Aya

[Dildo Argentino]

Oh lord.  I remember this now.

And this is where the majority of his responses in this thread come from:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake#Skeptical_conspiracy

Nope. Actually, I named my sources before...

[LMNO]

I see.  So, it's total coincidence that the tone and bent to your posts are so incredibly similar to Sheldrake's ranting?

[Dildo Argentino]

I see.  So, it's total coincidence that the tone and bent to your posts are so incredibly similar to Sheldrake's ranting?

It must be. I read Sheldrake's first book (A New Science of Life) a few years after it was published, still in the eighties. Since then, I have not kept in touch much with what he was doing.

Hang on, there's another explanation: you could be ascribing similarity where there actually isn't any.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution".

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I see.  So, it's total coincidence that the tone and bent to your posts are so incredibly similar to Sheldrake's ranting?

It must be. I read Sheldrake's first book (A New Science of Life) a few years after it was published, still in the eighties. Since then, I have not kept in touch much with what he was doing.

Hang on, there's another explanation: you could be ascribing similarity where there actually isn't any.

So you're just an unconsciously derivative schmuck?  Not to mention a liar, because you posted the link to his talk. You complete idiot.

[Dildo Argentino]

I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution".

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

[Dildo Argentino]

I see.  So, it's total coincidence that the tone and bent to your posts are so incredibly similar to Sheldrake's ranting?

It must be. I read Sheldrake's first book (A New Science of Life) a few years after it was published, still in the eighties. Since then, I have not kept in touch much with what he was doing.

Hang on, there's another explanation: you could be ascribing similarity where there actually isn't any.

So you're just an unconsciously derivative schmuck?  Not to mention a liar, because you posted the link to his talk. You complete idiot.

What's with the reading skills? "I have not kept in touch much", right? Not "not at all", but, rather, "not much". I found the video by searching for terms like "critique of scientific dogmatism" or some such, shortly before posting it here.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

A little background: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake

He claims, among other things, that telepathy is real, that the speed of light is decreasing, and that species are not defined by their DNA but by a type of cosmic vibrations. I believe he is also a fan of the "water has memory" ideas that homeopathy is based on, and that there is a huge global science conspiracy to conceal evidence of all of these things.

He's about one step away from reptilian shapeshifter overlords.

And now I know where Holist gets his ideas.

This is what is called "ad hominem" argument. Don't get me started on Isaac Newton's bizarre views.

It's the core of his proposition about the nature of the world. The man's ideas are fundamentally wrong, and he believes that there is a conspiracy in the scientific community to discredit him. How is that ad hominem? I think that perhaps once again you are using words you don't understand. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I see.  So, it's total coincidence that the tone and bent to your posts are so incredibly similar to Sheldrake's ranting?

It must be. I read Sheldrake's first book (A New Science of Life) a few years after it was published, still in the eighties. Since then, I have not kept in touch much with what he was doing.

Hang on, there's another explanation: you could be ascribing similarity where there actually isn't any.

So you're just an unconsciously derivative schmuck?  Not to mention a liar, because you posted the link to his talk. You complete idiot.

What's with the reading skills? "I have not kept in touch much", right? Not "not at all", but, rather, "not much". I found the video by searching for terms like "critique of scientific dogmatism" or some such, shortly before posting it here.

So you're saying that you don't vet your sources carefully? So much for thinking carefully and slowly. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Are you drunk, Holist?

[Dildo Argentino]

A little background: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake

He claims, among other things, that telepathy is real, that the speed of light is decreasing, and that species are not defined by their DNA but by a type of cosmic vibrations. I believe he is also a fan of the "water has memory" ideas that homeopathy is based on, and that there is a huge global science conspiracy to conceal evidence of all of these things.

He's about one step away from reptilian shapeshifter overlords.

And now I know where Holist gets his ideas.

This is what is called "ad hominem" argument. Don't get me started on Isaac Newton's bizarre views.

It's the core of his proposition about the nature of the world. The man's ideas are fundamentally wrong, and he believes that there is a conspiracy in the scientific community to discredit him. How is that ad hominem? I think that perhaps once again you are using words you don't understand. 

I present a roughly 20-minute lecture by a man. The lecture is about very specific things. You don't bother to discuss those, you just give a general gloss of what you think that person is generally about, and use that to discredit anything he might have said in that, specific lecture. Ad hominem.

As for being a backwater rube: we Hungarians robbed the land we now live on from other folks over a thousand years ago. We let most of them live and in fact genetic research shows we interbred with them a great deal. When did you steal the land you currently occupy, and how many of the previous occupiers survived the job?

[Dildo Argentino]

Are you drunk, Holist?

Nope. Somewhat overfed,but not drunk. Are you?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution".

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

Please, O Science Master, acquaint me with this testable hypothesis of your guru's. 

[Dildo Argentino]

I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution".

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

Please, O Science Master, acquaint me with this testable hypothesis of your guru's. 

Read the book.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Are you drunk, Holist?

Nope. Somewhat overfed,but not drunk. Are you?

Not yet, but I have two weeks off and I might get that way if I go to the store this afternoon.

Your grasp of English is great for a Hungarian, but still not that good. BTW.