HumanisTim

[QUOTE]Originally posted by theyeti:
[QB]

There's really no such thing as a biological change that is not at the molecular level. What are living things made of if not molecules? Stomping on a plant will definately cause changes in DNA expression and protein content, as will any serious physiological challenge.

Do you have a link or something to this research?

It was a blurb in a newspaper on Saturday. It was for Lancaster Intelligencer Journal. Heres a semi link


(url removed by Coragyps - it was "not found" and was running off the page, anyway. Tim, you might try posting the search terms you used to find the article.)

though I can't get it to open. Hopefully others will have more luck.

[ August 06, 2002: Message edited by: Coragyps ]</p>

HumanisTim

I brought it up but I'm not one of the believer types. Wasn't the original crop cirlce incident admitted as being a hoax years ago. In order to believe the others are real. Wouldn't that mean aliens would have just started copying what they saw. Speaking of aliens from other planets. If they did exist and one day we really were visited. Would that be considered a supernatual event. I don't think it would. They'd be as biologically natural as us.

SteveD

I studied crop circles fairly seriously a few months ago in response to a co-worker who believes that they are the result of some non-human intelligence and was trying to convince me of the same.

As far as I could tell all of the work related the effects on the crop stalks and things like that has been performed by a retired biophysicist named Levengood. The problem is that he has identified these effects in crops that are known to have come from hoaxed formations. Therefore they are not at all reliable in identifying a "real" crop circle from a hoaxed one.

In one particular case he stated that deformed wheat stalks were caused by the area being subjected to microwave radiation two to three weeks before the formation appeared. It turns out that the formation in question was positively man-made as it was commissioned by The Daily Mail newspaper.

From what I was able to find out about it, Dr. Levengood has lost all credibility in my book.

Here is a link to some information about that particular crop formation.

<a href="http://www.circlemakers.org/freddy.html" target="_blank">Averbury crop circle</a>

In addition, Dr. Levengood's methodolgy seems to be sloppy. See the criticism in this link.

<a href="http://www.csicop.org/sb/9606/crop_circle.html" target="_blank">CSICOP on-line</a>


Steve

HumanisTim

Thank you so much. I think thats the guy the article was talking about. It is amazing how people will still believe in things, that have been shown to be hoaxes.

Thor Q. Mada

Late_Cretaceous,

By definition gullibility is willfull. And the belief in crop circles and their alien origin is just a substitute for demons, witches and any other superstition, translated into modern times. It is sad, admittedly but true. The other one is alien abduction, and vampires.
I get the sh...ts when I switch on the television and look at Buffy the Vampire slayer or Scoubidoo or dark angle. And these programs are supposed to allowed for children. Nice ducation.
I am just back from the Middle East, where a well educated University graduate just told me a "true" story about the prophet: His sweat smelled like roses, and he never yawed, and although he was a small person, whenever he was in company of others he looked like taller than anyone of them!!!
Then I switch on the television and see this Polish idiot at work in Canada and South America producing new saints as if there is no tomorrow.
Scary.
I have had enough of this planet, and will go back to my homeworld soon.

Oolon Colluphid

I don’t see a problem with BtVS personally. As well as my hardline scientific rationalist stance, I also collect ghost stories -- M R James, Blackwood, Burrage, Lamsley etc kind of thing. A little suspension of disbelief can lead to great fun (and some bloody good scares: “a pleasing terror”, in James’s phrase). The point of course is that one is consciously suspending disbelief. You know it isn’t real really -- which is why it is fun. It’s like roller-coasters: fear-inducing danger, but safe really (usually -- but the queues would be rather shorter if they knew the thing was likely to really crash).

Maybe under-sixes (say) don’t know that the Buffy stuff isn’t real, but they’ll learn. I remember the heartbreaking disillusion I felt, at about five, of discovering that my magic wand didn’t work. What kids learn is that letting your imagination soar doesn’t have to entail expecting to be able to yourself, just by flapping your arms.

This stuff is no worse that Doctor Who or Quatermass, or any other fantasy thing. I’m inclined to think that, with things like CGI around and widespread, if anything, kids will learn to trust practically nothing on their screens.

Of more concern is the moral of something like the X Files. Sure, it’s fantasy; but over and over the sceptic is shown to be wrong, that all manner of weird shit is possible or even real. Always a supernatural explanation. That is a troubling thing to teach kids, even if only indirectly.

It is quite the reverse of

in fact. I don’t know about later series (the ones with Crappy-Doo) and the film, but the original Scooby-Doos taught kids very well. It was always the owner of the run-down funfair, looking to scare off someone so he could develop the site, who “would have gotten away with it, too, if it hadn’t been for those meddling kids!” There, the supernatural was always revealed to have a natural explanation -- one, moreover, that was worked out from the prosaic rational evidence. Now that was a good bit of education!

Maybe I’m just obtuse, but never heard of that!

Cheers, Oolon

PS sorry for derailing the thread. Do carry on!

DVF

Yep, sounds to me like his corn is popped.

Jamie_L

Three cheers for old Scooby-Doo! The most popular piece of skeptical entertainment ever. Okay, maybe I'm exaggerating.

Of course, new Scooby-Doo caroons are just the opposite. It's all about real aliens and real witches. I guess skepticism doesn't sell anymore. *Sigh*

Is anyone else turned off by the movie "Signs" because it is a movie about a proven hoax? Even though I love suspending my disbelief for space opera and fantasy stories, I just can't turn off my B.S. detectors for this one. It's kind of like that TV-movie "based on" Van Pragh's life as a communicator with the dead.

Jamie

Tharmas

Cheers from another M R James fan. The man didn't destroy my sense of reality when I was a youngster (give kids credit for more sense than many adults!). Instead, he taught me how to write English prose.

I'm off to the Galapagos now for a few weeks! I also apologize for derailing the thread, but I'm just in a darn good mood while I wait for my taxi, tickets in hand!

Shadowy Man

Yes Jamie_L, I am turned off by the movie because it relies on the reality of a proven hoax. I have really enjoyed both of Shamalayan's (sp?) other movies, but will probably not see this one.