November 21, 2014
Brain science, conspiracy theories, infamous people, interesting facts, New Scientist, politics, Psychology, Superstitions
Interesting article about conspiracy theorists. I have always said and I am saying it again, they conspiracy theorists, hav e an (interesting ) not so balanced psychological profile with a ‘ touch of ‘ paranoia of course. No point arguing with them either.I have known a few, say no more!
Once you buy into the first conspiracy theory, the next one seems that much more plausible.
To believe that the U.S. government planned or deliberately allowed the 9/11 attacks, you’d have to posit that President Bush intentionally sacrificed 3,000 Americans. To believe that explosives, not planes, brought down the buildings, you’d have to imagine an operation large enough to plant the devices without anyone getting caught. To insist that the truth remains hidden, you’d have to assume that everyone who has reviewed the attacks and the events leading up to them—the CIA, the Justice Department, the Federal Aviation Administration, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, scientific organizations, peer-reviewed journals, news organizations, the airlines, and local law enforcement agencies in three states—was incompetent, deceived, or part of the cover-up.
Conspiracy theory psychology is becoming an empirical field with a broader mission: to understand why so many people embrace this way of interpreting history. As you’d expect, distrust turns out to be an important factor. But it’s not the kind of distrust that cultivates critical thinking.
The common thread between distrust and cynicism, as defined in these experiments, is a perception of bad character. More broadly, it’s a tendency to focus on intention and agency, rather than randomness or causal complexity. In extreme form, it can become paranoia. In mild form, it’s a common weakness known as the fundamental attribution error—ascribing others’ behavior to personality traits and objectives, forgetting the importance of situational factors and chance. Suspicion, imagination, and fantasy are closely related.
Read it for yourself!
November 13, 2014
conspiracy theories, Creationism, evolution, geology, interesting facts, science, Superstitions, technology
European Space Agency’s Rosetta mission, Rosetta's Comet
Exciting times! Indeed.
European Space Agency’s Rosetta mission successfully placed a small spacecraft on the surface of a speeding comet on Wednesday. Now maybe we will find out of comets filled the oceans of the Earth! Maybe we could find out of organic material exists on comets which could mean life was seeded from outer space.
But of course this news is not for the faint hearted, creationists and conspiracy theorists.
For scientists, one of the central mysteries that Rosetta will explore is whether Earth’s oceans are filled with melted comets.
Since the rocky bits that came together to form the planet were dry, water has to have come from somewhere else. One possibility is that comets slamming into the Earthearly on seeded it with water. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/science/space/european-space-agencys-spacecraft-lands-on-comets-surface.html
And how big exactly is Rosetta’s comet? Compared to Los Angeles very big.
November 10, 2014
actors, famous people, infamous people, interesting facts, news, Psychology, science, sociopaths, The brain
ghosts, James Randi, Psychichs
Is there a ghost in the house!
Why O! Why in this day and age are there zillions of people so gullible that they believe in psychics and ghosts?
Is it due to Conmen? One who gains the trust, or “confidence”, of his victims (often called marks) in order to manipulate, steal from, or otherwise predate upon them.
Or is it just plain stupidity?
Or maybe both?
Interesting article about James Randi in the New York Times. Now as you probably know Randi has a million dollar challenge to anybody who can prove supernatural… and up to now nobody has been able to claim the prize!!! A million dollars, I could do with a million dollars!
And the likes of John Edwards did not even go there: Surprise! surprise!
But here is a link to the Randi article (and of course Uri Geller who has been calles a psychopath also figures). http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/09/magazine/the-unbelievable-skepticism-of-the-amazing-randi.html?_r=0
Love the last paragraph
In July last year, Randi came closer than ever to the end. He was hospitalized with aneurysms in his legs and needed surgery. Before the procedure began, the surgeon showed Peña scans of Randi’s circulatory system. “Very challenging, a very difficult situation,” the surgeon told him. “But he lived a good life.” The operation was supposed to take two hours, but it stretched to six and a half.
When Randi began to come to, heavily dosed with painkillers, he looked about him in confusion. There were nurses speaking in hushed voices. He began hallucinating. He was convinced that he was behind the curtain before a show and that the whispering he could hear was the audience coming in. The theater was full; he had to get onstage. He tried to look at his watch, but he found he didn’t have it on. He began to panic. When the hallucinations became intensely visual, Peña brought a pen and paper to the bedside. It could prove an important exercise in skeptical inquiry to record what Randi saw as he emerged from a state so close to death, one in which so many people sincerely believed they had glimpsed the other side. Randi scribbled away; his observations, Peña thought, might eventually make a great essay. Later, when the opiates and the anaesthetic wore off, Randi looked at the notes he had written.
They were indecipherable.
And then of course an interesting experiment. You can see ghosts if you really want to! Here is how!
November 7, 2014
Brain science, famous people, health, interesting facts, medicine, news, science, Uncategorized
Parkinson’s Disease breakthrough!
This is for the near future! 5 Years?
Basically the disease is caused by the loss of nerve cells in the brain that produce the chemical dopamine ,which helps to control mood and movement.
Now according to an article on BBC and I quote To simulate Parkinson’s, Lund University researchers killed dopamine-producing neurons on one side of the rats’ brains.
They then converted human embryonic stem cells into neurons that produced dopamine.
These were injected into the rats’ brains, and the researchers found evidence that the damage was reversed.
There have been no human clinical trials of stem-cell-derived neurons, but the researchers said they could be ready for testing by 2017.
Malin Parmar, associate professor of developmental and regenerative neurobiology, said: “It’s a huge breakthrough in the field [and] a stepping stone towards clinical trials.”
A similar method has been tried in a limited number of patients.
It involved taking brain tissue from multiple aborted foetuses to heal the brain.
Clinical trials were abandoned after mixed results, but about a third of the patients had foetal brain cells that functioned for 25 years.
You can read more here http://www.healthcanal.com/medical-breakthroughs/57115-stem-cell-transplants-for-parkinson%E2%80%99s-disease-edging-closer.html
October 29, 2014
books, infamous people, People
After this it is back to my cave!
Yes the subject I was never going to talk about!
I believe there are now about 6 SIX books on the subject of Reeva Steenkamp’s murder. Everybody now on the bandwagon. Money makes the world go round? Morality, respect and truth got off mid air.
First there was a book very objective about the court case. Fine, it was objective and if one is interested in the court case this is good to read I suppose.
Then the ex girlfriend’s mother I kid you not. No I did not read it, I would not stoop that low but I did read one chapter published in a local newspaper. And the mother wrote that they did not receive present from Oscar, she was actually complaining about it. So the motive is clear. MONEY. She allowed her 16 or 17 year old daughter sleep overs at Oscar’s house. What was she a pimp? Did she expect something in return? Marriage for the daughter to rich an famous and when it did not work out she writes a book? She has been called names and I think she deserves them.
Then now Mrs Steenkamp’s book / interviews. Here I really do not know what to say because I do not understand why she had to go into Reeva’s sex life. Would Reeva have liked and condoned this?
So I would like to give you a link to a very good article that I read and I rest my case.