BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 07 Nov 08 - 05:21 PM

Science is--and damn well should be--skeptical. If you have a hypothesis that's testable, test it. If it's not, ignore it.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Amos
Date: 06 Nov 08 - 09:48 PM

A SOUND curiosity, in which a spoken phrase seems to morph into a song when repeated, is shedding light on the difference between speech and song.
Diana Deutsch, a psychologist at the University of California in San Diego, first noticed the illusion in the mid-1990s when editing a recording of her own voice. One phrase - "sometimes behaves so strangely" - began to sound like a song when she replayed it several times.
Now Deutsch has confirmed that the illusion is real by testing it on proficient singers. Those played the same phrase just once and asked to repeat what they heard, spoke it back. But those who heard the phrase many times, sang it back (listen at www.tinyurl.com/65tcer).
The illusion only occurs when the phrase is repeated exactly - not with a slightly drifting key, for instance. "It brings to the fore a real mystery - why don't we hear speech as song all the time?" says Deutsch. She suspects our brains normally suppress musical cues when we hear speech, so that we focus on interpreting the words. But repetition of the words, which we've already processed, can sometimes override this.
"It stops the inhibition of the pitch region of the brain so we hear song, which is really what we ought to have been hearing in the first place," says Deutsch, who will discuss her findings next week at an Acoustical Society of America meeting in Miami, Florida.
Her team is now using MRI scans to see which brain regions "light up" when people perceive a shift from speech to song.
From issue 2681 of New Scientist magazine, 05 November 2008, page 17

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,Christina
Date: 11 Sep 04 - 11:13 PM

Intellect is in the process of integrating our unification conceptions. It is integral to the conscious participation in our evolution. It is what this humanity is directed toward.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,cmherlof
Date: 11 Sep 04 - 11:05 PM

Bridging the gap between science and the humanities is a conceptuality of systems thinking. I say so with respect to a world that can work for everyone, which is synergetic. We have to ask questions referential to a coordinate system and also as we learn better how to generalize concepts. One question that I've discovered relative to conscious participation in our evolution is this: "What is the most consciously comprehensive considerate alternate option?" Once you get to your answer, you may find that you must ask it again. It relates succinctly to equity not the punitive mind sets as well as spaces and spheres in Universe.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Sep 04 - 10:57 PM

Being skeptical has absolutely nothing to do with it, "Ohh-Ahh". The porno industry welcomes both skeptics and true believers as far as I know, as long as they're willing and fairly well-endowed. :-) Man, THINK about it. Just think about it.

You know, guys, I would love to read this whole thread, I really would...and eventually I may do so...but I have a life here (just barely) that is calling me to start baling before the boat sinks.

If I get more time tomorrow I may plow my way through this whole thread, and then possibly even come up with some pearls of wisdom of my own with which to delight the mind of a believer and drive a skeptic into foaming fits of cold sarcasm, lofty contempt or raging fury!

In the meantime, carry on without me.

Remember: We all share this one glorious trait in common - We all tend to quietly think, in our hidden heart of hearts, as we walk through the door..."The smartest person here just entered the room."

I know this, I see it in myself and in others, and I chuckle even at myself, because I do see it. There is nothing more human than vanity. We delight in hearing the words of our erstwhile debating opponents, because it assures us of our own superiority and their folly, and it provides us with ammunition for the next DEVASTATING volley of verbal brilliance. Vanity, vanity.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 10 Sep 04 - 09:25 PM

From the Thread List

BS: A new level of terror
BS: God's simple plan of salvation...

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 07:04 PM

Yet there's much to be said for rising to the challenge any "chasm" presents.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 06:18 PM

Two Bears, even if I had read all the studies done on Reiki to date I would still be in no position to assess them. An undergraduate degree in Psychology has given me a basic understanding of scientific method and vernacular, but I am still not familiar enough with research procedures to know whether a study is reliable or not. That's why I'd rather ask Wolfgang than believe everything I read.

I would much rather directing my energy to healing myself and those around me than reading test results.

ANL - 2B

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 05:38 PM

thanks, Wolfgang. Studies by independent researchers who are obviously affiliated do with an alternative therapy seem to be very hard to find.

I wouldn't write Bengston's work off quite yet, though. Here's what he's been up to since the rather incredibly successful experiment with cancerous mice in 2000 you reviewed:

...I have been awarded a sabbatical for the fall 2002 semester to work with the cancer center of the University of Connecticut's medical school. We are moving on several fronts. First, we are going to replicate my healing studies in their "clean" lab, with an eye towards discovering what biological processes are involved in tumor regression. And second, I will be working with the radiology department doing functional MRI imaging to see if there are detectable brain patterns associated with healing.

It will be interesting to see the results of this follow-up study (if any). Thanks again for your help and your interesting posts,

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Wolfgang
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 12:58 PM

Daylia,

they too have not reported random assignement of the mice to the groups, but in this case that is not so damning for the study because the effect sizes reported are so big (dead vs. alive).

In a somewhat simple example: If a messias heals/resurrects a person that is already dead the lack of a placebo control group (or nonrandom assignement) is not really vital. Whereas in pain perception a placebo effect can in the mind of most scientists explain all or most of the effect, there is no reasonable argument that a mere belief in the effectiveness of the treatment alone can wake up a dead person.

Extremely big effect sizes need no controls. If a messias really would wake up a dead person any scientist saying well he perhaps selected a dead still a bit fresh looking and therefore random assignement has been violated would only get laughter from his colleagues. There still could be counter arguments (fraud etc.) but lack of random assignement isn't a good one.

Still I would have preferred random assignement. All I said is under the assumption that the usual course, mice dying after about three weeks, is correct. I have no expertise at all on that field.

The study therefore seems good at the first glance but for two things: (1) The journal itself is a bit fringe science and is not considered respectable. But that alone is not a very good reason to reject it. There have been dismal studies in respectable jounals and vice versa.
(2) They only cite positive references. No really critical discussion of their results can be found. That looks a bit fishy to me.

I would have loved to read more about precautions against fraud in that study for that in my eyes is the most probable hypothesis. Replacement of the mice by similar looking ones by a person with a strong interest in one particular result. That thought seems not to have crossed their minds.

Anyway, such a result when corroborated should get a Nobel prize but my guess is we'll never more read about it in any mainstream journal. If the authors really believe they have found what they claim they should seek the way out into the world of peer reviewed journals.

I'll have to rethink what I have said about Backster. Perhaps I have mixed him up with another person doing similar research. I find normally the information in the Scepdic reliable but their language too hard and uncompromising. (Don't show that link to Amos, he'll not like what one can read there about Swann.)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 09:19 AM

Man I have a lot of "double posts" here! Not trying to hijack the thread or anything, but I'd like to comment on

I have no credible comment about Reiki and pain. because I have not read all of the tests.

Two Bears, even if I had read all the studies done on Reiki to date I would still be in no position to assess them. An undergraduate degree in Psychology has given me a basic understanding of scientific method and vernacular, but I am still not familiar enough with research procedures to know whether a study is reliable or not. That's why I'd rather ask Wolfgang than believe everything I read.

We all have different experiences, different areas of expertise. I prefer to see this situation as beneficial - as different (and therefore most valuable) perspectives or "angles" on the topic at hand, each adding a unique contribution to an understanding of the complete picture. I see no point in using our differences as excuses to engage in non-productive and seemingly endless arguments and "wars".

So here's to building a "Rainbow Bridge" over that "chasm" - and remembering that arguments and anecdotes are NOT exactly "Rainbow" material. This thread is certainly living proof of that!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 08:45 AM

Wolfgang if you are weary of studying these articles out of the goodness of your heart please just say the word, but I'd love to have your expert opinion on this study by American researchers Bengston and Krinsley in 2000:

The Effect of "Laying On of Hands" on Transplanted Breast Cancer in Mice (this is a pdf file)

Here's a quote: Our tentative conclusions: belief in laying on of hands is not necessary in order to produce the effect    [Ha! Toldja! :-) ]; there is a stimulated immune response to treatment which is reproducible and predictable; and the mice retain immunity to the same cancer after remission. Further work should involve testing on various diseases and conventional immunological studies of treatment effects on experimental animals.


It is disappointing to find such an incriminating review of Backster's work with plants, after reading your positive assessment above:

Skeptic's Dictionary on Backster's studies with plants

I'm wondering what your response to the Skeptics might be, Wolfgang.
And Mahalo nui loa (thank you very much) for your patient explanations and giving your time and expertise here.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 Sep 04 - 08:40 AM

You don't seem to know that the book from Houdini mentioned above is using exactly this method of fraud detection. And Randi BTW is never arguing that he could do something similar under different conditions (that would be unconvincing) but that he could do the same effect under the same conditions.

Wolfgang: I was not aware Houdini wrote a book; or read it. Houdini was a bit before my time.

My tirade was against magiciams of the ilk like the Unamazing Randi who was debunking the Psychic surgeons of the Philapines.

The Unamazing Randi did psychic surgery via sleight of hand, and inferred that all psychic surgeons were frauds and they used sleight of hand fakery.

What should be done is record the surgery with high speed film or tape, then watch the surgery frame by frame for fakery. After finding a fraud; expose that individual as such.

No high quality studies have thus far been published on the efficacy of reiki for pain
Do you agree with the author's assessment?

I have no credible comment about Reiki and pain. because I have not read all of the tests.

Furthermore; I no longer teach of practise Reiki because HUNA literally blows the doors off of Reiki, Seichim, Qigong, Actualism, Silva Mind Control, etc.

ANL - 2B

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 11:28 PM

Dear Senor Ramon y Cajal,

You'd be surprised how few are missed. I wish you had left a list of things that need investigation. Even though you lived during a period of enormous change, little of the technology needed to study ordinary things had been developed yet. Today, we have much more powerful tools and many more hands and eyes.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 04:04 PM

Oops I meant to hit "Preview" not Submit ... sorry bout the bad html folks.

Quantum theory, for example, has been validated millions of times. Such as, every time some one turns on a television.

Not sure about quantum theory and tv's mack, but I know that life-force energy is validated a million times a day too - every time you look in the mirror, look at a tree, pat your cat for example. That's what I hoped people would glean from the quote I posted above;

How many interesting facts fail to be converted into fertile discoveries because their first observers regard them as natural and ordinary things! .... It is strange to see how the populace, which nourishes its imagination with tales of witches or saints, mysterious events and extraordinary occurrences, disdains the world around it as commonplace, monotonous and prosaic, without suspecting that at bottom it is all secret, mystery, and marvel.

- Santiago Ramon y Cajal (1852-1934)

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 03:56 PM

Idiopathic, as in the definition posted above, in this usage implies that the cure is peculiar to the individual. That something in their own character or metabolism (reason not necessarily known) allowed them to recover.

A most accurate implication! And one which, when seen in light of my anecdotal experience, further implies that all human beings are "idiopathic", ie able to heal themselves using "something in their own character or metabolism (reason not necessarily known)". The ancient Hawaiians called that mysterious "reason" mana, or life-force energy, and understood it's 3 "voltages" (mana or physical/emotional; mana mana or mental; and mana loa or spiritual) as fundametal components of every human being's "anatomy".

Wolfgang, thank you very much for your thoughtful analysis of the Bunnell research. Going by what you have said about the reliability of her "empirical evidence" (or any other "empirical evidence) I hope you will agree that further research/replication of her results is warranted, as with Backster's interesting-sounding work with plants and the healing power of "prayer".

FWIW, I agree with your quote from Dr. Nassim Assefi's article (internist and women's health specialist at Harborview). The on-line research I've been doing over the last couple days only validates my initial hunch - that she is absolutely correct in saying "No high quality studies have thus far been published on the efficacy of reiki for pain.

And I further agree with her in that I also have "... seen some remarkable results from qigong and acupuncture treatments that could not be explained by the Western biomedical model, so I was already open to the possibility of other healing paradigms," as well as her statement I have been impressed by my anecdotal experience; every time I use reiki on patients, [in my case, people] they feel better.

I qualify that last statement by adding that until I had received proper instruction (some years after I was introduced to Reiki), the person I was working on would indeed always feel better - but I would walk away with their symptoms. Over time, my new-found "healing" abilities became VERY sickening to me, to the point where I became so sensitive to other people's physical pains, fevers, illnesses - even emotions and thought-patterns - that I started isolating myself from everyone. Being in public places was an ordeal. I eventually had to take a whole year of sick leave to deal with it - and I'm not kidding. :-(   

Little Hawk can attest to this. He was one of my first Reiki recipients, years ago, and knows the details of my "healing career" first-hand. If a scientific explanation or quick medical remedy had been available at the time, it would have saved a LOT of time and grief - not to mention fear! - that's for sure.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 03:43 PM

A word about experiments: The general rule is 'One experiment may be interesting. Repeated by 5 or 10 others, it points a definite finger. Repeated 100 times, it's convincing.Repeated 1000 times, probably indicates a new rule of nature. Quantum theory, for example, has been validated millions of times. Such as, every time some one turns on a television.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 10:57 AM

I haven't read this thread much past 100 posts because it has entered the zone that GUEST OohAhh described perfectly--the emotional blackmail phase (you wanna meet my doctor? I dare you to prove my individual facts wrong!).

Idio--one's own: personal: separate: distinct.

Idiopathic, as in the definition posted above, in this usage implies that the cure is peculiar to the individual. That something in their own character or metabolism (reason not necessarily known) allowed them to recover.

When I am being argumentative; you will know (an example was the other thread where I called you "intelectually dishonest").
Name calling always gets you a lot of mileage, doesn't it, Two Bears? You're always argumentative, and I always know it. Your arguments also always bring the discussion to the lowest common denominator, and they stop being productive when that happens.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 10:36 AM

Daylia,

I have read the one Bunnell study in detail. First, a general word to studies. One can criticise single studies in retrospective, but that is a suboptimal procedure for manyx reasons: One may not find what was wrong, one critical detail may not have been mentioned, the description may be wrong and all that. The ultimate test is if the results described can be repeated by other researchers.

Two examples: The first empirical test of Einstein's theory did not come out in favour of the theory. Up to now, nobody knows why. But since this has not been replicated, the theory stands and the test is forgotten.

Backster once has published a bokk upon 'The power of prayer on plants'. Many of the experiments are perfect the way they are described. Nevertheless, nobody really believes Backster, because his results have not been replicated. With that in mind, read what I have to say about Bunnell:

No randomisation procedure is mentioned (the rough rule here is: what has not been mentioned has not been done or done wrong) in the detailed description.

The short abstract mentions double blind procedure, the detailed description only mentions one blinding.

The pilot study mentions t-test per trial (which did not make sense to me), the long study mentions just one t-test. The t-test her is not optimal a nonparametric test would be better, but (as the data look) would be significant as well.

The pilot study mentions one independent variable with three levels (healed, simply handled, warmed (untreated)), the longer study first says that the results from the first three trials of the pilot study were incorporated but then goes on only to mention two levels (healed/unhealed) for all trials. What has she done here? Lumped unhealed and untreated together? We'll never know.

I can't say for sure that the one or the other detail were responsible for the result, but her way of reporting and doing the study doesn't increase my trust in her competence doing this type of research.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 09:45 AM

The way to test mediums is to go to a medium, and then after the paranormal event; examine what is in the room for ways of fakery. (Two Bears)

You don't seem to know that the book from Houdini mentioned above is using exactly this method of fraud detection. And Randi BTW is never arguing that he could do something similar under different conditions (that would be unconvincing) but that he could do the same effect under the same conditions.

Have I overlooked your comment to me saying that we both agree on this point (according to your link):
No high quality studies have thus far been published on the efficacy of reiki for pain
Do you agree with the author's assessment?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 08:46 AM

At first glance I thought "idiopathic" might mean "pathological idiot", but no ... according to Webster's, it means

1. arising spontaneously or from an obscure or unknown cause: PRIMARY;

2. peculiar to the individual


Hope this helps.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 08:29 AM

Little Hawk - what has being sceptical to do with the porno industry -a non-seqitur if I ever saw one!

The porno industry appeals to the Ooh-Aah in us all. Ooh-Aah!

Wolfgang, I'm hoping you have the time to take a look at these studies by Toni Bunnell M.Sc., Ph.D, Faculty of Health, University of Hull, UK

The Effect of 'Healing with Intent' on Pepsin Enzyme Activity

Complete details of that experiment in pdf format

And a quote: The rate of breakdown of egg albumen by a 1% pepsin solution was followed using a Jenway 6051 Colorimeter at a wavelength of 470nm. An effect due to healing was indicated by experiments using percentage light transmission (%T) as an indicator of reaction rate. Across 20 separate trials the reaction rate of the enzyme sample 'healed with intent' was found to be significantly greater than the unhealed sample (p = 0.03).

The Effect of "Healing with Intent" on Peak Expiratory Flow Rates in Asthmatics

And a quote: The results obtained in this study suggest that the delivery of "healing with intent", for a ten-minute period, produces a significant improvement in breathing efficiency in the majority of asthmatics, using peak expiratory flow rate as an indication of lung function. As such, it would appear to be a valid complementary therapy for use with prescribed medication.

... In previous studies, healers have been shown to produce 70-V surges of electricity in addition to anomalously large magnetic fields from their hands ... Sugano et al., noted that EEG changes observed in healers during healing are predominantly an increase in alpha waves across the brain.24 Increased changes of brain waves from baseline to healing periods were recorded in experienced (effective or expert) healers compared to those less effective. Healers also tend to evidence increased activation of the right hemisphere during healing. Receivers of healing show increased synchronicity of alpha waves as well as increased EEG amplitude in the frontal areas. This observation and that of another study is in agreement with later studies demonstrating that, during healing, the healer's alpha brainwaves synchronize with those of the healee, so that both will be resonating at the same frequency, known as sympathetic resonance.18,23,24 In addition, healing has been shown to have an effect on enzyme activity, eliminating any possibility of the existence of a placebo effect.4-8,10,12


And here is Dr. Bunnell's summary of his own work: A Tentative Mechanism for Healing

If these studies are reliable (and I'll trust your expertise on that one, Wolfgang), they show very positive results for energetic healing indeed! Conducting preliminary studies on energy work using animals, plants, enzymes etc as subjects rather than humans seems like an excellent idea. That way, the effects of the energy itself could be measured WITHOUT the introduction (and interference) of the human psychological variable (ie personality or "state" of receptivity).

Hey, doing all this research on-line about energetic healing, I'm almost tempted to go back to university and finish my Masters, using THIS as my thesis! The hallowed halls of academia might prove to be a MOST refreshing change after almost a decade of being immersed, for better or worse, in "New Agisms".

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Two_bears
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 08:09 AM

Two Bears:

Thanks

I used the "Mister" because I come from a formal background and because I am a firm believer in the idea that common courtesy helps to grease the wheels of society.

I also grew up in that kind of environment; but the people I knew would use flowery words to a persons face, then speak ill of them behind the persons back. In those cases the formality was insincere.

I would MUCH rather have people tell me what they think of me to my face instead of speaking ill of me behind my back.

With me; what you see is exactly what you get. I will say the same thing to your face; that I will tell others behind your back.

I dislike formality because I prefer to know where I really stand with a person.

You still miss the point of how a career in science progresses. Every hotshot researcher dreams of the opportunity to upset some long established idea. Yes, it's dangerous, professionally speaking. If he can prove he's right, though, all is golden.

I sincerely hope you are right; but in 1994 and 1995 the hot and upcoming A-V researchers knew of the security holes I reported in InVircible, and not ONE had the courage to duplicate the test and either confirm or reject the findings I reported.

If a researcher could prove beyond doubt that a paranormal event was genuine, and reproduce his results his reputation would be made.

I sincerely hope you are right, and I DO hope somedat we mustics and science will be able to come together.

And long words? People use them because they are exact, because they're accustomed to them, and/or there's no good synonym. I suspect you know what idiopathic means

Mack: If I knew what it was; I would not waste my time or lifeforce to ask for a definition.

ANL - 2B

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah
Date: 07 Sep 04 - 05:20 AM

Don't worry Mack - I don't feel remotely insulted - just amused. You need to read my 'emotional blackmail' comment in context.
Little Hawk - what has being sceptical to do with the porno industry -a non-seqitur if I ever saw one!

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 11:39 PM

Two Bears:

I used the "Mister" because I come from a formal background and because I am a firm believer in the idea that common courtesy helps to grease the wheels of society.

We're going to have to disagree about the role of stage magicians. Houdini was able to expose frauds because he was a professional fraud himself. Men who were better educated and, possibly, smarter were taken in because they didn't know what to look for. The example I gave was a simple one. I can't imagine what could be done with modern technology.

You still miss the point of how a career in science progresses. Every hotshot researcher dreams of the opportunity to upset some long established idea. Yes, it's dangerous, professionally speaking. If he can prove he's right, though, all is golden. Werner Heisenberg and Nils Borh were derided, then lionized. Stephen Hawking was laughed at when he theorized about black holes. In these cases the issue wasn't money but knowlege. If a researcher could prove beyond doubt that a paranormal event was genuine, and reproduce his results his reputation would be made.

And long words? People use them because they are exact, because they're accustomed to them, and/or there's no good synonym. I suspect you know what idiopathic means.

And computers? I'll PM you about that. It doesn't really belong here.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Two_bears
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 09:57 PM

If I'm interpreting this correctly, it is probably not a popular study within the Reiki communities. It seems to indicate that patients could not differentiate between a treatment given by an "initiated" or "attuned" practitioner

Daylia: that is because there is not much difference between a Reiki attuned person, and a non Reiki attuned person. I am a Master/Teacher of higher in five different forms of Reiki (Karuna. Magnussa Phoenix, Tibetan, Usui Shiki, and Usui Shiki Ryoho)

Both the attuned and non attuned persons were transferring mental lifeforce energy through the minor chakras in the palms of the hands. The Chinese Qigong masters called these areas Laogong.

There are only two differences.

1. the attuned persons had been doing healing for a while, and was able to transmit more energy.

2. the attuned person had techniques to still and focus the mind.

THis does not surprise me. It's one of the reasons why I prefer Reiki over Huna. Huna does not employ "secret" symbols or require that students receive "attunments" from a "Master". I know through

You prefer Reiki over HUNA? IMHO HUNA beats Reiki hands down for many reasons.

The other reason I prefer Huna over Reiki is that Huna techniques employ the healthiest, most powerful and effective level (or "voltage") of vital life-force energy; in Hawaiian - mana loa, or the "spiritual" level.

Ah you placed them in the wrong order in the paragraph earlier.

You are correct. Mana loa is MUCH more powerful than mana mana, and Qigong, Reiki, Actualism, Silva Mind Control, Seichim, etc only use the basic mana or mana mana (mental lifeforce energy).

Dear Mr Two Bears:

Mack: I am a simple guy. Just use the name Two Bears. I do not care for formality for two reasons.

1. it is often insincere
2. it is not necessary

You said: Mack: Are some or even MOST so called mediums frauds? this could be; but does NOT mean that ALL mediums are frauds.

It means that Houdini looked very hard and found none who were genuine among some of the most fameous mediums in history. Nobody can check them all.

True. I never said it would be easy.

You also said: The way to test mediums is to go to a medium, and then after the paranormal event; examine what is in the room for ways of fakery.

This doesn't work. The Fox sisters who, I believe, were the first modern spirit mediums confessed that their 'spirit rapping' was produced with clickers strapped to their thighs. Would you ask your mediums to strip?

There is no need to have them strip; but someone could pat the medium down for hidden devices.

Mack: I have seen some bizarre things from the paranormal in my life; and there was no medium present; and mant of them were outside; so I can only accept them and go on.

I will NEVER forget what happened in one pipe ceremony that happened on the first weekend of December two years ago.

You misunderstand the process. All paradign shifts come from some young researcher/s making extraordinary claims. For example, consider quantum theory. It eliminates cause and effect at the quantum level. A form of statistical analysis is used instead. This is what Einstein was referring to when he said "God does not play dice with the universe."

If a young scientist cares about his reputation, and wishes to be gainfully employed; will not walk out on a thin limb like that.

Pretty much the same thing happened to me when I was in the Computer Anti-Virus field 10 years ago.

InVircible by NetZ computing claimed to

1. Detect ALL viruses
2. Remove ALL viruses
3. Repair itself if Invircible became infected.

At this time; most tests of Anti-Virus software tested the viruses by scanning, and InVircible had a scanner; but detected the unknown viruses via generic detection methods (detecting viruses by detecting the change made by viruses when the viruses infected the boot sector, Master Boot Record, or files.

I tested Anti-Virus software (both scanners, and generic detectors, and published a list of recommended scanners (software that detected a minimum of the viruses in my collection, and generic virus detectors that passed my tests.

People asked me to evaluate InVircible, and I did, and I immediately started finding security holes big enough to fly a jumbo jet through.

After I reported the security faults (it only took 9 viruses to show that all three claims were full of hot air), the author, and his U.S. distributor attacked me. they repeatedly threatened me with law suits, and degraded into a shouting match; but I refused to back down an inch.

This war went on for two years, and I tested four different versions of InVircible, and not ONE of the well respected independent virus researchers had the courage to duplicate the tests I had performed and either stand with me or against me.

After more than two years; Vesselin Bontchev was asked to evaluate InVircible, and he wrote a paper more than 40 pages in length, and he acknowledged Bill Lambdin (me) in the document for my earlier research to identify security holes in the program.

This is why I do not trust scientists to tell the truth about research into paranormal events.

I suggest you do as I do. There are a host of on-line dictionaries and glossaries. Of course, it's easier to do with the linux multiple desktops. BTW, I don't have any degrees, either.

Mack: there is no need to use such words, and I am puttering around on a 737 MHZ Celeron processor running Windows ME (a slow processor, and a flaky operating system does neither gives one speed or stable environment.

ANL - 2B

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 02:43 PM

Note to GUESTOoh-Aah: If you feel insulted, remember that an insult is a cup of poison. Any one can hand it to you, but only you can drink it. Also, there are other terms you could have used - perhaps more effective ones - than 'emotional blackmail'.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 01:54 PM

Dear Mr Two Bears:

You said: Mack: Are some or even MOST so called mediums frauds? this could be; but does NOT mean that ALL mediums are frauds.

It means that Houdini looked very hard and found none who were genuine among some of the most fameous mediums in history. Nobody can check them all.

You also said: The way to test mediums is to go to a medium, and then after the paranormal event; examine what is in the room for ways of fakery.

This doesn't work. The Fox sisters who, I believe, were the first modern spirit mediums confessed that their 'spirit rapping' was produced with clickers strapped to their thighs. Would you ask your mediums to strip?

Then: I just do not trust scientists to explore the paranormal; because the mothers milk of scientists is MONEY, and receiving grants for studies.

If a scientist was to walk out on a limb and confirm something not accepted in the current field of sciencel they would never be able to work in their field again.

You misunderstand the process. All paradign shifts come from some young researcher/s making extraordinary claims. For example, consider quantum theory. It eliminates cause and effect at the quantum level. A form of statistical analysis is used instead. This is what Einstein was referring to when he said "God does not play dice with the universe." Workmanlike studies that extend science incrementally lead to solid careers with no glory. Researchers who lead paradign shifts become immortal. More or less.

Then: Would you please define "idiopathic"? I am a simple man and do not have any degrees.

I suggest you do as I do. There are a host of on-line dictionaries and glossaries. Of course, it's easier to do with the linux multiple desktops. BTW, I don't have any degrees, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 01:51 PM

Oops that should read "This is one of reasons I prefer Huna over Reiki", not vice versa!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 01:48 PM

Wolfgang, I don't think this study used a "control group", but it does test the effectiveness of "placebo" Reiki.

Although the Reiki research in totality supports the anecdotal records, the absence of randomized and placebo-controlled trials precludes the interpretation of the outcomes as resulting from specific effects as opposed to placebo effects plus natural history ... none of the final participants in round 4 (4 breast cancer patients and 4 observers) could differentiate between the identity of placebo and Reiki practitioners.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, it is probably not a popular study within the Reiki communities. It seems to indicate that patients could not differentiate between a treatment given by an "initiated" or "attuned" practitioner and the placebos, who had received basic instruction in Reiki techniques but no "attunements". In short, experimental subjects experienced the same benefits from a Reiki treatment whether it was administered by a placebo or a Reiki practitioner.

THis does not surprise me. It's one of the reasons why I prefer Reiki over Huna. Huna does not employ "secret" symbols or require that students receive "attunments" from a "Master". I know through personal experience that neither symbols nor "attunements" are required to work successfully with life-force energy. This is important, because according to tradition, Reiki Masters can charge up to $10,000 for an attunement to Mastery.

The other reason I prefer Huna over Reiki is that Huna techniques employ the healthiest, most powerful and effective level (or "voltage") of vital life-force energy; in Hawaiian - mana loa, or the "spiritual" level. (Please pardon the non-scientific vernacular used for convience here, in these "chasmatic" times). Techniques like Reiki employ mana mana, or "mental" life-force energy. Mana mana can and does afford beneficial healing effects, but in my experience Reiki techniques can be riskier, and the energy itself less powerful and effective.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 01:07 PM

Ohh Ahh - Have you offered your services to the porno film industry yet? You sound like a natural.

Looks like I missed a ton of stuff by ignoring this thread. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Two_bears
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 10:40 AM

Could I point out that for all the sound and fury of TwoBears frequent posts, and his long lists of 'FACT's he is STILL only offering personal anecdotes to back himself up.

Ooh Aah:
Personal experiences are all that I have to share at this time.

The fact that these are very personal and intensly sentimental suggests that he is practicing a common form of emotional blackmail among believers- 'challenge my beliefs and you are making a personal attack on me, so I have the right to get VERY UPSET'

Would you please care to offer one instance where *I* said that?

Two Bears, you understand little outside of your field. He surely wouldn't accept it if the 'levitation' was only shown under conditions where fraud is possible. But if he was allowed to study closely and make some quick tests, the matter would be completely different. Have you ever asked yourself why supposedly paranormal stunts are done under bad viewing condition, with no checks, are not done repeatedly etc? Well, that's are the conditions under which prestidigitators work.

Wolfgang; read my post to Mack about the proper way to test the paranormal (examine the room immediately AFTER the incident for signs of fakery). Just because Randi discovers a way to fake it via illusion does NOT mean the medium was a fake.

ANL - 2B

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Two_bears
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 10:25 AM

There are no "pain receptors" in brain tissue itself. Brain surgery is often performed while the patient is awake and conscious. Do you mean that the woman's scalp was not anesthetized, but she was given life-force energy (using QiGong) instead?

Daylia: In the video it was reported that the woman being operated on was NOT anesthetized at all, and the video explained why the surgery had to be done that way.

Yes; I was aware that there are no pain receptors in the skull or the bone.

Somebody ought to say a few words in defense of The Amazing Randi, I suppose. The practice of using stage magicians to investigate paranormal claims is well established. AFAIK it started with Harry Houdini. He wanted very badly to believe we can communicate with the dead. But every medium he investigated turned out to be a fraud.

Mack: Are some or even MOST so called mediums frauds? this could be; but does NOT mean that ALL mediums are frauds.

About the magicians investicating the paranormal is non sence. the problem with magicians testing the paranormal is because they find ONE way to fake it via illusion; they infer that ALL mediums use that method to fake it.

The way to test mediums is to go to a medium, and then after the paranormal event; examine what is in the room for ways of fakery.

Two Bears seems unimpressed by the scientific standard of evidence. What can one say? It's the standard that brought us all of modern technology. It works. Consistantly.

Mack: That's not it at all! Science has given humanity an almost twice as long life expectency, and a much better quality of life.

I just do not trust scientists to explore the paranormal; because the mothers milk of scientists is MONEY, and receiving grants for studies.

If a scientist was to walk out on a limb and confirm something not accepted in the current field of sciencel they would never be able to work in their field again.

Two Bears, you never have gotten it. Simply your argumentative tone alone is enough to convince me that your "healing" techniques are preaching to the choir and not seeking converts.

SRS: I am not being argumentative. When I am being argumentative; you will know (an example was the other thread where I called you "intelectually dishonest"). I am passionate about this spiritual technology because I have seen it work time after time after time. All I want is to raise the blinders of other people and show them this spiritual technology that can explore, and decide for themself if this works or doesn't work. I am fond of saying "They get to be the judge, jury, and prosecutor.".

preaching to the choir? Not hardly. It has worked on MANY people that were complete disbelievers' but if you had read the incident of Tammy F's hand CAREFULY; you would have know that. At the beginning she said "I don't believe in that crap" 3-4 minutes later she had her right hand working again, and her expression was "Damn! This is cool!"

text is no doubt as you report it. Self-reporting is a selective process and allows too many loopholes for those who want quantified proof from more than one source. Science asks for the ability to

Do you want to come over and have me take you to meet my doctor? and show you my medical record? I will. Put up or shut up.

That bridge as you describe it is one of blind faith, and is built all on your say-so.

Absolutely not! I teach people who and what they really are; then they take this spiritual technology and test it until they either accept this technology is real or reject it (just like I did). Disbelievers have nothing to lose except their disbelief.

I happen to think a great deal of idiopathic healing takes places when people with illnesses have a positive outlook and have managed to channel their energy constructively.

Would you please define "idiopathic"? I am a simple man and do not have any degrees.

People CAN channel their own energy via creative visualization, or meditation and direct their energy to heal their body (the Hawai'ians would call this energy mana mana). I am living proof of that.

However; there is a spiritual technology where people can take that basic mana and mana mana and transform that basic mana and mana mana into mana low that is MANY times more powerful that the method described above.

Two Bears, thank you for the most interesting links

You're quite welcome.

Karla's statement is a sweeping generalization and (therefore not surprisingly) just plain wrong. I know first hand that there are MANY in the so-called "New Age and metaphysical community" who very wisely embrace a "skeptical viewpoint". Including myself.

Absolutely correct Daylia; I myself was a convinced athiest until 1996 when I had my OBE that proved to my satisfaction of life after death, and giving me a spiritual awakening.

When I was learning Qigong 31 years ago; if Tsang had said "in 30 years you will be laying hands and healing the sick; I would have said "Oh yeah; where can I buy some of whatever you have been smoking?"

In 1999 when my friend introduced me to HUNA; I read a few books and told him "Not only no; but HELL no!" I did not accept this spiritual technology as real until it had been proven to work.

Two Bears, the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy is a comprehensive and informative read, with an extensive bibliography. Thanks for posting the link.

My pleasure Daylia.

Well, I never thought I'd see the day I'd be rooting for the W ... oh never mind ...

I don't like Bush, and I like Kerry even less. There are about 100 men and women I would like to vote for before we get to tweedle dum and tweedle dumber.

A. I'm pleased to announed that a google search for "Daniel Wirth + huna", and another for "Two Bears + Daniel Wirth" yielded zero results. A plus for Mr two Bears.

Thank you Mack: Now may I kindly ask that you actually read my website to see what *I* say about HUNA in general and Healing in particular, and learn this spiritual technology for yourself and you decide for yourself of this spiritual technology works or it does not.

http://www.geocities.com/huna101

ANL - 2B

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Wolfgang
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 10:20 AM

Two Bears,

I join Katlaughing in thanking you for the links. Nothing new so far for me from these links: announcements of studies, advertising, simle pre-post tests with subjective variables not potperly reported, nothing at all that could convince me yet that there is something worth looking at. But I found this quote in your link:

No high quality studies have thus far been published on the efficacy of reiki for pain

See, that's what I was saying all the time, so I guess we agree?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Wolfgang
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 09:46 AM

Houdini's book is great. Its title is A Magician among the Spirits.

Randi ... would not accept it if he saw someone levitate for real (just because he could do it via illusion) (Two Bears)

Two Bears, you understand little outside of your field. He surely wouldn't accept it if the 'levitation' was only shown under conditions where fraud is possible. But if he was allowed to study closely and make some quick tests, the matter would be completely different. Have you ever asked yourself why supposedly paranormal stunts are done under bad viewing condition, with no checks, are not done repeatedly etc? Well, that's are the conditions under which prestidigitators work.

As for Randi not changing his skeptical mind, there once was that man who claimed he could see from a vinyl record (without any labels!) at 1 yard distance which recording that was and who was the conductor (only classical music). Randi didn't believe that at first, tested him and found the guy could do what he claimed.

I get the impression, Two Bears, that you wouldn't recognise a magician's trick when you watch it.

Daylia, the Olsen and Hanson study is exactly what I believe to be true and have said so all the time: Several technique of subjective pain reduction, your methods being a few of many, are (for a subgroup of patients; large enough to be interesting) working. But they do not work better than a placebo control. That study is just the no control group pre-post subjectivwe dependent variable design which is known since long to reduce subjective pain. A former colleague of mine could get a wisdom tooth removed with no narcotics at all. He just knoew how to hypnotise himself. It would only be interesting (though hardly to expect) if Reiki etc would work worse than a placebo treatment.

That's why I was so surprised to find studies showing that Reiki works better than a placebo control, for that's what these studies said. That would have been truly interesting and puzzling. But then I found all these studies were published by a fraudster.

You do not seem to realise how much damage the elimination of these studies does to Reiki. From a real alternative to pain killers it went back to the status it shares with many relaxation methods and methods influencing the ego-perception: One of many methods eliciting in some people a placebo effect. This is not a blank dismissal for as I have said, if that works I'd prefer it to painkillers, but it is much less than advertised.

Bring on the good studies and I'll have another look. The good study should have: (1) random assignement (2) a placebo (or opposite treatment) control (3) blinding and (4) an objective outcome measure. It is not for nothing that these requirements are made. For if these are met and we have a positive result we really have soemthing new to think about and not just a new one of the many methods using the placebo effect to alter subjective perception since more than 2,000 years.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 08:51 AM

But I'm not qualified to assess this. Wait till Wolfgang takes a look. He's the closest thing to a scientist around here.

Yes, and I'm hoping he takes a look at the studies Two Bears posted too - from Hartford Hospital and Harborview Medical Center in Seattle. Here's quote from the Harborview article:

Researchers at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, Washington are attempting to add to the depth of knowledge about reiki by using a $304,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health to determine whether it can ease the pain and suffering associated with fibromyalgia, a debilitating rheumatic condition that affects roughly six million Americans.

In the words of Dr. Nassim Assefi, an internist and women's health specialist at Harborview,

"As a medical student, I had studied traditional Chinese medicine in China, and had seen some remarkable results from qigong and acupuncture treatments that could not be explained by the Western biomedical model, so I was already open to the possibility of other healing paradigms," Dr. Assefi explained in an e-mail to Acupuncture Today. "Shortly after my patient passed away, Harvard offered me the opportunity to receive reiki training, and soon thereafter, I integrated reiki into my everyday patient care. I remain an open-minded skeptic about the mechanism of reiki, but I have been impressed by my anecdotal experience; every time I use reiki on patients, they feel better.

"No high quality studies have thus far been published on the efficacy of reiki for pain. Thus, I set out to apply the highest scientific standards to objectively answer the question of whether reiki is beneficial in the treatment of fibromyalgia, a chronic pain syndrome that is not well treated by conventional methods. If reiki proves to be effective for the treatment of fibromyalgia, our unique clinical study design will help answer preliminary questions about how reiki works."2

There are two other areas of abuse that concern me even more than abuse of scientific research methods or bureaucratic procedures - and those are

1) abuse of the public by preventing them from being accurately informed about / provided with natural alternative therapies which may eliminate their need for costly and dangerous drugs, as well as reducing time spent in hospital wards and clinics, thus freeing up those facilities and medical personnel for the next person who requires them:

2) abuse of the public through all the misinformation and charlatanism out there disguised as "New Age healing methods". Remember that techniques like Reiki and Huna work by affecting what the scientists are now calling the body's "Biofield". There is very little scientific understanding as yet about this subtle bioelectric "field", although it has been the focus of traditional Chinese medicine like acupuncture for thousands of years.

In the hands of an unscrupulous or improperly trained practitioner, techniques like Reiki can be dangerous to both the "healer" and "healee". They can affect a (receptive) human being on all levels, mental, emotional, physical and spiritual - not to mention financial - for better or worse. Unfortunately, I do have quite a bit of personal experience with this. Reliable public information about these techniques from the medical/scientific community will go a LONG way toward putting the charlatans out of business.

Re Karla's article: I see no better way of bridging any "chasms" between Science and the "New Age" than learning about, practicing and working towards at least a modicum of scientific understanding of traditional spiritual/energetic healing techniques like Reiki and Huna. I don't see how books like Karla's help the situation, except by generating profits for those who choose to engage in such "wars" rather than getting out there and putting their "new-age" techniques to practical use, helping others.

GUEST Ooh-Aah, I know Two Bears personally and at the risk of speaking for him, I suspect he's just being his usual out-spoken blustery on-line self, and not making a play for anyone's sympathies. He does not take people's responses to his work or his opinions personally, be they positive or negative. In spite of the image his posts create, he DOES have a healthy respect for the rigours of scientific method and procedure, and recognizes it's importance. He just doesn't consider Science to be the be-all and end-all, the "last word" on this subject in any way - and neither do I.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah
Date: 06 Sep 04 - 04:01 AM

Could I point out that for all the sound and fury of TwoBears frequent posts, and his long lists of 'FACT's he is STILL only offering personal anecdotes to back himself up. The fact that these are very personal and intensly sentimental suggests that he is practicing a common form of emotional blackmail among believers- 'challenge my beliefs and you are making a personal attack on me, so I have the right to get VERY UPSET'.
    This is one reason we need scientific proof rather than people typing true or false information into computers.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 11:43 PM

No. But I'm not qualified to assess this. Wait till Wolfgang takes a look. He's the closest thing to a scientist around here. To my ignorant eye, however, it looks good. Please don't think that I'm attacking Reiki or HUNA specificaly. They're just the things that have come up. My personal bete noir where this kind of thing is concerned, is abuse; abuse of validating procedures, of burocratic procedures, and all the rest. Didn't Wolfgang say that this is exactly the area where psychological effects are greatest?

I would much rather stick to the original topic, but will respond to whatever arises, if I have something to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 09:45 PM

Here is a study by Olson and Hanson, 1997 at the University of Edmonton on using Reiki to manage pain. Click on "display" and you'll read

The purpose of this study was to explore the usefulness of Reiki as an adjuvant to opioid therapy in the management of pain. Since no studies in this area could be found, a pilot study was carried out involving 20 volunteers experiencing pain at 55 sites for a variety of reasons, including cancer. All Reiki treatments were provided by a certified second-degree Reiki therapist. Pain was measured using both a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a Likert scale immediately before and after the Reiki treatment. Both instruments showed a highly significant (p < 0.0001) reduction in pain following the Reiki treatment.

I have found Reiki studies on-line funded by the Canadian Breast Cancer Association as well as the National Institutes of Health in co-operation with the University of Michigan and Harborview Medical Center. Reliable scientific research on the medical applications of alternative therapies such as Reiki has become absolutely necessary imo, in the best interests of the public.

Could you suggest a more appropriate setting for this research than in hospitals and/or medical clinics, mack?

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 06:08 PM

Dear katlaughing:

Of course not. Although in 2001 I had surgery at the Pacific Medical Center and can attest to the flakiness of the 'support' facilities available. What I suspect happened must have been something like this:

    A while back a committee of the NIH passed a resolution endorsing acupuncture. It seems the members had been split for quite a while, with the 'anti' group having a clear majority. Then one day, when most of the 'anti' group was out of town, a special agenda was introduced and the resolution was passed. Pure burocratic manipulation. The 'antis' were furious. And rightly so. This kind of sleaze has no place in national policy.

Each hospital is a different case. I wager, though, that all are similar.

PS. By 'serious check' I mean exactly the kind of thing Wolfgang did. When the majority of the validation comes from one person, it's a red flag to any researcher. The man that did most of the Reiki studies, Daniel Wirth, is a real piece of work. His last project involved the efficacy of prayer at an 'in vitro' fertility clinic. The man given as the head of the project says he never heard of it until 6 months after it was finished. The head of the clinic, Dr Cha, isn't responding to comminications and may have gone home to Korea. Since the clinic was associated with Harvard, the story got plenty of press. Anything Wirth says about anything needs to be checked twice.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 03:39 PM

Somehow, these programs were pushed through without any serious check of the basis of Reike.

That's a pretty sweeping claim, mack. Were you personally involved at each and every one of those hospitals when they made the decision to implement Reiki?

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 03:00 PM

A. I'm pleased to announed that a google search for "Daniel Wirth + huna", and another for "Two Bears + Daniel Wirth" yielded zero results. A plus for Mr two Bears.

B. However, an earlier post by Wolfgang showed that the scientific basis for Reike is pretty thoroughly compromised. Earlier yet, a GUEST demanded to know where public funds were being used for questionable New Age treatments. I quote Two Bear's post of 2:07 AM:

Reiki is currently in use as a complementary therapy at the Tucson Medical Center in Arizona, the Portsmouth Regional Hospital in New Hampshire, and at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Hospital in New York. The Hospital at the University of Pennsylvania (HUP) Medical School, Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, Marian General Hospital, and the California Pacific Medical Center all offer Reiki to their patients. In Cleveland, hospitals are considering setting up a Reiki clinic.

Somehow, these programs were pushed through without any serious check of the basis of Reike. 'Nuff said.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 01:54 PM

"I know firsthand that the skeptical viewpoint cannot be heard or assimilated in the New Age and metaphysical community ... "

Karla's statement is a sweeping generalization and (therefore not surprisingly) just plain wrong. I know first hand that there are MANY in the so-called "New Age and metaphysical community" who very wisely embrace a "skeptical viewpoint". Including myself.


Do you believe all that electromechanical complexity now understands anything?

:-) Well my own bioelectrical complexities are still processing that data, Amos ... but probably not!

I like to think that Donald's "chasmatic" thinking has been reduced quite considerably by scientific advances over the last two decades (since he walked the planet). If that's so, it's only made room for new "chasms" like Karla's, it seems.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 01:16 PM

Two Bears, the White House Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy is a comprehensive and informative read, with an extensive bibliography. Thanks for posting the link.

Here's a quote:

Despite their diversity, there are some common threads that run among many traditional systems of health care as well as systems that have emerged more recently. These similarities include an emphasis on whole systems, the promotion of self-care and the stimulation of self-healing processes, the integration of mind and body, the spiritual nature of illness and healing, and the prevention of illness by enhancing the vital energy, or subtle forces, in the body.1


Well, I never thought I'd see the day I'd be rooting for the W ... oh never mind ...


daylia


PS but   IT'S ANOTHER MIRACLE!!!    ... now stop that RIGHT now ... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Amos
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 12:53 PM

One cannot logically be a determinist in physics and chemistry and biology, and a mystic in psychology.

- Donald O. Hebb (1904-1985)


I am sorry but this is malarkey, akin to saying that it is not logical to believe in electronics as the science behind telephones unless you ALSO believe electronics is the science of thought, an absurd proposition. Thought, qualia, awareness are QUALITATIVELY different and orders of magnitude more telling in the overall scheme of human life than mechanisms are.

Here's another effort: suppose you wrote the word "understanding" into a memory register and then copied it into the next cells of the register over and over again until every row in that register was full of the binary settings for the hexadecimal code for the ASCII characters for the word "understanding". Then suppose you also duplicated that entire register with all those settings and linked the duplicate to the primary and repeated these ten thousand times, so there ten thousand registers, let's say of 1 megabyte each, ten thousand megabytes of memory reflecting thousands of copies of the word "understanding", all powered up. Stack them all up in a closet somewhere, all set and humming happily.

Do you believe all that electromechanical complexity now understands anything?

Really?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 12:37 PM

Two Bears, thank you for the most interesting links.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 12:35 PM

From Stage LEFT, a bear wanders onto the stage and speaks:

SRS: If we mystics WERE to build a bridge; the skeptics would not have the courage to walk across it.

Two Bears, you never have gotten it. Simply your argumentative tone alone is enough to convince me that your "healing" techniques are preaching to the choir and not seeking converts. You would rather argue, and you would rather lump instead of sort and filter the contrary attitudes that you are faced with. Your life as text is no doubt as you report it. Self-reporting is a selective process and allows too many loopholes for those who want quantified proof from more than one source. Science asks for the ability to repeat the experiment. There are medical practitioners who are attempting to build those bridges, who have incorporated other non-medical healing programs and more informal reporting into their research and practices. Christiane Northrup is a name that comes to mind by way of illustration.

That bridge as you describe it is one of blind faith, and is built all on your say-so. The article that started this thread was clear in that a meeting of the parties in question is necessary and that chasm must be bridged by people building from both sides. Your bridge would, I fear, miss that shared middle ground altogether and wander off toward the opposite shore without enough support for anyone's weight.

I happen to think a great deal of idiopathic healing takes places when people with illnesses have a positive outlook and have managed to channel their energy constructively. This may be with or without the help of healers. This crosses many cultures, with or without formalized religion involved.

I'll leave it at that. Now you can cut and paste and pepper the thread with item by item rebuttals. Keep in mind, however, that you're posting the perfect illustrations for what the McLaren article was saying. Reiterating one of her remarks: "I know firsthand that the skeptical viewpoint cannot be heard or assimilated in the New Age and metaphysical community; it is anathema, and that's a shame for every single one of us. It is a shame because the search for the truth, the concern for the welfare of others, the need to be treated with respect, and the need to be welcomed in a culture - are all things my people share with yours."

It is a shame.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: mack/misophist
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 12:08 PM

Somebody ought to say a few words in defense of The Amazing Randi, I suppose. The practice of using stage magicians to investigate paranormal claims is well established. AFAIK it started with Harry Houdini. He wanted very badly to believe we can communicate with the dead. But every medium he investigated turned out to be a fraud. He wrote a book about it. Read it for yourself, if you're interested. Some very bright people were taken in by these frauds; some because they were credulous, some because they didn't know what to look for. Houdini, being a kind of professional fraud himself (Stage magic is a kind of fraud. We all know it's not real magic.) knew how to observe correctly. Randi merely carries on this tradition. The basic rationale is the principle of parsimony: if a thing can be done without using extraordinary gifts or means, then that's probably what's happening.

One reason for this kind of scrutiny is the notion that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. This might make more sense in another context. Such as "When you're facing the heavy weight champion of the world, it's not enough to knock him down, you've got to knock him out." Somebody said this about Ali, once. This testing isn't limited to paranormal claims. It applies to all testable claims.

Two Bears seems unimpressed by the scientific standard of evidence. What can one say? It's the standard that brought us all of modern technology. It works. Consistantly.

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 10:55 AM

Some interesting points of view from a few of the scientists and researchers who contributed to the text Biological Psychology (4th edition; James W. Kalat)I studied at university:

Modern psychology takes completely for granted that behavior and neural function are perfectly correlated ... There is no separate soul or life-force to stick a finger into the brain now and then and make neural cells do what they would not otherwise ... It is quite conceivable that some day the assumption will have to be rejected. But it is important also to see that we have not reached that day yet ... One cannot logically be a determinist in physics and chemistry and biology, and a mystic in psychology.

- Donald O. Hebb (1904-1985)


(Well, there's our "chasm").

*sigh*


I have learned as much from outside academia as from within. Many industrial firms have great research equipment and the money to apply to a problem. For instance, for some of my odor studies I needed extremely pure, highly expensive chemicals. The cost would have been prohibitive in a university laboratory, even with a large research grant. But industrial firms are willing to support the research if the information might help develop products that they can market.

- Susan S. Schiffman

(Substitute the words "pharmaceutical firms" or even "Reiki firms" for "industrial firms", and you get an idea how the cards are stacked against honest and credible scientific research into energetic healing modalities).

*another sigh*


People are too easily influenced by negative data. It is often hard to make things work right. If you can never prove your idea, maybe the idea was wrong, but maybe you never did the experiment right.

- Candance Pert


(Another reason why it's not advisable to put one's complete trust in "empirical evidence", even if it IS honest and unbiased).

*triple sigh*



How many interesting facts fail to be converted into fertile discoveries because their first observers regard them as natural and ordinary things! .... It is strange to see how the populace, which nourishes its imagination with tales of witches or saints, mysterious events and extraordinary occurrences, disdains the world around it as commonplace, monotonous and prosaic, without suspecting that at bottom it is all secret, mystery, and marvel.

- Santiago Ramon y Cajal (1852-1934)


:-) Now, that one I like!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: Science and New Age: Bridging the chasm
From: *daylia*
Date: 05 Sep 04 - 10:21 AM

In the Bill Moyers series about healing in China; they record a MD who is doing brain surgery on a woman who is awake and talking whle the MD is working on different areas of this woman's brain.

I wish the debunkers would watch that video then speak to the patient, MD, and Qigong master who blocked the flow of ch'i so the MD could cut the top of thay woman's skull off, then continued to block the flow of ch'i so the patient was not unconscious from the pain. the MD was literaly talking to the patient while he operated on her

There are no "pain receptors" in brain tissue itself. Brain surgery is often performed while the patient is awake and conscious. Do you mean that the woman's scalp was not anesthetized, but she was given life-force energy (using QiGong) instead?