Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
They're almost certainly full of it. Anyone got a reference to the peer-reviewed paper describing their work? Until there is one, this isn't worth looking at. Even then, I would view it with extreme skepticism.
This is what Brad DeLong called "dingbat kabuki." The scientists have an overblown story they want to get out because it makes them look good. The journalists want a story which raises interest. Nobody has any incentive to make sure the story is told in an honest way. Everybody involved wins, except the readers.
Since your brain is so developed, you should be able to explain in details of the brain as that of sutra elaborated by Buddha Sakyamuni.:cool:
Probably less severe as insane patients where their memory is erased quite substantially or sort of walking coma / zombies if memory of love is erased entirely.
They're almost certainly full of it. Anyone got a reference to the peer-reviewed paper describing their work? Until there is one, this isn't worth looking at. Even then, I would view it with extreme skepticism.
This is what Brad DeLong called "dingbat kabuki." The scientists have an overblown story they want to get out because it makes them look good. The journalists want a story which raises interest. Nobody has any incentive to make sure the story is told in an honest way. Everybody involved wins, except the readers.
The point of this thread I think, is not whether or not we should blindly trust what is written in a magazine, but the degree of skepticism people can have, as if it was that improbable.
Michel Gondry's seminal Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind posited this theory about erasing memories: and if true, it means we can soon wipe his slightly less seminal The Science of Sleep from our minds for good.
Comments
*Nobody* knows how the complete workings of the mind, but there is more knowledge now than there ever has been. So there IS some knowledge.
This is what Brad DeLong called "dingbat kabuki." The scientists have an overblown story they want to get out because it makes them look good. The journalists want a story which raises interest. Nobody has any incentive to make sure the story is told in an honest way. Everybody involved wins, except the readers.
Probably less severe as insane patients where their memory is erased quite substantially or sort of walking coma / zombies if memory of love is erased entirely.
The point of this thread I think, is not whether or not we should blindly trust what is written in a magazine, but the degree of skepticism people can have, as if it was that improbable.
I don't understand the metaphor.