A Dramatic Demonstration of the Power of Mental Frames

[tangiblephoton]

the moral of the story is...

Be objective

[habesjn]

Thumbs up if you replayed it to see if the first playthrough was the same.

[DeckchairsFTW]

@habesjn Fail.

[DeckchairsFTW]

@habesjn Fail. :P

[ProjectileBurn]

i suggest people who are confused should read A Brief History Of Time by Stephen Hawkings, it kinda tells how scientists have come to make sense of the universe. but thats what science has been, theories set based on observations, so we can't help but trust a theory until something comes along that would make as much as sense. if u choose not to believe it, thats okay

[jawnwb]

This is brilliant, and I think it was presented really well.

[guerdon6]

So, our instinct has its own history in the form perceptions?

[mfskarphedin]

I don't get it. I was taught about the Big Bang Theory when I was in the 6th grade. I'm 40 now, and that's still what I think. What, were they wrong?

[fuunguus]

When I was little I knew the tooth fairy was false, and built all kinds of traps to catch my mom in the act, but they never woke me up :(

One day I got this brilliant idea, I could just go look for the tooth in the trash, and what do you know, there it was! My mom had no excuses this time! I felt so smart lol

[philogos0]

There's nothing to believe. The "Big Bang" is a theory. There's lots of evidence pointing to it but really it's not a lot more than our best guess. The largest piece of supporting evidence is how there are no good competing theories.

The red shift suggests expansion; play the system in reverse and voila. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. This is why so many people "believe" in the Big Bang.

[Akiuki]

@philogos0 You have totally dismissed the evidence of the big bang based on the CBMR and the predictions the BBT model suggests. These predictions where tested by COBE and produced such an agreement between theory and reality that both are statistically inidistiguishable

[lautour]

I didn't hear those words the second time. Was it because I wasn't following along on the screen? He guaranteed I'd hear the words, but it sounded exactly the same as the first time he played it backwards: mostly gibberish.

[MrLeethle]

@lautour Yes. It's because you didn't read along.

[h0twire15]

@lautour So you didn't do as you were instructed, then whine in the comments that it didn't work?

[ilmafwends]

@lautour he said that it was necessary to read along and then explain that it works because you read along... are you sure you heard anything? or was the whole thing in gibberish for you?

[Gazmus]

B3ta yay!!!

[ClareAer]

What i heard first was this is my safe haven.... not this is saten till u gave me the words so either way i win.

[MikeCLG]

Ugh, that's horrible. Can't believe that worked, I don't like being that easy to trick.

[wryrich]

@MikeCLG The point is, we're all that easy to trick. It's how our brains work. We identify patterns – sometimes, when they're not there. Also we have a decided tendency to remember "hits" -- people who got brain cancer after X activity, times when our dowsing rod seemed to find water -- and forget the "misses" that might tell us whether those cancers, or wells, could easily have been there by chance. In social terms, too, we can fail to see injustice if it's nested in our expectations. Slavery.

[mikydutzaa]

this is the demonstration how our brains approximate some sound to make some sense, not that big bang theory isnt right. i bet this dude dosent know high school math or physics. and whats with that arrogant public? they are geniuses?

and about hubble. it stayed few month in the same position and the nasa guys overlapped each light it recorded. enough with talking. this dude is dumber then u think

[Ikaftl]

@mikydutzaa Try watching it again. He isn't saying the big bang theory is wrong. He's saying that those who didn't want to believe it allowed their own bias to prejudice their interpretation of the data - data which actually showed that the big bang theory was likely to be correct. By the way, this "dude" has a PhD in particle physics...

[btarrh]

Big deal it's called back masking. ELO, Queen, Brittany Spears, they have all back masked their music. Find ELO Eldorado on youtube, record the first verse with Windows Sound Recorder and then tell WSR to reverse it. You will find a very disturbing messages.

[chrisfass]

@btarrh I think you've missed the point of this video...

[Hexl0r]

INCEPTION

[dudev]

Why would anyone give a thumbs-down to this video?

[wownouser]

brilliant :)

[Ramshobraja]

This is why free flow of information is important so that biases can atleast be crosschecked and corrected.

[imsosickofthis1]

This is more fascinating than anything Derren Brown does! There's nothing like it for wiping cynicism off the faces of thirty teenage faces simultaneously. It begs questions for anybody who's ever asked to be a witness in court.

[kitsunde]

I made no claim that the big bang was at the beginning of the universe and if you look up "big crunch" you'll see that there is a proposal that multiple big bangs and big crunches could happen. Although one of the problems is that if time and space didn't exist before the big bang then how could we refer to anything before the big bang as "before".

[bluescreenguru]

Arguing about religion from either side, especially on the Internet, is futile and makes the participants look silly.

[panama2468]

He says that heard something that they imagined or he fed them. But did he not base it off the reverse version of the song itself?

[TheKyleBaxter]

Right, but sounds were there. The brain has checks for consistency, so if he had the song saying something crazy, like what I'm typing now, you would reject it.; Your brain would recognize the words he was giving as not consistent with the sounds you were hearing.

[akoumjian]

This talk gets cut off right at the interesting part.

[chiropractic47]

Simon Singh lost his appeal against chiropractics bitch slap! Long live chiropractic!

[Panosl]

No, he just didn't want to go through a huge libel case which would cost him huge amounts of money thanks to how backwards British libel laws still are.

On the bright side chiropractors have been outed by this and 1/4 have been investigated. Eventually people will see it as the nonsense it is along with homoeopathy and new age healing.

[chiropractic47]

Panosl, yo wat up! 1/4 of chiropractors were investigated? Wow man! Why is it that the Brits hate chiropractors while Americans, etc. love em? Did the U.K. recieve 1/4 of the bad chiropractors? Or is it that your investigative board is terrible at their job? I thought you guys hate all chiropractors! A 1/4 of American MD's are found to be bad? "Power of Mental Frames", perhaps Simon Singh is onto something? Brits are taught chiropractic is bad, so they believe it to be bad!? How convenient? Bye.

[Panosl]

Americans are a pretty gullible bunch and are far more tolerant of nonsense like that. Chiropractice is pretty much all pseudo-science and up there with healing stones for its effectiveness. You obviously ignore the facts but that's not much my problem, you're evidently biased. Still I'm glad Britain has woke up and chiropracters are being outed in many places for being fakes.

[pr0f2007]

oh my god!!! fake doctors, like simon, who try to present a scientific argument with a song of LedZeppeling!!!! HELP!!!!!!!!! British people, please, GET RID OF THAT CLOWN!!!!!!

[statickk14]

Simon is brilliant...his book on 'Big Bang' is one of the best that I have read.

[wownouser]

@statickk14

I'm reading it now. And I LOVE it.

[bslaybaugh]

No one believed in the big bang because there was no big bang. Something doesn't come from nothing without a creator. End of story.

[emanuel46b]

where did the creator come from?

[bslaybaugh]

I was sure I'd get this question when I left this comment. It's a good question. I'm obviously talking about God when I say Creator. In Exodus, when Moses asks God who does he say sent him, God simply tells Moses "I AM THAT I AM." It's hard for us to understand but God just is. He always has been and He always will be. God lives in dimension that is not bound by time or space. Therefore when we ask "where did the Creator/God come from?" the answer is simply that He just is.

[l3v5y]

If you accept that answer, why not accept that something can come from nothing?

Surely in an infinity of nothing it's more likely for something to spontaneously exist than it is for some supernatural being to always exist?

[bslaybaugh]

I disagree, it's much harder to believe that something came from nothing than to believe that something has always existed. Where did a building come from? Did it just appear out of nowhere? No, it had to have a creator in order for it to exist. What about a painting? A car? God didn't make this complicated, Satan did so it would be harder for you to believe. The big bang theory and the theory of evolution are just that, theories. Theories created by man to try and disprove the existence of God.

[l3v5y]

God fills the gap between science and reality.

If God created everything, why did God only begin to exist when religion start a few thousand years ago? And why did Judaism then split into Christianity? Surely there is one God so only one religion?

Also, houses, cars etc are all the end result of thousands of gradually improving iterations. You wouldn't start by making an internal combustion engine, you'd discover the principles of expansion or gearing or whatever and then build on it.

[statickk14]

And your argument is from ignorance. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. But I don't expect much from people who don't understand the concept of evidence based reasoning.

[bslaybaugh]

"And your argument is from ignorance. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. But I don't expect much from people who don't understand the concept of evidence based reasoning." So does that mean you agree with me?

[statickk14]

Do you have evidence to support that it is God who created everything? Nope, I don't agree with you at all, your argument for a God is ridiculous and funny. Do you even understand how the process of science works, or are you another dumb creationist?

[bslaybaugh]

Just another dumb creationist I guess. Do you have evidence to support that it wasn't God who created everything? As for evidence, my faith is my evidence (Hebrews 11:1).

[statickk14]

I can't disprove a lot of things. I can't disprove Santa Claus or the unicorn, but that doesn't mean that I have to believe it them. The responsibility for the evidence is on the one who is claiming it. Faith is believing in something without evidence, so what you are saying is you don't have any evidence.

[Sullehman]

@statickk14 incorrect definition of faith. albeit not completely wrong, but compelling enough to get a lot of upvotes on youtube. well done.

[kitsunde]

"I disagree, it's much harder to believe that something came from nothing than to believe that something has always existed."

Where did God come from and if you believe that God has always been around then why can't the universe? If something would have had to have been created then surely something would have had to created God, and the things that created God and....

It's NOT turtles all the way down.

[truvelocity]

There is a huge hole that I can't help but see in your argument. Where do you get the idea that the Big Bang was the beginning of the Universe? How do you know that it isn't just a natural pattern of the cosmos that has already happened millions of times, before? That there are not just one, but many or thousands of universes?

[kitsunde]

Although I suppose you might use a different definition of the universe than me so I should clarify that by universe I mean everything in existence, that has been and will be; all of it. You could substitute universe with reality if you will.

Even so it wouldn't have been a "huge hole" since you didn't put forward any supporting evidence to the contrary; just idle speculation.

[truvelocity]

@kitsunde Idle speculation. Interesting. I'm talking about the theory that physicists are talking about now, which is what preceded the Big Bang, M theory. That it is a natural cycle and there are many universes that do not apply to our known physics. However, I think you must know that it was a priest who discovered the Big Bang, not an atheist, so get off of your presumption of atheists. Just speak of people and how they came to their knowledge and why they prefer specific understandings.

[kitsunde]

@truvelocity - I was pointing out that you were claiming things without mentioning what you are supporting your claims with. I can't very well read your mind now can I? You need to declare where you are deriving your claims from.

Anyways. M theory is a part of string theory which hasn't been shown to hold true in any way beyond being an interesting mathematical model and has been heavily criticized and questioned if it should even be called a scientific theory.

[kitsunde]

@truvelocity - Furthermore. I have no idea what point you are making by stating it was a priest that discovered the big bang. I've made no claims that religious people are unable to apply analytical thinking. Religion doesn't score brownie points for making scientific discoveries any more than atheism does. Discovering gravity does not imply that your choice of God exists.

[kitsunde]

@truvelocity - If anything the only claim I'm making in that regard is that religious people who claim science fail to apply the same critical thinking that science is derives from onto themselves. For instance suggesting that I should only speak of why people prefer specific understands, which is goes strictly against critical thinking that says you should question everything and only hold the things can be proven to be true. I'm never going to stop questioning, sensibilities be damned.

[truvelocity]

@kitsunde I get you. I understand. It is important to question everything.

[simplic10]

"I've got news for you. If you're buying records and playing them backwards, you *are* Satan! Look no further."

-Bill Hicks

[JuditC]

The 'little toolshed' was a bit of a stretch, but I did hear everything else the second time around :P

[lovebiotech]

I've seen this entire video, and it's excellent, just like his book.

[fallingstarblues]

Where is the rest of this video? Simon Singh is incredibly compelling....

I liked his books a lot...yet he is not an internet star like Dawkins and Hawking...

-_-

Damn.

[Daghead]

I was hoping he'd give another set of backwards lyrics.

[Newtoon]

Excellent demo of framing process.

It also prooves that people can be easily leaded to believe they hear or saw something that never happened but on which they have poor data in mind. The brain fills the missing information, naturally... It happened so many times in trials.