This guy is obviously a religious person who is stuck in the stone age. Whether one agrees with Sheldrake or not he uses a scientific approach that shows no magic in it. The topics of his experiments have been deemed "paranormal" or "magical" but this is what science has always done with this sort of subject matter. The science Sheldrake uses is simple and forthright and shows no evidence of magical thinking. The subjects he studies are what can be questionable to science. His methods are sound.
What a moron! He compares Rupert Sheldrake to Galileo Galilei, so is positioning himself alongside the Vatican in defending the indefensible. He has a closed mind, while Sheldrake's is open and enquiring.
While I do believe Sheldrake claims to be absurd, I wonder if this man realize the impression he would give with expressions such as heresy and book burning.
"Maddox penned an editorial in April 1983 entitled "No Need for Panic about AIDS" that voiced the then-common thinking that "male homosexuals should be persuaded to change their ways" of "pathetic promiscuity" and described AIDS as a "perhaps non-existent condition"."
We must find a way to create a new Carl Sagan, science deserves a better spokeperson.
Is anyone else struck by the irony of him saying that it can be condemned in the same way that the pope condemned Galilao, if my memory serves me Galilao was found to be right in the end even if the dogmatic paradigm resisted his truth
sir, I believe magick should be tested. I could not disagree with you more. test the buddist monks (they have) and more. if anyone is in the dark ages, it is you.
If a theory is unpopular with the mainstream it does not really matter how much evidence is brought to bear in support of the hypothesis - there will still be "no evidence" to support it. We see this with complimentary medicine all the time.
That's extremely, ironically APT - Maddox's condemnation of Sheldrake being compared to the Pope condemning Galileo. Because, you see, the Pope was wrong, and Galileo was proven right.
I am currently reading the 2009 edition of
Sheldrake's "A New Science of Life" and his theories are thoroughly substantiated. Not only that, but those "gaps" in scientific theory that Maddox claimed would soon be filled (and make Sheldrake's theories obsolete) are still there 30 years later.
I guess John Maddox means that if you put forward a theory, it has to comply with scientific rules. Those rules are that the theory must do predictions and one or more experiments are defined to test the predictions and which could falsify the theory.
If your theory doesn't comply with these rules, it's worthless because there's no way to tell if it's right or wrong. From a scientific point of view you can call this heresy.
yes you are very free to be a scientist and invoke language from from dogmatic religion. It just makes you look silly and exposes your insecurity as scientist and truthseeker. Is this person interested in what might be true or is he interested in keeping his dogma intact. I mean that's his argument; this can not be tested accordingto scientific dogma; therefore it is wrong, end of discussion.
Not only wrong, if we are to believe Maddox, but outright heresy and case for book burning.
@ ohwell121: No, it can not be tested according to scientific rules; therefore it is not possible to tell if it is right or wrong. So you just have to believe the theory. Therefore it is just religion, or magic as John Maddox says.
indeed, and Galileos claims could not be tested according to theology, therefore it was also defunct. Or magic, as Pope Urban would have called it.
In fact if you look up the heresy trial of Galileo you'll find similar arguments as the ones posed by John Maddox and straight scientist. It was said about his theory that "false and contrary to Scripture". scripture and theology was seen as the science of the day.
The so-called Big Bang theory is also unfalsifiable then, because it cannot be tested in a laboratory either... and the scientists who natter on about alternative universes and worm holes are talking out of their high hats as well. What an asinine double standard.
Rupert Sheldrake possesses what Robert Kennedy described as "Moral Courage" - the willingness to incur backlash from his own group (scientists; biologists) in order to pursue honest scientific inquiry.
LMAO! I don't know whether I agree with Sheldrake on the principles of his theory, but clearly Maddox's comparison here is self-defeating and poorly thought out. Does he even know what he is saying?
No,you didn't miss anything.You're just getting to see the true face of organised skepticism,not true skepticism.The Skeptic society is a disinformation operation.
John Maddox is supposed to be a very clever scientist yet, in order to demonstrate that he is right in condemning Rupert Sheldrake, he compares himself with a Pope who turned out to be humiliatingly wrong in condemning Galileo!
Is he stupid or am i missing something?
If this example of Pope vs Galileo teaches us anything, it would be that a single scientist could be right while the majority of the scientific establishment is stuck in their rigid old world view.
it's an exercise in self-ownage. He is so immersed and angry he can't see the high irony of what he's saying. In fact, he makes science into the very thing it was trying to avoid becoming; a dogmatic religion. I mean these are his words; we are the pope, he is Galileo.
This guy is obviously a religious person who is stuck in the stone age. Whether one agrees with Sheldrake or not he uses a scientific approach that shows no magic in it. The topics of his experiments have been deemed "paranormal" or "magical" but this is what science has always done with this sort of subject matter. The science Sheldrake uses is simple and forthright and shows no evidence of magical thinking. The subjects he studies are what can be questionable to science. His methods are sound.
rowansart 1 week ago
What a moron! He compares Rupert Sheldrake to Galileo Galilei, so is positioning himself alongside the Vatican in defending the indefensible. He has a closed mind, while Sheldrake's is open and enquiring.
amylnitrateify 2 weeks ago
While I do believe Sheldrake claims to be absurd, I wonder if this man realize the impression he would give with expressions such as heresy and book burning.
ThisOneIsTaken 6 months ago
@ThisOneIsTaken
Whoa, flash news on this dude.
"Maddox penned an editorial in April 1983 entitled "No Need for Panic about AIDS" that voiced the then-common thinking that "male homosexuals should be persuaded to change their ways" of "pathetic promiscuity" and described AIDS as a "perhaps non-existent condition"."
We must find a way to create a new Carl Sagan, science deserves a better spokeperson.
ThisOneIsTaken 6 months ago
it reminds me of the radio 5 debate between sheldrake and peter atkins which was priceless
marcusantonio91 10 months ago
LOL! Oh where would we be without such great pearls of wisdom?
As usual, the Voices of Authority scream their loudest to ensure that History repeats itself.
SC0RePIO 1 year ago
Is anyone else struck by the irony of him saying that it can be condemned in the same way that the pope condemned Galilao, if my memory serves me Galilao was found to be right in the end even if the dogmatic paradigm resisted his truth
azelkia 1 year ago
A book for burning?
Well, therefore I read it. The Bible was also considered a book for burning, and I read it, 20 times! I love to be a heretic!
LastDaysPictures 1 year ago
sir, I believe magick should be tested. I could not disagree with you more. test the buddist monks (they have) and more. if anyone is in the dark ages, it is you.
thepixieful 1 year ago
If a theory is unpopular with the mainstream it does not really matter how much evidence is brought to bear in support of the hypothesis - there will still be "no evidence" to support it. We see this with complimentary medicine all the time.
seemorerocks 2 years ago
Sir John Maddox is pulling a hoodwink here. He knows that Sheldrake is right, but he wants to keep these secrets hidden.
elgaed69 2 years ago
That's extremely, ironically APT - Maddox's condemnation of Sheldrake being compared to the Pope condemning Galileo. Because, you see, the Pope was wrong, and Galileo was proven right.
I am currently reading the 2009 edition of
Sheldrake's "A New Science of Life" and his theories are thoroughly substantiated. Not only that, but those "gaps" in scientific theory that Maddox claimed would soon be filled (and make Sheldrake's theories obsolete) are still there 30 years later.
HurricaneHeidi 2 years ago 5
RIP Sir John Maddox
metacarpi 2 years ago
I guess John Maddox means that if you put forward a theory, it has to comply with scientific rules. Those rules are that the theory must do predictions and one or more experiments are defined to test the predictions and which could falsify the theory.
If your theory doesn't comply with these rules, it's worthless because there's no way to tell if it's right or wrong. From a scientific point of view you can call this heresy.
citroenfan616 2 years ago
yes you are very free to be a scientist and invoke language from from dogmatic religion. It just makes you look silly and exposes your insecurity as scientist and truthseeker. Is this person interested in what might be true or is he interested in keeping his dogma intact. I mean that's his argument; this can not be tested accordingto scientific dogma; therefore it is wrong, end of discussion.
Not only wrong, if we are to believe Maddox, but outright heresy and case for book burning.
ohwell121 2 years ago 3
@ ohwell121: No, it can not be tested according to scientific rules; therefore it is not possible to tell if it is right or wrong. So you just have to believe the theory. Therefore it is just religion, or magic as John Maddox says.
citroenfan616 2 years ago
indeed, and Galileos claims could not be tested according to theology, therefore it was also defunct. Or magic, as Pope Urban would have called it.
In fact if you look up the heresy trial of Galileo you'll find similar arguments as the ones posed by John Maddox and straight scientist. It was said about his theory that "false and contrary to Scripture". scripture and theology was seen as the science of the day.
And books were burned.
ohwell121 2 years ago 4
The so-called Big Bang theory is also unfalsifiable then, because it cannot be tested in a laboratory either... and the scientists who natter on about alternative universes and worm holes are talking out of their high hats as well. What an asinine double standard.
Rupert Sheldrake possesses what Robert Kennedy described as "Moral Courage" - the willingness to incur backlash from his own group (scientists; biologists) in order to pursue honest scientific inquiry.
HurricaneHeidi 2 years ago
yes, but the ironical thing is that Sheldrake's theory IS very testable as he lays out in his book.
25nomind 2 years ago
The boy thinks he is a priest. Heresy indeed. And I used to think that science was secular.
olduvaisampson 3 years ago
LMAO! I don't know whether I agree with Sheldrake on the principles of his theory, but clearly Maddox's comparison here is self-defeating and poorly thought out. Does he even know what he is saying?
K2nsl3r 3 years ago 9
No,you didn't miss anything.You're just getting to see the true face of organised skepticism,not true skepticism.The Skeptic society is a disinformation operation.
ossiorn 3 years ago 9
I do not get it?
John Maddox is supposed to be a very clever scientist yet, in order to demonstrate that he is right in condemning Rupert Sheldrake, he compares himself with a Pope who turned out to be humiliatingly wrong in condemning Galileo!
Is he stupid or am i missing something?
If this example of Pope vs Galileo teaches us anything, it would be that a single scientist could be right while the majority of the scientific establishment is stuck in their rigid old world view.
peterwassink 3 years ago 7
it's an exercise in self-ownage. He is so immersed and angry he can't see the high irony of what he's saying. In fact, he makes science into the very thing it was trying to avoid becoming; a dogmatic religion. I mean these are his words; we are the pope, he is Galileo.
ohwell121 2 years ago 5