The Line Between Science and Pseudoscience

If psionic abilities or magic and mysticism was fake, how come some of the greatest scientists and thinks practiced it or at least had an interest in it. Leonardo Da Vinci had plenty of occult symbols in his art, Isaac Newton was said to have done rituals and George Washington Carver had even said he was able to communicate with plants. Yet scientists today discredit such abilities despite the fact that they idolize scientists who did practice such abilities.

Scientists have been wrong.

At the end of his understanding, Newton also invoked God, but that was because we had reached a frontier of ignorance.

Then, another scientist, took his work further.

Heres something interesting by someone who does respect Newton immensely. That does not blind him to his shortcomings though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytaf30wuLbQ

Much of Da Vinici's art, while inspiring later generations( some using it as basis for there experiments), were, in and of themselves, faulty in design, with, or without occult symbols.

George Washington Carver was said to be able to communicate with plants, but, a lot of people say a lot of things. It proves nothing in and of itself.

I work with the mentally ill and they make plenty of claims, but that doesnt make it valid, even were they previously scientists, teachers, etc.

This is where the line is or me.

I don't really see psionics as impossible because there isn't "proof" There was evidence but people get proof and evidence mixed up when they are not the same thing. All those spell books and techniques for levitation and psionics are evidence. And people say there is no evidence when in fact that is evidence and that is has been demonstrated before. Telekinesis has been demonstrated before but the problem is on videos it's difficult to tell if it's real or fake,. Some are fake and some might not. With Carver he said he talked to plants and of course by talking, he never meant that the plants literally had mouths and spoke english to him. It's that the plants could communicate telepathically.

And people will say "well religion was pretty dominant even among scientists back then" Yes it was dominant but atheism was around even in ancient times and many of the greatest ancient scientists were usually not atheist and even practiced what we call magic or psionic abilities or alchemy. The problem is with telekinesis or magic, we automatically think of movies, when real psionics and magic doesn't work that way anyway.

Some things can't even be recorded and need to be experienced. Such as if there was a ritual casting a protection or healing spell around someone, the act and spell was complete and took effect but the camera didn't catch it when it was recording it? How could it? The camera is not designed to catch it so when we watch it, we think nothing happened when in reality it actually did take effect. Sometimes you need to experience something in order to know that it exists. How can a camera record telepathy or protection auras or otherworldly visits? I think we have developed a materialistic attitude, where if something isn't in your hands or right in front of your face, it must not exist. Being close minded so much prevents us from learning the entire truth.

Maybe that's why those scientists were great because by studying the other side like metaphysics, magic, psionics ect, they got a better perspective of the universe and had both eyes opened, not just one.

Theweirdtophat wrote: Can anyone please answer this question? I'm just wondering if a to this anyone knew the answer to this one because I can't find answers on other forums.

If psionic abilities or magic and mysticism was fake, how come some of the greatest scientists and thinks practiced it or at least had an interest in it. Leonardo Da Vinci had plenty of occult symbols in his art, Isaac Newton was said to have done rituals and George Washington Carver had even said he was able to communicate with plants. Yet scientists today discredit such abilities despite the fact that they idolize scientists who did practice such abilities.

It's a secret!!!
:lol:
But seriously, I think a clue is the ' art of memory ', and as such 'magic' were mostly a range of practises to try and drive improvements in memory, perception and cognition. Remembering in those days before books, and still today, a specialist was really someone who knew a lot about stuff in a lot of detail, so memory was a foundation, and from that complexity can derive which can enable creativity to emerge.

Science, as currently defined and understood, has boundaries. It is only concerned by those physically-measurable and quantifiable natural things. Anything outside of that can be viewed with a scientific mindset, but is beyond the grasp of science itself.

Dear Theweirdtophat,
So the most recent activity available to my viewing as a guest of Yabuturtle was incidentally the day before your joining date, Tophat. Yabu posted more or less the same questions and exactly the same argument about pretty much the same topic in his thread on telekinesis .
Now, a few quotations to show that this is more than just my paranoia:

---

Theweirdtophat wrote: Some things can't even be recorded and need to be experienced. Such as if there was a ritual casting a protection or healing spell around someone, the act and spell was complete and took effect but the camera didn't catch it when it was recording it? How could it? The camera is not designed to catch it so when we watch it, we think nothing happened when in reality it actually did take effect.	Yabuturtle wrote: People ask for proof but there are things that would be difficult to prove. Such as if you were casting a blessing spell on someone. You can watch it on film but the film wouldn't catch it, but that doesn't mean the person wasn't blessed in some way.
Theweirdtophat wrote: And of course when people think of telekinesis or magic, they think of stuff from hollywood, but a lot of that stuff is exaggerated and real psionics and magic doesn't work like that. It isn't flashy and it's more subtle but nonetheless real.	Yabuturtle wrote: I really think it's because when people think of magic, they imagine people hurling fire balls or something from the movies, when real magic doesn't work that way. With Telekinesis, they imagine people using it like in the movies, flinging numerous objects all over the place, when telekinesis is a little more subtle than that.
Theweirdtophat wrote: If psionic abilities or magic and mysticism was fake, how come some of the greatest scientists and thinks practiced it or at least had an interest in it. Leonardo Da Vinci had plenty of occult symbols in his art, Isaac Newton was said to have done rituals and George Washington Carver had even said he was able to communicate with plants. Yet scientists today discredit such abilities despite the fact that they idolize scientists who did practice such abilities.	Yabuturtle wrote: Of course one should also mention that many of the great scientists practiced or at least had an interest in psychic abilities or magic or mysticism. George Washington Carver, Da Vinci, Isaac Newton, ect. did as well. These were scientists yet they didn't dismiss such things and these guys are looked up by scientists today, many of which that dismiss such abilities are fake. It's ironic to me.

---

Since I have myself already addressed just about every point on this, I shan't. I have also covered the topic outside of that numerous times so I shall do that only when asked. This peculiar similarity is the only thing I'm pointing out for now, as a humble service to the Temple.
*bows*

Isn't this all about trying to understand the world? One persons truth is another persons lie. People in a culture on the other sides of the world think different things to be true. I may disagree with them. Who is wrong? How about reflecting on what they have in common rather than how they are different?

Gisteron wrote: Dear Theweirdtophat,
So the most recent activity available to my viewing as a guest of Yabuturtle was incidentally the day before your joining date, Tophat. Yabu posted more or less the same questions and exactly the same argument about pretty much the same topic in his thread on telekinesis .
Now, a few quotations to show that this is more than just my paranoia:

---

Theweirdtophat wrote: Some things can't even be recorded and need to be experienced. Such as if there was a ritual casting a protection or healing spell around someone, the act and spell was complete and took effect but the camera didn't catch it when it was recording it? How could it? The camera is not designed to catch it so when we watch it, we think nothing happened when in reality it actually did take effect.	Yabuturtle wrote: People ask for proof but there are things that would be difficult to prove. Such as if you were casting a blessing spell on someone. You can watch it on film but the film wouldn't catch it, but that doesn't mean the person wasn't blessed in some way.
Theweirdtophat wrote: And of course when people think of telekinesis or magic, they think of stuff from hollywood, but a lot of that stuff is exaggerated and real psionics and magic doesn't work like that. It isn't flashy and it's more subtle but nonetheless real.	Yabuturtle wrote: I really think it's because when people think of magic, they imagine people hurling fire balls or something from the movies, when real magic doesn't work that way. With Telekinesis, they imagine people using it like in the movies, flinging numerous objects all over the place, when telekinesis is a little more subtle than that.
Theweirdtophat wrote: If psionic abilities or magic and mysticism was fake, how come some of the greatest scientists and thinks practiced it or at least had an interest in it. Leonardo Da Vinci had plenty of occult symbols in his art, Isaac Newton was said to have done rituals and George Washington Carver had even said he was able to communicate with plants. Yet scientists today discredit such abilities despite the fact that they idolize scientists who did practice such abilities.	Yabuturtle wrote: Of course one should also mention that many of the great scientists practiced or at least had an interest in psychic abilities or magic or mysticism. George Washington Carver, Da Vinci, Isaac Newton, ect. did as well. These were scientists yet they didn't dismiss such things and these guys are looked up by scientists today, many of which that dismiss such abilities are fake. It's ironic to me.

---

Since I have myself already addressed just about every point on this, I shan't. I have also covered the topic outside of that numerous times so I shall do that only when asked. This peculiar similarity is the only thing I'm pointing out for now, as a humble service to the Temple.
*bows*

It's possible that you have too much time and I don't really see how it has anything to do with this topic.

No, we're not the same, but just because we happen to share the same ideas, does not make one the same. If you research online you'll find dozens of people that will say pretty much the same thing I've said.

I have heard crystal power is also often labeled as pseudo science which doesn't make sense. Don't we use synthetic crystals in computers and equipment? If a synthetic crystal can do that, what could a natural crystal do?

I feel like we are being lied to and being prevented from learning all the powers a human can learn, crystal, plant, metal, stone power, magic, psionics, alchemy, ect.all of which were practiced thousands of years by the way. But with a better understanding of the world, imagine what one could do when one uses science, magic, psionics ect.

Theweirdtophat wrote: I have heard crystal power is also often labeled as pseudo science which doesn't make sense. Don't we use synthetic crystals in computers and equipment? If a synthetic crystal can do that, what could a natural crystal do?

It is pseudoscience. It's pseudoscience because there's no real scientific mindset looking into these "powers". Furthermore, your assertion that we use synthetic crystals in "computers and equipment" is vague enough to showcase your ignorance on how and why they are used. It certainly isn't because there's some kind of magic in them.

I feel like we are being lied to and being prevented from learning all the powers a human can learn, crystal, plant, metal, stone power, magic, psionics, alchemy, ect.all of which were practiced thousands of years by the way.

Cite your source, please.