IUBio

Speaking the Unspoken

Andrew Ray aray at emory.edu
Sun May 19 02:18:28 EST 1996


Richard Nacamuli wrote:
> 
>         Do you mean to tell me that if I was to tell you that
> I've detected electromagnetic emissions from our brains, this
> would bear little relevance to neuroscience and you would not
> be interested?
>         Is your eyesight so good that you can see that there
> are no radio emissions? Or is it that poor?
>         Suppose I was to tell you that I've already done so?
> You would believe it, wouldn't you? It's *not* that far out;
> neither, perhaps, that far away.
>         Think about it.
>                                 Rich.
> 
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> Richard L. Nacamuli                             "Eppur si muove"
> headwave at access.digex.net                                Galileo
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I've detected EM emissions from brains of humans and animals - 
it's called an EEG.  Just because they aren't strong enough to reach far
past the skull doesn't mean they aren't there.  BTW, if by radio 
emissions you are suggesting that you have proof of "telepathic" 
communication, then you should be able to test it.  For instance,
is there a definite pattern that is definitely coming from one being and
being directionally sent?  What is your hypothesis about the radio 
emissions?  What the people who have started this thread are complaining
about is not whether your "experiments" are relevant.  What they are 
asking for is a serious scientific discourse.  Saying you have proof of 
radio emissions is fine.  Have you published it?  Is any other work done 
that supports your work?  Do you have a hypothesis about these emissions, 
or are you just speculating on why they exist (or for that matter, 
whether they exist)?  How can you test this hypothesis?  These questions, 
and the search for the answers, are what science is all about.  What they 
are asking for is simply for you to back up your statements instead of 
just saying "it's true".  Anecdotal evidence doesn't make for solid 
evidence, it's just a starting point.  Or, to sum it up, put your money 
where your mouth is.  Even that perennial pest, Betty Martini, seems to 
have at least some case studies to back her (him?) up, and is willing to 
refer to them (even if she is unwilling to hear evidence against her 
theories).

Andrew Ray
Emory University Neuroscience Program
aray at emory.edu



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net