2012

[Mistral]

Heinlein said that religion exists for three reasons. One-to benefit the priests. Two-to benefit the priests. And three-always to benefit the priests. Same thing with those who would put a belief in that which can't be proved out for the willing believers to purchase. Notice I say purchase. I cite such (expensive) books as Holy Grail, Bloody Grail and the collected works of "Dr." Wayne Dyer as prime examples. There are many others-and they have a plan. They plan to separate suckers from their money.

 

[TIN_MAN]

^^ Kinda like the way drugs are peddled on American TV. "80 percent of of those who tried (insert brand name drug) suffered the following side effects, loss of vision, loss of hearing, paralysis, stroke, heart attack, brain damage, but ask your doctor if its right for you!

 

[iguana_tonante]

Taking your last part first, I already said my statement about a "quantum leap in evolution" is just a guess, but it's an educated guess nontheless.

Call me when kids start getting mutant powers and forming their own superhero team.

What I never said, however, was that something significant would happen in 2012, in fact, I said just the opposite. I'll make this prediction, though, the winter solstice Sun will appear to align with the galactic center, as seen from the Earth, on December 31, 2012. Hows that for a scientific prediction. Just wait and see, it'll come true.

Well, just like it happened a whole lotta times in the past? And just like it will happen a whole lotta times in the future? Given any random number of geometrical configurations, things will align sooner or later. I just don't get the significance of that. If you are not going for the "end of the world" perspective, then, why care?

I do keep my mind open for pseudoscience, in fact I find it everywhere, it's rampant, I find it just as often in the hallowed halls of academia as I do in the fringes of the 'new age' groups. There's a differance between the scientific method and science as it's usually practiced, even by "professionals". Science is only as good as the people who practice it, and people are flawed, easily swayed by personal, political, socio/economic, and even military concerns. So unless we find a way to insulate science and scientists from these pressures, then the best we can hope for I'm afraid, is a flawed science.

Meh. Can't argue with you that sometimes scientists make bad science, too. Single researchers make mistakes, have personal preferences, and surely feel the pressure of academic politics and funding concerns. However, the scientific community at large is much more unbiased. Papers get under very strict scrutiny, and bad science is zeroed and expunged in most cases. That is why scientific consensus is so important. When competing research groups come to the same conclusion using different approaches and independent data, you may be quite confident that the results are trustworthy.
On the other hand, people doing "fringe science" and new age humbug are most assured not to do any good science. They are not subjected to peer review and their conclusions are not tested independently. It doesn't mean they can't be occasionally right: even a broken clock is correct two times a day. But what they do is not scientific in nature, and every attempt to pass it as such is a disservice to people reading it.

As for McKenna. He's not my "friend" (I never met the man) but his drug use is openly discussed in his book "The Hidden Lanscape", but this in no way invalidates his discoveries. He may not have been a Professional scientist, but he was nontheless a very intellegent and erudite man. The relationship he and his brother found in the I Ching and its relation to a calender is by no means unscientific, nor is the fact that it predicts the end of a major cycle (related to the precession of the equinoxes apparently?). As I said in my post above, we would expect any really good, acurate calander to do this.

I'm sure he is an intelligent and erudite man: as I said, I would love to have a chat a share a joint with a man like that. But intelligence and learning doesn't make him a scientist in the current meaning of word.

In closing, I'll just say that that, while I agree that people have been predicting the end of the world since there have been people on the planet, I disagree that they've always been wrong, we know there have been many catastrophes that have wiped out most life on earth, even within human existance, so I'm sure somebody got it right even if just by accident?

Heh. Getting a prediction right by accident is no prediction at all.

 

[Mistral]

iguana seems to have the rebuttal well in hand.

 

[TIN_MAN]

Call me when kids start getting mutant powers and forming their own superhero team.

Your attemp at humor does not disguise your implication that I am influenced by popular media, I assure you I am not. I was refering to "Punctuated Equilibria", but unless your an Evolutionary biologist, you wouldn't pick up on that. Besides, it wouldn't do your case any good to concede that I might know a little something about what I'm talking about.

Well, just like it happened a whole lotta times in the past? And just like it will happen a whole lotta times in the future? Given any random number of geometrical configurations, things will align sooner or later. I just don't get the significance of that. If you are not going for the "end of the world" perspective, then, why care?

See, this illustrates my position in a nutshell, you label everything I said as "bullshit", but you clearly have not paid attention to what it is I actually am saying, so it's not surprising that you "just don't get it". You're more interested in painting me as some kind of gullible New Age crackpot that does sloppy research and is afraid the sky is falling, despite the fact that you know nothing about me. That's arrogant assumption on your part. Summarily judging at a moments glance, as you do, with a dismissive wave of the heavy victorian hand, a topic that covers a wide range of scientific disciplines, accumulated by many differant researchers, over many decades, without taking the time to separate the wheat from the chaff, and do a fair objective analysis, is hardly a scientific attitude.

Meh. Can't argue with you that sometimes scientists make bad science, too. Single researchers make mistakes, have personal preferences, and surely feel the pressure of academic politics and funding concerns. However, the scientific community at large is much more unbiased. Papers get under very strict scrutiny, and bad science is zeroed and expunged in most cases. That is why scientific consensus is so important. When competing research groups come to the same conclusion using different approaches and independent data, you may be quite confident that the results are trustworthy.
On the other hand, people doing "fringe science" and new age humbug are most assured not to do any good science. They are not subjected to peer review and their conclusions are not tested independently. It doesn't mean they can't be occasionally right: even a broken clock is correct two times a day. But what they do is not scientific in nature, and every attempt to pass it as such is a disservice to people reading it.

We're basically in agreement on this point, but I don't put quite as much "faith" in the peer reviewed system as you do. It's mostly made up of people like you, who have already made up their minds about what science is is and is not, and what it can and cannot do. Thus biasing their opinions.

I'm sure he is an intelligent and erudite man: as I said, I would love to have a chat a share a joint with a man like that. But intelligence and learning doesn't make him a scientist in the current meaning of word.

Then a doctorate in Psychopharmacology does not qualify Dennis McKenna as a scientist? Okay, suit yourself. Don't suppose you'd care to tell us what degrees you hold or what's your chosen field of expertise is?

Unless your willing to give me something other than your opinion, we're right back where we started, "right back at you".

 

[Mistral]

Wait, you're relying on the word of a Doctor of Heavy Drugs to determine the future? I think I'll have to take exception to his skill set having any bearing on the interpretation of myriad historical texts across multiple cultures and their alleged significance towards any future events. Now, if he was a Doctor of, say, archeology with a second degree in Sociology and a minor in mass psychology I might take him seriously. But psychopharmacology? WTF? How does that add relevance to any theory he might have outside the area of how drugs affect the brain?

 

[TIN_MAN]

Wait, you're relying on the word of a Doctor of Heavy Drugs to determine the future? I think I'll have to take exception to his skill set having any bearing on the interpretation of myriad historical texts across multiple cultures and their alleged significance towards any future events. Now, if he was a Doctor of, say, archeology with a second degree in Sociology and a minor in mass psychology I might take him seriously. But psychopharmacology? WTF? How does that add relevance to any theory he might have outside the area of how drugs affect the brain?

I don't know what you guys are reading, but it's certainly not my posts? I never said I was relying on McKenna, or anybody else for that matter, to determine the future? Thats got nothing to do with what I'm saying. He is just one of many experts in various fields that have contributed their expertise to our understanding of the universe and our place within it. Rest assured, I only give credence where credence is due, and I meticulously cross referance my facts, and double check everything I research!

 

[Mistral]

And I ask again-how does his field of expertise add credence to any theories he has about other fields?

 

[TIN_MAN]

And I ask again-how does his field of expertise add credence to any theories he has about other fields?

Fair enough. The answer is, it doesn't. I never claimed it did, it only lends credence to those areas where his expertise overlaps and illuminates other pieces of the larger puzzle. As for other fields, I also mentioned others such as, Johnson F. Yan, Ph.D., Author of DNA and the I Ching, who did post doctoral studies on computational chemistry of biopolymers at Cornell university, and Jos'e Arguelles, Ph.D., Art Historian, with more credentials than you can shake a stick at, and Author of The Mayan Factor, and Earth Ascending: An Illustrated Treatise on the Law Governing Whole Systems, who uses his philosophical insights to connect all the above and much else besides. These are just the most relevant and accessable sources pertinent to the topic at hand, and by no means exhaust all the books, Essays, Science papers, and internet resources I've used in my various researches on this, and related subjects! If your really curious about any of this, then go to the library, check out a few of these books, read them, and then come back and start a new thread and we'll be able to debate them much more thoroughly.
Perhaps the question you should really be asking is; How many Ph.D.'s does Iquana need (or have) that qualify him (or her?) as such an expert, in so many different fields, that he/she can pontificate on so vast a subject and instantly size it all up as nothing but "bullshit"?
The bottom line is, Iguana's basic equation reads like this, science = truth, non-science = bullshit, and of course he/she gets to decide what science is based on his/her narrow definition. There are more than two sides to a coin, however, it also has edges and corners as well, keep this in mind when when attemping to seperate the wheat from the chaff.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The only significance 2012 will have for me (that I can predict) will be the fact that the Florida Marlins will open their new ballpark.

Also I believe the renovations to Dodger Stadium are supposed to be done by then.

Beyond that, 2012 will be just like any other year.

 

[Steve Roby]

Taking your last part first, I already said my statement about a "quantum leap in evolution" is just a guess, but it's an educated guess nontheless.

I don't understand how it's any kind of guess, educated or otherwise. The phrase "quantum leap in evolution" is empty jargon that doesn't say anything meaningful about either quantum leaps or evolution. It's another example of New Age thinkers borrowing poorly understood scientific words to try to sound less flaky.

 

[TIN_MAN]

Taking your last part first, I already said my statement about a "quantum leap in evolution" is just a guess, but it's an educated guess nontheless.

I don't understand how it's any kind of guess, educated or otherwise. The phrase "quantum leap in evolution" is empty jargon that doesn't say anything meaningful about either quantum leaps or evolution. It's another example of New Age thinkers borrowing poorly understood scientific words to try to sound less flaky.

Well, if you read on a little further, you'll see a term that may be a little more acceptable to you? I use the term here because its an easily understandable and accessable term thats entered into the common lexicon, In fact, "quantum leap" is a term thats long since lost its provenance to nuclear an sub-nuclear physics, it's generaly used now to refer to any sudden jump or advancement, but you knew that. You guys just want to nit-pick me to death, which just tells me you can't come up with anything better to say or do. Incidently, there is a connection between quantum jumps in electron otbits and cell growth and mutation, which ultimatly effects macroevolution, but that's a whole other debate.

 

[Klaus]

There's good article on Slate about the criminal/idiotic 2012 hysteria...

 

[Tyson]

I love it when scientists lay the logical beatdown on flaky bullshit. I mean, in some respects it's like watching an adult beat up a child, but the child is so mind numbingly idiotic that it deserves it in this case.

 

[miraclefan]

2012 will be just like any other year.

Well, there is this pesky little thing we call an ''ELECTION'' happing in that year, you ever heard of it?

 

[TechnoBoY]

It's when the aliens said they would come back. Duh.

 

[Steve Roby]

It's also a hundred years before 2112. That has to be significant.

 

[john titor]

America will wage war on Iran, they're already preparing. This will escalate into a global crisis with further wars. First contact with an alien species will be made in 2012 (it will have something to do with CERN).. Humanity will avoid self destruction and enter a new phase in its evolution.

 

[Ethros]

Conan O'Brien will lose his legs in the War of 2012

 

[Mistral]

America will wage war on Iran, they're already preparing. This will escalate into a global crisis with further wars. First contact with an alien species will be made in 2012 (it will have something to do with CERN).. Humanity will avoid self destruction and enter a new phase in its evolution.

Could you put me in touch with your pusher? He apparently has really good stuff.