Prescott's Blog: Goblin Universe
Posted by kamarling at 12:53, 25 Feb 2010http://michaelprescott.typepad.com/micha...
Michael Prescott rarely fails to have something interesting for his readers. His review of "The Goblin Universe" by Ted Holiday in particular chimes nicely with many of my own dearly held but essentially amateur hypotheses. Such as:
Instead, he regards it as something more akin to a "thought form," an image or idea that temporarily materializes or manifests itself in such a way as to be perceived by especially sensitive observers under just the right conditions.
... Indeed, Holiday believes there is a connection between UFOs and the phantom menagerie; UFOs, he thinks, are thought forms too.
and...
He points us to the work of Harold Burr, former professor of anatomy at the Yale School of Medicine. For decades Burr investigated what he called "L-fields," short for "life-fields," which he saw as electrodynamic fields that organize all living systems.
and this ...
Ted Holiday: "Perhaps we are now looking somewhat dimly at the real mechanism of evolution. To talk of the hit-or-this stupidity of chance mutations is as ludicrous as talking about a Creator making animals of clay. A far more subtle and effective method of modifying animals exists and it can be shown to exist -- the effect of mind on matter...."
Great food for thought even if it is pure speculation.
Enjoy.
Bookmark/Search this post with
- kamarling's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
21 February 2009
1 day 5 hours
I quite like these ideas. As much as they are not part of my natural bias it would be utterly profound if they existed. Then again, only in the same way as gene's are utterly profound too. Since profound is as much as personal point of view and i don't think we should be too biased against some of the things so far seen.
I know alot of people find the randomness in evolution a bit of a stumbling block in evolution. First thing to note though is that evolution is not random. Mutation is (though its a little more complex than that), but evolution by natural selection (plus the other selections) ultimately results in non random adaptation.
To test whether mutation is random, or guided towards environmental conditions or put another way if the mutations are occuring in a given direction or whether the mutations are being selected in a given direction is not too hard. You do need to monitor the genome over time in a controlled environment, or monitor sections of it.
Given that biologists can build a picture and predict the mutation positions and rates from first principles based on genetic theory i cannot see what the issue is really. From what i've been told any first year degree student working in genetics will be expected to be able to do this.
If there was an unknown energy acting on mutation then any attempt to build an understanding on these first principles shouldn't work, since the underlying field would be the first principle, or at least one of them, and you wouldn't have all the components of the theory and it would fail to predict the real world.
26 June 2005
3 days 18 min
Interesting discussion on a science discussion board about the randomness issue:
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/...
Wanted: More White Crows ... http://whitecrows.davidsmuse.co.uk
22 November 2004
2 weeks 14 hours
There seems to be a common tendency of people to explain the complicated parts of the universe, and therefore of life, as akin to the high tech of their age. Only a more advanced version of that thigh tech.
The sun used to be carried across the sky by a chariot, when those things were leading edge technology. Later it was perfectly balanced spheres and gearing.
Now it is electricity (think Frankenstein) and fancy models of computation.
----
We are the cat.