look at. It would be as exciting as, say, the
discovery of magnetosensitivity in birds. The
problem is that there is no evidence at all that
dowsing is a real thing. Scientists have put _far_
more effort into trying to detect "dowsing" than
the so-called "dowsers" have. Far, far more. And
so we do get pissed off by accusations that we are
somehow "suppressing" this shit. |
|
| |
//This one teeny little thing... // That statement
tells me that you don't have the first idea about
how science actually works. The discrepancy
between Newtonian and Einsteinian predictions for
the motion of Mercury was infinitesimal, and look
at what that meant. |
|
| |
//If I get this crap to work again you have to
reimburse me for them when we meet// Gladly.
But you have to be able to demonstrate this ability
to me, not just say "Hey, I tried it and it worked." |
|
| |
Who knows? Dozens of "dowsers" have been as
adamant of their abilities as you are, but have
been found not to have those abilities. Perhaps
you will turn out to be exceptional not just among
human beings, but amongst "dowsers". If so, I will
be extremely happy and intrigued. |
|
| |
====
Now, can we get back to the points I made in my
last annotation? Can you explain to me how you
believe journal articles could be made to "vanish"?
I am interested to hear your reasoning. |
|
| |
Don't know. I just see a whole lot of [page can not be displayed] when looking. |
|
| |
I did manage to find a single study confirming the ability though: |
|
| |
Hans-Dieter Betz
Sektion Physik der Universitat Munchen D-85748 Garching
The dowsing phenomenon represents a longstanding puzzle which receives continued
attention in almost all countries. Histori- cally, the essential claim consists in the assumption
that certain persons are able to locate underground water and possibly other materials without
using obvious conventional information or technical systems other than, say, a rod or a
pendulum.
A large body of experimental evidence is available, interpreted both as proof by one
side, but as anecdotical and fortuitous by the other side. Various investigations have been
conducted in the past which yielded quite reliable conclusions, though no general agreement could be achieved in the realm of science.
We report results of our scientific program which we
have conducted for some 10 years and which is still continuing in order to clarify some of the
basic questions. During the first phase, we tried to find proof for either existence or nonexistence
of the debated phenomenon. Within a period of two years some 100 dowsers have been tested by means of sophisticated experiments and a statistical analysis of the results revealed a very high level of significance for the existence of a real dowsing phenomenon.
In a second test program, the performance of a particularly skilled dowser has been examined, who worked on behalf of a government agency and located some 1000 wells in arid areas
throughout the world. His success was undebatable. As a consequence, an increasing number
of earth scientists began to agree that the matter should be pursued further on a scientific
basis.
This led to a third phase of investigation, in which geological experiments have been conducted which are still going on and aim at the skill of dowsers to locate underground anomalies. Experiments with a dozen of gifted dowsers have been carried out. In addition, well location success of a commercially operating dowser is investigated, who is sufficiently talented to give a water-guarantee to his clients. Our latest studies involve the observed capability of dowsers to sense directions of underground disturbances ("reaction zones"); first results of double-blind tests will be presented. Meanwhile the evidence in favour of the
phenomenon has become overwhelming and the question to be investigated is no longer
whether dowsing skills exist but how well these skills can be demonstrated. |
|
| |
I wonder how long this paper on this one teeny little thing will take to go 404 file not found? |
|
| |
//Don't know. I just see a whole lot of [page can
not be displayed] when looking. // |
|
| |
Ah, OK now we're in business - email me an
example and I'll take a look. Email is on my
profile. |
|
| |
re. the cited paper - interesting. I do note,
however, that they seem to be relying on the
ability of "dowsers" to find well-water (ie, places
to bore for water). A good geologist can do that
without "dowsing". In fact, when we had a
borehole dug, the guy knew to within 10 metres
how deep we'd have to go - not a dowsing rod in
sight. Not really a proof of "dowsing". |
|
| |
I liked this: //well location success of a
commercially operating dowser is investigated, who
is sufficiently talented to give a water-guarantee
to his clients// - it's like saying to expectant
mothers "I will predict the gender of your baby.
I'm so confident of my abilities that if I'm wrong
I'll give you 75% of your fee back!".
Also
this: //first results of double-blind tests will be
presented// - I'm interested in what kind of
double-blind test they're running; nothing else in
that abstract seemed to suggest they were comparing
the performance of dowsers with random people,
geologists, farmers, etc. |
|
| |
// Ah, OK now we're in business - email me an example and I'll take a look. Email is on my profile.// |
|
| |
Um... I've been stumbling across this crap since [ninteenthly] clued me in that the way I described my visual perception sounded like HPPD, which lead to visual snow which lead to researching the pineal gland over the last seven years or so. |
|
| |
I can't go back through all that crap again man. Start with hypermelatoninism and figure out where every hit but two went and you'll be able to jump ahead of the stuff I had to wade through to get to that point. |
|
| |
//A good geologist can do that without "dowsing". In fact, when we had a borehole dug, the guy knew to within 10 metres how deep we'd have to go - not a dowsing rod in sight. Not really a proof of "dowsing".// |
|
| |
Don't know. I saw a guy who wasn't a geologist pull it off and I did it myself a few times way the fuck back when. Like I told you. I already know it's a thing some people can do, All of these hoops I've been jumping through trying to get you to even consider the remotest possibility that I'm not full of shit have been entirely for your benefit.
It's tiring, this whole being assumed guilty until proving yourself innocent bullshit over the course of an entire lifetime. |
|
| |
It's a thing. Gird your loins. There's a whole bunch of other 'things' too. Not all of them are teeny little things. |
|
| |
//nothing else in that abstract seemed to suggest they were comparing the performance of dowsers with random people, geologists, farmers, etc.// |
|
| |
Maybe that's what they mean by a double blind study. |
|
| |
I just know that I've yet to lie to you all... so I already know what the end result of the studies will eventually be.
Some people are more sensitive to any given stimuli than others.
Quit burning us alive and stuffing us into closets out of fear and you'll find out that, not only has a bunch of woo-woo been put there to distract you, but that it's also not nearly as rare as it's been made out to appear. |
|
| |
I took a class in geohydrology in college some 40
years ago and I still recall quite vividly what my
professor had to say about dowsing: "If there is
water to be found, it doesn't matter much where
you dig. Dig deep enough and you'll find it." |
|
| |
He had some interesting thoughts on "cones of
depression" unrelated to psychology, too. |
|
| |
//It's a thing. Gird your loins. There's a whole bunch of other
'things'// |
|
| |
[2fries], I don't think you understand quite why scientists appear so
hostile toward this stuff, so let me explain if I can. |
|
| |
Good scientists spend their careers looking for weird stuff - stuff that
doesn't fit with what we already know. Relativity; quantum
mechanics; antibiotics - you name it. We don't try to avoid weird
stuff - weird stuff is what makes transformational changes in science.
Weird stuff is what makes Nobel prizes, if that's what you're after.
Nobody got a Nobel prize for adding an extra decimal point to a well-
established theory. |
|
| |
So, quit making out that "we", the "establishment", are in the business
of maintaining some sort of status quo. That's just silly and patently
untrue. |
|
| |
But finding weird stuff is not easy. Most scientists go through their
entire careers without succeeding in doing that. |
|
| |
So, when someone stands up and says "Hey! Here's a weird
phenomenon - humans can sense water remotely!", scientists are
going to be attracted to that idea because there is the prospect of
finding something truly transformational and remarkable. |
|
| |
But then when they check, and find that the phenomenon is not real,
and can't be reproduced under reasonably controlled conditions, they
will get frustrated. When enough "dowsers" keep saying "Hey!", and
when time after time there turns out that there is nothing there,
scientists will eventually get pissed off. That's pretty much the
situation we're in now. |
|
| |
If one person - just one person - could demonstrate "dowsing" under
rigorous conditions, the whole situation would change. So far, nobody
- not one person - has managed to do so. |
|
| |
I do, as it happens, find it offensive and defamatory to be told, time
and again, that I or scientists in general are actively "suppressing"
these remarkable abilities. It's a complete mis-representation of
what science is about and what scientists do. |
|
| |
//I do, as it happens, find it offensive and defamatory to be told, time and again, that I or scientists in general are actively "suppressing" these remarkable abilities. It's a complete mis-representation of what science is about and what scientists do.// |
|
| |
Well it's a good thing I never said that then isn't it? |
|
| |
Scientists are not the "establishment". Scientists do not suppress their own works, their works get suppressed and have been getting suppressed since before Galileo.
Nothing has changed in our enlightened modern societies.
Scientists are just men and women. There are good men and women and there are bad one's, and then there are those who can be bought, just like in every other profession. |
|
| |
//If one person - just one person - could demonstrate "dowsing" under rigorous conditions, the whole situation would change. So far, nobody - not one person - has managed to do so.// |
|
| |
Frankly in the time that you've been going back and forth
defending it, the demonstration could've been neatly
videoed and wrapped up by now. |
|
| |
All points are made. All parties are entrenched. Either
conduct the really relatively easy experiment or let it go. |
|
| |
//Either conduct the really relatively easy
experiment or let it go.// Been done by others
already. But if [2fries] is willing to do it again, I'm
in. |
|
| |
//their works get suppressed and have been
getting suppressed since before Galileo.// Yeah,
and pretty much up until Galileo too. |
|
| |
You've said that papers are mysteriously vanishing;
you can't remember what they were; you can't find
any evidence of their vanishing; and there is no,
repeat no plausible mechanism to make a paper
"vanish" in this age of peer-reviewed journals and
PDFs. It's about as ludicrous as accusing 747 pilots
of sneaking onto orbit when nobody's looking. Your
assertion is, to be frank, just silly. |
|
| |
It's also just as insulting to suggest that scientists
are complicit in having their work "suppressed" as
to suggest that they are suppressing it themselves. |
|
| |
//I call bullshit.// Well, there we are - we agree
on that one, as I call bullshit too. Can you provide
anything to back yourself up with? Or not? |
|
| |
I'll do the little experiment, tomorrow in fact, but play it through in your heads, I see two outcomes; |
|
| |
Scenario 1: Nothing I try can seem to make those dang coat-hangers cross no matter what I do.
This is not proof of the falseness of my words, but it will be taken as such. |
|
| |
Scenario 2: It works like a hot damn and I get it all on film.
This does not prove the truth of my words, and will not be taken as such. |
|
| |
Nice little kangaroo court session you seem to think you can demand of me before I have the right to speak the truth as I know it.
This is not so. |
|
| |
You do not have the right to demand proof from me before I am allowed to speak my mind. I have not given away this right and have no intention of doing so. |
|
| |
If you do not like me speaking the truth as I know it you do however have the right to either not listen to me or filter me from your perception.
You have the right to stop putting words in my mouth and then arguing against them as though they are my own.
You have the right to stop spin doctoring dissimilar aspects of our discussion to introduce an "us" vs "them" propaganda.
You have the right to quit giving me ultimatums.
You have the right to step down off that condescending high horse and basically stop being an asshole to me just because you are incapable of extending the benefit of the doubt that the possibility exists that I am telling the truth. (which I am btw in case I missed that point) |
|
| |
I have presented a study claiming the ability to be real.
There has been a PubMed abstract of another study claiming isolation of the human tissues responsible for such sensitivity linked.
...and I have reported my own experiences as it pertains to the subject. |
|
| |
You don't seem to want to address these things themselves but instead to detract from them by attacking me on multiple fronts that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter at hand and everything to do with debunking and degradation propaganda tactics. |
|
| |
I've told you the truth as I know it.
Don't like it?
Tough shit. |
|
| |
Prove I'm a liar or stop calling me one. I refuse to be judged guilty until proving myself innocent. |
|
| |
That would be a very unenlightened and closed-minded attitude for a scientist to have. |
|
| |
// Nothing I try can seem to make those dang
coat-
hangers cross no matter what I do.
This is not proof of the falseness of my words// |
|
| |
So, you're saying that if you fail, it's because there
really was a unicorn in the box but, golly gee, it
must
have escaped? Are you saying that your claims
cannot be falsified? |
|
| |
//It works like a hot damn and I get it all on film.
This does not prove the truth of my words, and will
not be taken as such.// I can make my ears light
up in different colours on video. We were
discussing a demonstration in person. |
|
| |
Baby steps Max, baby steps. These kangaroo court appointed fools errands need to run their course first. |
|
| |
Nothing conclusive so far but it's been an interesting weekend I really didn't have to waste. So many variables. |
|
| |
Limited the experiment to thirty paper containers, (space constraints).
Two bent coat-hangers, three willow forks and a sandwich baggie full of water and my wife switching the container for each attempt later... |
|
| |
No success at all with any of devices even when I knew where the water was.
Then I got a single success but I was wrong in that it wasn't the container the rods crossed over but the one closest to my feet. The my wife wanted to have a go and when I switched containers for her. The baggie had leaked and the container was getting damp underneath but I left it.
Nothing with willow switches but with the hangers she found it twice and the third time was within one container, and she seemed to do better walking east to west rather than north to south because the space determined the layout, but the sound of grass hitting the hollow containers and being an audible cue as to which containers "aren't" the right ones cause me to set it back up on an elevated deck with no water lines beneath it. |
|
| |
Again, I sucked, and she couldn't get them to cross either which makes me wonder if the wet paper touching earth may have had something to do with her initial luck. |
|
| |
I'm going to try swivels on the coat-hanger handles, filling the hollow containers with sand as suggested to mitigate sound and perhaps one of those water bulbs stabbed into the ground to rule out suspended water vs ground penetrating water. |
|
| |
I'll certainly let you know if I can clue into a way to repeatedly reproduce results. My daughter found the container first try with the willow switch but nothing with the rods. Heh, she says, "That's not easy to feel."
We'll try a bit more after supper. |
|
| |
It's interesting. Something for the neighbours to talk about anyway eh. |
|
| |
Well, kudos for running the experiment. Keep me
posted. |
|
| |
How are the tests coming along, [2fries]? |
|
| |
// I'm going to try swivels on the coat-hanger handles // |
|
| |
My understanding of swivels on dowsing rod handles is
that they were invented to minimize the ideomotor
effect, and thereby distinguish whether A) the movement
of the rods is due to some direct effect from whatever is
buried, or B) the movement of the rods is caused by
minute movements of the hands under the influence of
the brain (the brain, purportedly, being what detects the
hidden stuff in this case). |
|
| |
Therefore, [2fries], if (I understand correctly that you
believe that) your ability to detect water underground is
mediated by your brain, and if your ability is in fact real
(which I'm not arguing for or against—I too am interested
in your results), I predict that adding swivels will make
dowsing more difficult. (Though, now that I've told you
this, you might unconsciously move your hands less or
more with the swivels on…) |
|
| |
When I was young I tried dowsing with bent coathanger
pieces. I think I tried swivels (just bits of drinking straw),
but I don't remember the result. I also don't remember
any other results, or the nature of the experiments
(probably not very scientific). |
|
| |
I'd thought to leave a portion of the rods exposed so that they could touch skin.
I can always shorten them if it doesn't look promising. |
|
| |
Pretty much right after my last posting hellacious wind-storms, wild fires, rain and work load have kept us from another attempt. |
|
| |
I'll let you know if I can reproduce results... just like I said. |
|
| |
Something I've often wondered:
Let's suppose that dowsing rods have some mechanism that makes
them move towards each other, caused by some action of water under
the human body. |
|
| |
So what is the mechanism? |
|
| |
1. The rods attract each other somehow. Material would presumably
be important in this case.
2. The angle of the hands changes slightly. A very small movement of
the hands makes a big change to the rod position. The material would
not be important in this case. |
|
| |
I have some observations on those mechanisms: |
|
| |
1. The bearings can be fixed by using a structure between them, so
that the angle of each cannot affect the rods so that they cross using
angle changes |
|
| |
2. The angle of the hands can be varied at will, and not noticeable. If
involuntary, the inwards rotation of the hands is a strange reaction to
standing over water. |
|
| |
The observation is that "dowsing" "works" by
conscious or unconscious movements of the
"dowsers" hands. As you note, with the bent rods,
an arbitrarily small tilt will have a large effect on
the rods. The other style of dowsing uses a split,
flexible twig which is held in a sort of semi-stable
strained position, such that even an undetectably
small movement will cause the twig to flip one
way or the other. |
|
| |
It's sort of the same deal as the old idea about
holding a ring on a piece of thread to see if a
woman is pregnant with a boy or a girl: arbitrarily
small movements of the hand cause the pendulum
to swing either back and forth or in a circle. That
one actually works, of course: the woman is almost
invariably pregnant with either a boy or a girl.
Just can't tell which. |
|
| |
[Max], that type of tool might be common, but that's not what every
dowser uses. |
|
| |
My father's cousin Cliff was a dowser. He used forked cottonwood
branches at least 2 fingers wide at the tips, and wrist-sized at the
stub end. Not split, nor flexible. |
|
| |
(I remember Cliff looking for dowsing sticks before we went to his
lower farm for the day. He had cottonwoods at the upper farm, so
that's what he used. Didn't want a live one; he said they were "so
full of water they didn't care," didn't want a dried one; "It's dead,
won't work." Looked for something that had been off the tree for a
couple of weeks or so. He'd pick one up, walk to the irrigation ditch,
try it, toss it away and go look for another. When Cliff found one he
liked, he came walking back to the jeep, wrapped the stick in his
coat, and carefully put it in the back. I asked him why he wrapped it
up. He said the jeep wasn't good for the stick. "I wouldn't even bring
a sheep home from the herd in this thing if I wanted it to survive,"
he said. So, I'm just about to get in the jeep, wondering if that's a
good idea, having a 75 mile ride ahead of us. "What about the
dog?" I asked. "You have him ride in the jeep, don't you?" He looks
at me with a grin, then gave one of those piercing whistles all of the
other country boys could do that I could never get the hang of, and
yells, "Hey, Ring! Get in the jeep!" The dog comes bounding along
from a couple hundred yards away, makes a quick stop to piss on
the rear tire, and jumps in. Cliff laughed, head back, pointed at me
in a "there's your explanation" kind of gesture, and we got in and
left. |
|
| |
I could say "now you know", except you don't, and neither do I, but
that's what I saw.) |
|
| |
[2 fries] A question for you, just because this
(why people believe what they believe) is a topic
which interests me: Much of the discussion here has
been on the experimental evidence that would be
needed in order to convince [Max] that dowsing is a
real thing which works reliably and repeatably.
However, what evidence, or lack of evidence, or set
of failed tests would you need, to convince you
that dowsing is not real, that it is an illusion
caused by wishful thinking, self-deception,
confirmation bias and so on? - or would no amount
of negative evidence convince you of this? |
|
| |
I already concede that the possibility exists that dowsing doesn't work. I am not closed minded about any possibilities.
I've just relayed what I've honestly seen with my own eyes.
Something any of us should have be able to do without requiring proof to have that right. |
|
| |
I'm rather fussy about keeping the few rights we have left which haven't been conned away yet... |
|
| |
I don't know for certain whether dowsing is real or if the things I saw and did were just incredibly coincidental.
I only know what I've seen and done... and I still possess the right to speak of them if I wish since I don't have any strings of letters behind my name which would be at stake from having the audacity to demand to be able to tell it like it is. |
|
| |
It sounds to me like the studies underway in the link already have definitive proof that dowsing works for some folks, and that pub-med abstract eludes to studies of the underlying mechanisms. |
|
| |
Why "I" am having to prove it exists in order to speak about it is beyond me. |
|
| |
Three, precisely. And four rights gets you nowhere at all. |
|
| |
//Why "I" am having to prove it exists in order to
speak about it// |
|
| |
You don't "have to" - participation in this discussion is
voluntary. I'm here only because I enjoy it. You've
made unusual claims, and I doubt those claims and
am arguing that they are unjustified. There is no
financial penalty if you don't argue back, no jail
sentence, and no "have to". |
|
| |
There seems to be a peculiarly North Murkin confusion at play between *having* a right (liberty, permission, freedom, license) and *being* right (correct, factual, proven, accurate). |
|
| |
These are not the same things. |
|
| |
Truth is truth.
When the truth is not allowed to be spoken simply because the words can not be proven then we all become liars by default.
No thanks.
I'll just stick with being in the right and let scientists decide what 'they' are and are not allowed to utter without looking fools to their peers. |
|
| |
I've yet to have my peers reveal themselves, so I'll just keep learning and telling it like it is like I've always done. |
|
| |
// I'll let you know if I can reproduce results// |
|
| |
The really quick way to find out if this works would be to bury a bottle of vodka in a field, then get drunks to dowse for it. They would be extremely motivated, if you can get them to stop saying "youuure my bestesh ever pal you are <hic>" |
|
| |
This is our current situation.
[link]
Take a seat. |
|
| |
Damn. I was standing up in front of the PC... |
|
| |
Just touching base here. Any updates to report yet? |
|
| |
Ah well. Kudos for actually putting it to the test
anyway. |
|
| |
//three weeks full time to flip and scroll and swipe and flip and scroll and flip and swipe all the way down |
|
| |
I just turn the smartphone upside down, and the latest bits go to the top. |
|
| |
//I just turn the smartphone upside down// |
|
| |
Damn you, [nmrm], damn you. I just tried that with
my new iPhone8 prototype. The damned thing has
this internal orientation sensor and, as soon as I
turned it upside down, it made the entire room
rotate to compensate. Now I'm picking bits of
chandelier out of my arse. |
|
| |
//I'm picking bits of chandelier out of my arse//
Again?! - I suppose at least you've got a better
excuse this time. |
|
| |
//Again?!// I suspect, [hippo], that you are
confusing "chandelier" with "Chancellor". |
|
| |
That would explain why my ballroom is so gloomy |
|
| |
Well, I don't like to boast... |
|
| |