Red Collie

Someone is shy

Red hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
Red Collie
Posted over 2 years ago
Discuss the note to the TED community on the withdrawal of the TEDxWestHollywood license.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this subject, I am a professional scientist with 30 years of experience in top laboratories including Caltech 1976-1981, MRC LMB Cambridge 1982-86, and CSIRO Australia 1987-2010. Much of what the TED admin writes is not true. While it is true that (a) Suzanne or others are not professional scientists, and (b) most professional scientists would not agree with what they might have to say, it is certainly not true that they are promoting 'pseudo-science' as several noisy critics claim. Personally I have been studying crop circles in a scientific sense since 2002. Even a child or border collie could verify factually, that certain of them were not made by local humans here on Earth. That is really a momentous result, which ought to be discussed factually in the scientific community. Millions of Amercan citizens snould know this, if the Bill of Rights counts for anything at all? Yet it has been effectively been censored by TED. Weblinks are not allowed here, but if you search on Google for "hard factual evidence for three paranormal crop circles" or "a summary of the best puzzles in crop circle history", then you may actually learn something, which the TED admin seemingly does not want anyone to know. Please read those links, and then you will learn the facts.
Noface
Red Collie
Posted over 2 years ago
Scientism and atheism are religions!
dear kate, you are quite right, in that organized science post-2000 has all the trappings of a pagan, atheistic, intolerant religion. Firstly regarding Mr. Dawkins, he has no valid scientific achievements or original ideas of his own. The "selfish gene" idea was first developed by Francis Crick, and later discarded. If some people follow his "cult of atheism" as you call it, then they are not supporting real science as it has been known since 1700. Secondly this surprising atheistic movement is quite intolerant of any other ideas, and are actively engaged in censorship even today (circumspice). They suppress anything their little minds cannot conceive of. What is "real science", as defined say by Thomas Huxley in 1865? The real scientist is not skeptical of new facts, not skeptical of new ideas, but is always skeptical of received authorities or old established ideas. Those established ideas may come from a church, from an atheistic cult, or from Professors in learned universities. When new ideas or facts are suppressed by governing authorities, whether by the Pope and his cronies in 1630 with Galileo, by rulers in some dictatorship, or by popular atheistic cults in the modern western world, then it is not "science" but "religion", and the worst kind of religion at that. I would be more specific if it were allowed. I have actually produced a great deal or original, correct science, They only talk about it, and to my knowledge have never set foot in any real labroatory anywhere. Dr. Horace R. Drew (Caltech 1976-1981, MRC LMB Cambridge 1982-86, CSIRO Australia 1987-2010) (first x-ray crystal structures of left and right-handed DNA, part of the genetic code dealing with DNA curvature, and a textbook "Understanding DNA" from Elsevier Press, London, third edition 2004)
Noface
Red Collie
Posted over 2 years ago
A new policy of censorship on TEDx, what happened to open conversations?
As a long-term professional scientist, I agree with you, Sandy. Personally I do not agree with everything that Sheldrake and Hancock say, but to censor free speech like this is no different from having an "Index of Prohibited Books"', or like they censor the Dalai Lama in China (his book "Freedom in Exile" is prohibited there). If someone disagrees factually with what those speakers says, then the factual disagreements can be cited or discussed on any page which provides their talks. The current editors of TED have no idea what it means to do real science, or to be open-minded, and I will not associate with that organization any further, until substantial changes are made to reverse this poor decision, and how it could be made in general. Dr. Horace R. Drew, Caltech Ph.D. 1976-81, MRC LMB 1982-87, CSIRO Australia 1987-2010. Either you believe in free speech, and free science, or you don't. If there is a factual disagreement, then you air and discuss those disagreements, you do not cover them up.