John Maddox (Book For Burning)

John Maddox says of Rupert Sheldrake's work, "It's unnecessary to introduce magic into the explanation from physical and biological phenomenon when in fact there is every likelihood that the continuation of research as it is now practiced will indeed fill all the gaps that Sheldrake draws attention to."

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• John
• Maddox
• Rupert
• Sheldrake
• Nature

[ossiorn]

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.

[K2nsl3r]

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?

[rowansart]

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.

[amylnitrateify]

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.

[ThisOneIsTaken]

@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]

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.

[marcusantonio91]

it reminds me of the radio 5 debate between sheldrake and peter atkins which was priceless

[SC0RePIO]

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.

[azelkia]

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

[LastDaysPictures]

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!

[thepixieful]

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.

[seemorerocks]

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.