It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
it IS elitist because you won't even look at it. you-"Sheldrake is raving mad... but I have never read nor listened to any of his ideas.". Ok
Antigod
reply to post by bottleslingguy
it IS elitist because you won't even look at it. you-"Sheldrake is raving mad... but I have never read nor listened to any of his ideas.". Ok
I've never said anything about Sheldrake, ever. Perhaps you are confusing me with one of the other people here.
I'm not sure how it's relevant to the point about pigs and chimps. If it's relevant, explain how and I'll have a look. If it's not, I'm not going to be dragged down a side line while you fail to provide supporting evidence for some bizarre theory you are for some reason supporting.
like I said, show me evidence to support your case. Otherwise I'm not really interested.
Sorry for double post folks.
I think after I reread that I questioned whether you were a Sheldrake basher. So great this can be a wonderful learning moment all around. When you have an hour and a half watch the video I posted
Antigod
reply to post by bottleslingguy
I think after I reread that I questioned whether you were a Sheldrake basher. So great this can be a wonderful learning moment all around. When you have an hour and a half watch the video I posted
Sorry dude, no videos! I refuse to blow that much time. I'll skim some of his work in text later on.
you were one of the "magical thinking" people weren't you? see that is exactly what I mean about that mindset, they say "there's no evidence" and then they say "I don't have time to look at their evidence". You have time to joke around on pig/hum hybrid threads on a conspiracy site, why not take an hour and twenty minutes (and I even spared you that time by pointing out my point at the 23:00 mark) and see where the world is heading. and it's not a "video" it's a video of one of his lectures on morphogenetics. I hope it's not outside your comfort or ego zone but it's something that's not going away.
I dont watch videos for research because...
I Don't retain heard data anywhere near as well as visual. My memory is image based.
I read massively faster than anyone can talk.
I like to get up a new tabs to check references and other sources as I flip between text sources.
SovereignEve
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
Must be true, look at our politicians
All jokes aside, this seems to far fetched. I believe the aquatic ape theory sounds more plausible than this.
Interesting find though, however.
~Sovereign
bottleslingguy
reply to post by peter vlar
"self pious" go away with your elitist attitude. I asked Antigod to at least watch ten minutes of the lecture and tell me where he is wrong and after telling me she's researched him she can't find the time nor interest? That's ridiculous because I mean why else is she here? She supposedly watched the op's video how unreasonable is it to ask for ten minutes? That's that intellectual stonewalling I've been talking about.
bottleslingguy
reply to post by peter vlar
I'm pointing out exactly where Sheldrake speaks to my main point with you guys and gals. You guys can't even come up with anything close to what he says explains the directing force in genetic morphology. That's kinda a big thing wouldn't you think?
reply to post by bottleslingguy
She supposedly watched the op's video how unreasonable is it to ask for ten minutes? That's that intellectual stonewalling I've been talking about.
I can deal with you guys believing in the wrong things. have you heard the news they just discovered a 400,000 y.o. human femur? how many times do the text books have to be rewritten before you people realize the mechanistic view is not sustainable?
Deal with it.
bottleslingguy
I can deal with you guys believing in the wrong things. have you heard the news they just discovered a 400,000 y.o. human femur? how many times do the text books have to be rewritten before you people realize the mechanistic view is not sustainable?
Deal with it.
peter vlar
bottleslingguy
I can deal with you guys believing in the wrong things. have you heard the news they just discovered a 400,000 y.o. human femur? how many times do the text books have to be rewritten before you people realize the mechanistic view is not sustainable?
Deal with it.
The DNA recovered from the femur you mentioned was not from an AMH but from a Densiovan which I would fully expect to see at that age. What is being rewritten because if this other than further understanding our past? I don't understand why that's a bad thing. Not understanding that science is not immutable is a bigger issue.
it explains how dna is controlled.
And as far as the evidence for [Sheldrake's claims], again you don't see it because...
It is something people like you probably will never be able to understand no matter how much time you spend in schools.
why doesn't this person take this opportunity to shut me up and explain where Sheldrake has no evidence?
The defining characteristic of all scientific knowledge, including theories, is the ability to make falsifiable or testable predictions. The relevance and specificity of those predictions determine how potentially useful the theory is. A would-be theory that makes no observable predictions is not a useful theory. Predictions not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term "theory" is hardly applicable. Source