Protection And Restoration Of The Nervous System, 2005 Conference

[cdg]

@Tarmander and @cdg

I'm with Tarmander here. The fact that the research trend changed, doesn't mean such important experiments can't be replicated and expanded by others. It is true that research lines can change, studies can be manipulated, shifted, whatever, but Fox experiments are supposed to be very big.

It is like combustion engine, electricity, basic chemistry... no one can stop that from spreading. You can shift research lines in some directions but you'll never be able to silence something like Fox experiments if they were really relevant. Mainly because USA is not the only place in the world where research is done. I work with professors/scientists and I can tell you when they reach a certain point they have freedom to research whatever they want. They won't probably get that much money but still they have money. It's the same in all Europe. Fox experiments shouldn't be very expensive, right ?

People tend to swallow-up everything Peat says like it's in the Bible.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I don't know what to say to someone who already knows everything there is to know about research shenanigans. I am also directly involved with the research community and have seen in basic sciences such as chemistry, electrodymics/physics, etc. where the researchers, even those at the top, totally paranoid of new ideas and threatened to learn old ideas that already out shown their current research scared shitless to loose their grant money unless they are about to retire, even then they are thoroughly marginalized should they go off the bitten path unless they are smart and not let the powers that be know. Many things disappear of the face of the earth and are invented over and over as a result. You might want to read Body Electric by Becker and Lost Science by Gerry Vassilatos. But then I'd be lumped in with the conspiracy theorists and the like so I leave this discussion to the "trustanoia" faction.

 

[Makrosky]

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I don't know what to say to someone who already knows everything there is to know about research shenanigans. I am also directly involved with the research community and have seen in basic sciences such as chemistry, electrodymics/physics, etc. where the researchers, even those at the top, totally paranoid of new ideas and threatened to learn old ideas that already out shown their current research scared shitless to loose their grant money unless they are about to retire, even then they are thoroughly marginalized should they go off the bitten path unless they are smart and not let the powers that be know. Many things disappear of the face of the earth and are invented over and over as a result. You might want to read Body Electric by Becker and Lost Science by Gerry Vassilatos. But then I'd be lumped in with the conspiracy theorists and the like so I leave this discussion to the "trustanoia" faction.

Take it easy dude.
I have seen exactly all what you describe about researchers afraid of learning new ideas etc. I see it every single day. I wanted to point that although the majority of the researches are like that, the world is big and wide and there are still for sure researchers, either private or public funded, willing to adopt new ideas. Just like Peat, Lindberg's cool war on biology, etc. Fox experiments shouldn't need big resources and are of enough importance.

Critical thinking includes questioning Peat's ideas/assumptions.

 

[cdg]

Take it easy dude.
I have seen exactly all what you describe about researchers afraid of learning new ideas etc. I see it every single day. I wanted to point that although the majority of the researches are like that, the world is big and wide and there are still for sure researchers, either private or public funded, willing to adopt new ideas. Just like Peat, Lindberg's cool war on biology, etc. Fox experiments shouldn't need big resources and are of enough importance.

Critical thinking includes questioning Peat's ideas/assumptions.

I am only reacting to the tone of your comments. Many of us question Peat's ideas but often find upon further exploration/research that his work is indeed contextual as he himself says. Hence I was just trying to point out an alternate interpretation - that is why we have this forum. And many of us have not read/heard or remember all Peat has to say so it is very easy to disagree with a lot of his statements/ideas in isolation, hence, many of us do. But then realize later after further digging or understanding that indeed there is nothing really to disagree with or there are multiple ways to look at things etc. Speaking for myself, when you find persons who have integrity and genuinely love the work they do for it's own sake, you had better pay attention to them - biases not withstanding.