Zionist Professor uses science to disempower people

[blueocean]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... iends.html




Brains 'are hardwired to believe in God and imaginary friends'
By Fiona Macrae
Last updated at 1:48 PM on 05th February 2009
Comments (7) Add to My Stories  God's garden? Our brains are primed to see purpose and design around us, scientists say
Religion is part of human nature and our brains are hard wired to believe in God, scientists believe.

The evidence includes studies of babies and children which have shown the brain is programmed to think of the mind as being separate from the body.

This distinction allows us to believe in the supernatural, to conjure up imaginary friends  - and to conceive of gods, this week's New Scientist reports.

Other studies suggest our minds come with an overdeveloped sense of cause and effect, which primes us to see purpose and design everywhere, even when there is none.
Children as young as seven or eight believe that rocks, rivers and birds have been created for a specific purpose.

Taken together, the two traits mean were are perfectly programmed to believe in god.

Professor Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University , a psychologist at Yale University in the US, said: 'There's now a lot of evidence that some of the foundations for our religious beliefs are hard-wired.
'All humans possess the brain circuitry and it and it never goes away.'   etc etc



So humans are pre-programmed machines aye?

That is why these zionists spend so many effort on reprogramming the goyim-machines into zionist disinfo.......?  :twisted:

[jai_mann]

I have to listen to this kind of poorly based "logic" in one of my classes this semester. It aggravates the shit out of me because I can't say any thing or I risk 1) not finishing with the higher degree 2) getting shit listed which could include any number of things including the FEMA camps.

What they are doing in my class is mixing Nihilism/Pragmatism as the approach for the particular field I am in. The idea is more "what can you do with science/beliefs" as opposed to "how does this work". It's complete bullshit and I don't think any of my peers have a clue as to what is going on.

If I were to start citing material from Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma the only one who would have a clue as to what I'm talking about is the Professor and my distaste for the material will do me no favors. Gotta love the system.

I think one solution to this monopolization of legitimate views of reality is to push towards non-academic, open source types of education. If the current model of academia could be said to be like Microsoft windows then we need a Linux model.

The big thing being promoted in the class is that there is no "mind" and that people are essentially robots which is more or less what the Talmudists and upper level Masons think. There's also plenty of attacks on religion in the class which has made at least one person ditch it after the first class. I don't follow organized religion but as far as I'm concerned, careful demolition of certain old religious beliefs does not preclude other possibilities for a creator.

I hope I can make it through this semester. Ugh. They don't want us to believe in what they believe to be bullshit but they want us to believe in THEIR bullshit instead. :roll:

[MikeWB]

Why are you guys so up in arms over this? The guy is saying that all religions are total and utter bullshit and an aftereffect of our primitive brains. I completely agree with him. I'd go further and say it's a scam that's been inbred into humanity by the these bullshit religious institutions.

Long time ago, people used 'gods' as a way of explaining stuff that they didn't understand. Now that we finally understand things a lot better, we don't need gods anymore. Religions today are all about breeding hate towards others and about controlling people.

And this title that you picked is completely misleading. If anything, telling people that they're stupid for believing in bullshit is empowering, not disempowering!

[jai_mann]

They don't want us to believe in what they believe to be bullshit but they want us to believe in THEIR bullshit instead.

It's as simple as that really. Let me be clear. I follow no organized religion nor do I believe in a creator as described in "holy texts". I also am not atheist. My present ideas on a creator stem from the basic fact that all of this came from something but I can not define what.

My biggest issue with these folks is that they are disingenuous and they abuse "science" for political aims. One has to be extremely careful when reading and parsing through their logic because they are manipulative and misrepresent or play with verbiage. If I get the time tomorrow I will scan up 2 pages from a book I am reading and post it for you and others to read and comment on. If you don't catch what the author has done in those two pages I will point it out as I had to to some of my fellow classmates.

As I said in the first message, their goal is not the goal of science which is to as objectively as possible elucidate the mechanisms underlying a given phenomena. No, instead, their goal is to determine HOW they can use science to advance political and religious (yes religious, just not the religions they dislike) agendas of their own. An example would be the UN promoted Global Warming agenda.

Religions today are controlled by these very same people who pass themselves off as religious figures. Was Bush or Clinton representative of the Christian faith? Is the king of jordan representative of the Muslim faith? No, they are members of secret societies which practice this Gnosticism.

I think if you spend more time reading you will understand where I am coming from on this issue. I can't speak for blueocean.
Check this out-> http://www.jrbooksonline.com/HTML-docs/freemasonry.htm
And ->http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4451288/34_best_selling_conspiracy_ebooks (Albert Pike's Moral and Dogma is in there and it gets right into the thick of how they view the masses).

[targa2]

Hey Mike.  Get your science to explain what a thought is.They claim to have thoughts ,but cannot substantiate the existence of them by there own measuring standards.  Get them to replicate a seed in a lab. Hell, they were still arguing about whether light was waves or particles just 20 years ago.  I'm not sure they still know.

Science is in fact a religion.  It believes in the  unprovable, and that I congratulate them for!  It take guts to believe in what you only have a vague but nagging sense of, yet cannot prove.  

Science claims there is no god . In law...the burden of proof weighs upon the one who makes the claim.  That makes both the religion of science and the religions of god totally equal. Both have done untold damage to the earth and it's inhabitants and both have been a great source of life and inspiratation.  In this regard they are arguably equal.  Where they divert from equality is what's important here.  Religion gave up persecuting science a long time ago but science and it's materialistic followers are engaged in a full scale, slanderous war against believers in god on all fronts.
So much so, that they have taken out ads on buses to make their point.

But god still loves you Mike. There is still time for you to change and lose the venom!

[MikeWB]

Hey Mike.  Get your science to explain what a thought is.They claim to have thoughts ,but cannot substantiate the existence of them by there own measuring standards.  Get them to replicate a seed in a lab. Hell, they were still arguing about whether light was waves or particles just 20 years ago.  I'm not sure they still know.

Science is in fact a religion.  It believes in the  unprovable, and that I congratulate them for!  It take guts to believe in what you only have a vague but nagging sense of, yet cannot prove.  

Science claims there is no god . In law...the burden of proof weighs upon the one who makes the claim.  That makes both the religion of science and the religions of god totally equal. Both have done untold damage to the earth and it's inhabitants and both have been a great source of life and inspiratation.  In this regard they are arguably equal.  Where they divert from equality is what's important here.  Religion gave up persecuting science a long time ago but science and it's materialistic followers are engaged in a full scale, slanderous war against believers in god on all fronts.
So much so, that they have taken out ads on buses to make their point.

But god still loves you Mike. There is still time for you to change and lose the venom!

 Total and utter nonsense.  Hope you wake up from brainwashing that you've been subjected to. Religion is the virus of the mind and people who believe in it should get more education.

[blueocean]

Thanks for the link on freemasonry Jai-man.

"The big thing being promoted in the class is that there is no "mind" and that people are essentially robots which is more or less what the Talmudists and upper level Masons think. "


This is more or less what it comes down to yes. ( I am not asking people to go into organised religion or anything like that, I am asking people to become aware of this so called 'science'  agenda.

Buying into the nihilism agenda is a bit like buying into being a 'goyim' , a mindless animal ready to be shepherded/programmed and ...........culled.  

This Talmudic Science tells people that:  1 they are mindless machines

2 they are without conscioussness and without descision making abilities

3 they are self replicating meme machines

4 they don't exist at all, that they are simply illusions    maya  (funny that the anagram of maya is  Yama.  Yama is the god of death.................. or Zion )

etc. etc.     Problem is that most of the 'scientists' / social engineers that came up with these shiny 'ideas' are Occultists adhering to kabbalah/ talmud etc..

Nothing wrong with being an atheist, just make sure that you are an aware and mindfull one that can make your own decisions based upon your own conscience.  

[MikeWB]

Look, there is no god or gods or maker or anything like that. And even if there is a higher-order being out there that has created this Universe, that being doesn't give a shit about humans. All religions are total bullshit and they promise things that no one can verify.

Look around you. Look at all these injustices around us. Just look how many people are suffering. Do you think a real god would allow something like that?!

The sooner human race gets rid of itself of religion, the better the world will be. This has NOTHING to do with Zionism! Do not mix the two things! Just because some jew is smart and is expressing the truth doesn't mean that truth is somehow zionist. There's plenty of us non-jews who are atheists and don't believe in nonsense and fairy tales.

[blueocean]

That epicurus is indeed a problem. The problem of evil.


I would say this.  There are a couple of possible answers to the problem of evil here are a few of them:


1 Evil is Self-created due to degeneration and de-evolution that has taken place.

2 in some way we are all God/ a part of God so We/God is at war with itself as in Consciousness/subconsciousness/unconsciousness shadow stuff etc.

which could mean that although God is omnipotent,  gog/god fighting god infringess upon that omnipotence that god is, for it is an equal match. ( see the war within Q-land with star trek voyager as an example).

3 there is an unknown higher reason for not interfering at this level of reality. because of?

1 infection?

2 higher learning?

3 ?

4 unknown.


with things being so evil in this world god is in the accused bench, although most of the evil also comes from the kabbalic talmudic satanic Zionists that have said in the protocols of Zion they want to destroy god /all that is good anyway so................... who is the accused and who is the accuser?


Religion for the most part is a bad rehash of truth, which means that in the discussion about the problem of evil and God/a higher being  this should NOT be mixed together.

The Truth is that for a big part the same occultists/kabbalists that have pushed religious dogma and crap in the past are also the ones that more recently in the past have pushed atheism and more in particular Nihilism.  Try to understand that.

Humans are apparently easily conditioned into certain beliefs which vary a lot in different times and timeframes.  Meaning that what is apparently complete non-sense now, may have been a known truth in the past or will be in the future.


The current atheistic  nihilistic science for a big part is a result of occultists like Hegel forcing the concept of quantity upon a quality, meaning that what is a quality has been quantified (even though that is complete rubbish and non-sense) into EMPTY numbers or quantities. This simple mistake ( or manipulation)  has had very big consequences...........


maybe more later..........  

[jai_mann]

Well I couldn't get clear pictures from my camera and the free scanner I was given is a piece of shit (ya get what ya pay for..) so here is what I typed up. I wish I could type more because it would drive my point home regarding disingenuous arguments.

Comments would be appreciated as my fingahz and wrists are sore now  
From William Baum

p.12

Free Will versus Determinism

Definitions

   The idea that there can be a science of behavior implies that behavior, like any
scientific subject matter, is orderly, can be explained, with the right knowledge can be
predicted, and with the right means can be controlled. This is determinism, the notion that
behavior is determined solely by heredity and environment.
   Many people find determinism objectionable. It appears to run counter to
long-standing cultural traditions that assign the responsibility for action to the
individual, rather than to heredity and the environment. These traditions have changed to
some extent: delinquency is blamed on bad environment; famous artists acknowledge debts to
parents and teachers; and some behavioral traits, such as alcholism, schizophrenia,
handedness, and IQ are acknowledged to have a genetic component. Yet the tendency remains to
assign credit and blame to individuals, to assert that behavior depends not just on heredity
and environment but on something more, that people have freedom to choose their actions.
   The name for the ability to choose is free will. It implies a third element besides
heredity and environment, something within the individual. It asserts that despite
inheritance and despite all environmental impacts, a person who behaves one way could have
chosen to behave another way. It asserts something beyond merely experiencing that one has
choice-it could seem to me that I can eat the ice cream or not, and yet my eating the ice
cream could be entirely determined by past events. Free will asserts that choice is no
illusion, that individuals themselves cause behavior.
   Philosophers have tried to reconcile determinism and free will. Positions have
emerged called "soft determinism" and "compatibilist" theories of free will. A soft
determinism attributed to Donald Hebb, for example, holds that free will consists of
behavior's dependence on inheritance and past environmental history, factors less visible
than one's present environment. But, since such a view still considers behavior to result
solely from inheritance and environment, past and present, it implies that free will is only
an experience, an illusion, and not a causal relation between person and action. A
compatibilist theory of free will proposed by philosopher Daniel Dennett defines free will
as deliberation before action (Dennett,1984). As long as I deliberate over eating the ice
cream (Will it make me fat? Could I offset its effects with exercise later? Can I be happy
if I am always dieting?), my eating the ice cream is freely chosen. This is compatible with
determinism because deliberation itself is behavior that might be determined by heredity and
past environment. If deliberation plays any role in the behavior that follows, it would act
only as a link in a chain of causality extending back into earlier events. This definition,
however, deviates from what people conventionally mean by free will.
   Philosophers call the conventional idea of free will- the idea that choice really
can be free of past events-libertarian free will. Any other definition, like those of Hebb
and Dennett, that is compatible with determinism presents no problem for behaviorism or a
science of behavior. Only libertarian free will conflicts with behaviorism. The history of
the concept in Jewish and Christian theology suggests that it exists precisely in order to
deny the sort of determinism that behaviorism represents. Parting with the philosophers,
therefore, we will refer to libertarian free will as "free will".

My indentations don't seem to be showing up in the preview. Oh well maybe you all can tell where they are supposed to be...

[jai_mann]

Look, there is no god or gods or maker or anything like that. And even if there is a higher-order being out there that has created this Universe, that being doesn't give a shit about humans. All religions are total bullshit and they promise things that no one can verify.

Look around you. Look at all these injustices around us. Just look how many people are suffering. Do you think a real god would allow something like that?!

The sooner human race gets rid of itself of religion, the better the world will be. This has NOTHING to do with Zionism! Do not mix the two things! Just because some jew is smart and is expressing the truth doesn't mean that truth is somehow zionist. There's plenty of us non-jews who are atheists and don't believe in nonsense and fairy tales.

I've never made claims about a creator giving a shit about humans or anything else but the way I look at it is: Where did you come from? Where did your species come from? Where did your planet come from? Where did matter come from? Where did antimatter and dark energy come from? If there was a big bang what created it? That's all I'm getting at. I am coming at it from a realist perspective. As in science if we can determine that one event causes another event can we not use the same logic to track things back further? And I'm not completely sold on the big bang. It's a theory and the problem is: those who fall within the mean and the upper first and even second deviations from the mean for scientific analysis ability are by and large followers and they parrot what they hear as they are either incapable or unmotivated to engage in the abstract thought processes required to; assess the validity of theories, update the theories(why wait for the mainstream?), or apply them.

I'd actually have to say the world would be better off with out Talmudism and Masonry since millions upon millions have been killed through their ambition for a one world government. If people want to practice like the Amish or Minninites or some other peaceful, nonaggressive group then I have no beef with them.

[blueocean]

Great posts jai-man.



For a visual example go see the matrix part II again, when Neo sits across the Merovingian (Jewish bloodline from Babylon) and they discuss free will and determinism.  The programm called the merovingian doesn't 'believe'in choice..........


This is the scene with the chocolate cake brought to the woman at the restaurant which has been manipulated by the merovingian with a programm code.

[targa2]

Hey Mike

You never answered my questions.  Instead you engaged in name calling and arrogance.  Now you are acting like those who we criticize.

Science is........ "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world ".

In other words...... not concerned with anything spiritual.  Are you going to deny you have a spirit now?  OK , I'll play along.  What the fuck keeps you alive and gives you thought and drives you to do what you do then smart ass ,belligerent , know it all  !!!

See, I can be a vulgar prick too, and still believe in god.

Go join up with the Zionists....none of them believe in god either !

[MikeWB]

Hey Mike

You never answered my questions.  Instead you engaged in name calling and arrogance.  Now you are acting like those who we criticize.

Science is........ "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world ".

In other words...... not concerned with anything spiritual.  Are you going to deny you have a spirit now?  OK , I'll play along.  What the fuck keeps you alive and gives you thought and drives you to do what you do then smart ass ,belligerent , know it all  !!!

See, I can be a vulgar prick too, and still believe in god.

Go join up with the Zionists....none of them believe in god either !

Oh, so you're saying now that Zionists don't even believe in Talmud since they don't believe in God? Give me a break. Zionists believe in God and they believe they're the chosen people. That's their reason for existence!

As for your religious arguments, go ahead, prove to me that there is God. The onus is on YOU since you claim that there are invisible beings and other fairies. I don't claim that they exist. If anyone's arrogant, it's YOU! You're the one who believes that you know everything since you read it in some shitty old fairy tales book.  It's those who think that they're guided by something and that they have no free will that are arrogant. I'm not the one who's trying to impose delusions on others!

As for your questions, they're silly. Consciousness is a bioelectric signal created by our nerve cells. No need to spring to some magical solution like spirit. Spirit was invented as an explanation when people didn't know anything about science and biology. Now we know a lot more about how the brain works and spirit is not needed to explain how things work.

The Dragon In My Garage

by Carl Sagan
"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage"

Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin) I seriously make such an assertion to you.  Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself.  There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say.  I lead you to my garage.  You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle -- but no dragon.

"Where's the dragon?" you ask.

"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely.  "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick."  And so on.  I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all?  If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists?  Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true.  Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder.  What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.  The only thing you've really learned from my insistence that there's a dragon in my garage is that something funny is going on inside my head.  You'd wonder, if no physical tests apply, what convinced me.  The possibility that it was a dream or a hallucination would certainly enter your mind.  But then, why am I taking it so seriously?  Maybe I need help.  At the least, maybe I've seriously underestimated human fallibility.  Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded.  So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a fire-breathing dragon in my garage.  You merely put it on hold.  Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you.  Surely it's unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative -- merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of "not proved."

Imagine that things had gone otherwise.  The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch.  Your infrared detector reads off-scale.  The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you.  No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons -- to say nothing about invisible ones -- you must now acknowledge that there's something here, and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire-breathing dragon.

Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just me.  Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you that they have dragons in their garages -- but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive.  All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill-supported by the physical evidence.  None of us is a lunatic.  We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on.  I'd rather it not be true, I tell you.  But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all.

Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported.  But they're never made when a skeptic is looking.  An alternative explanation presents itself.  On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked.  Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath.  But again, other possibilities exist.  We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons.  Such "evidence" -- no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it -- is far from compelling.  Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.

[blueocean]

Oh, so you're saying now that Zionists don't even believe in Talmud since they don't believe in God? Give me a break. Zionists believe in God and they believe they're the chosen people. That's their reason for existence!

As for your religious arguments, go ahead, prove to me that there is God. The onus is on YOU since you claim that there are invisible beings and other fairies. I don't claim that they exist. If anyone's arrogant, it's YOU! You're the one who believes that you know everything since you read it in some shitty old fairy tales book. It's those who think that they're guided by something and that they have no free will that are arrogant. I'm not the one who's trying to impose delusions on others!

As for your questions, they're silly. Consciousness is a bioelectric signal created by our nerve cells. No need to spring to some magical solution like spirit. Spirit was invented as an explanation when people didn't know anything about science and biology. Now we know a lot more about how the brain works and spirit is not needed to explain how things work.

Let me make some corrections here:

1 The Zionists are basically kabbalist satanists , which means that they believe in themselves as godkings and they believe in black magic and many other types of 'fairy tales' .....  hehe

2 they believe in 'the other side'  and in using that for there own gain and power. and to establish an occult new world order.

3 god or the believe in god is seen as an obstacle to them plain and simple.

4 they will go to great lengths to enslave people whether this be enslavement to a catholic pope or enslavement to so called 'scientists' that promote nihilism.  Both enslave period.  not seeing that is.......

5 etc etc. etc.

The TAlmud is basically a legal document utilised to enslave jews and non-jews by circumventing the ten commandments and promotig Master Race doctrine/supremacism.

The Kabbalists DO believe in 'invisible Realms' hence all their black magic rituals and sacrifices real and illusionary.


There are many many delusions  Richard Dawkins is one of them  :lol:


People May believe freely, All I ask is that you fully understand the implications of your beliefs.  

1 believing that all is maya/Illusion  eventually leads to nihilism and non-being.  (think it through for oneself) (this is high illuminati belief by the way.)

2 believing that consciousness is nothing more than an ellectrical signal also leads to the belief that consciousness is an illusion/maya   and that 'people'are simply meme machine replicaters  and eventually leads to nihilism and non-being.
(think it through for oneself).

Funny how these implications work aye?  

Breaking free from one side of the prison (catholic or talmudic slave)  often leads to the opposame side of the same coin nihilistic science.  Both are enslavement in their own form.


There is many evidence about the manipulation of both science AND religion by the same usual suspects.  People should free themselves from all of them.............................

[jai_mann]

Hey Mike

You never answered my questions.  Instead you engaged in name calling and arrogance.  Now you are acting like those who we criticize.

Science is........ "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world ".

In other words...... not concerned with anything spiritual.  Are you going to deny you have a spirit now?  OK , I'll play along.  What the fuck keeps you alive and gives you thought and drives you to do what you do then smart ass ,belligerent , know it all  !!!

See, I can be a vulgar prick too, and still believe in god.

Go join up with the Zionists....none of them believe in god either !

When trying to convince others of something it's always best to avoid conflict .

[jai_mann]

Oh, so you're saying now that Zionists don't even believe in Talmud since they don't believe in God? Give me a break. Zionists believe in God and they believe they're the chosen people. That's their reason for existence!

As for your religious arguments, go ahead, prove to me that there is God. The onus is on YOU since you claim that there are invisible beings and other fairies. I don't claim that they exist. If anyone's arrogant, it's YOU! You're the one who believes that you know everything since you read it in some shitty old fairy tales book.  It's those who think that they're guided by something and that they have no free will that are arrogant. I'm not the one who's trying to impose delusions on others!

As for your questions, they're silly. Consciousness is a bioelectric signal created by our nerve cells. No need to spring to some magical solution like spirit. Spirit was invented as an explanation when people didn't know anything about science and biology. Now we know a lot more about how the brain works and spirit is not needed to explain how things work.

I would go so far as to say everything consists of different types of vibrations. Vibrations with different properties manifest as matter, light, emf & magnetism, etc. But then the question is, what created these vibrations? That would be the next step in my opinion. I would think that everything around us is evidence for a creator. Now when I say creator I'm not claiming any thing from religious texts necessarily.

Here's my problem with this issue of "spirit". Yes it was a concept created to explain something immaterial within humans. But wait, are there not physical phenomena which can occur yet not be observed by humans or their measuring instruments? There are plenty of scientists who acknowledge that this is the case. Nikola Tesla may not have been the first to demonstrate  this but he did show that longitudinal waves could be tapped/interacted with upon transverse waves which is what we think of as "material". Transverse waves are responsible for matter,light, heat, electricity. We can see and easily interact with these things. However, we can not see or easily interact with longitudinal waves (some call the manifestation of these waves dark matter, dark energy, neutrinos,radiant energy,cold energy,etc.). Prof. Konstantine Meyl has been giving demonstrations of Tesla's longitudinal waves and video's can be found online of his lectures. He has proposed something which I believe is accurate and it solved a serious question that I've had regarding electrochemical signals along the "nodes of Ranvier" on axons in the brain. In my biopsychology courses the text and teachers always said the signal "jumped" from one node to another. Well, 3 years into self-taught electronics/physics (9yrs later) and I realize this is bullshit. The most likely action is as proposed by Meyl which is that the signal is converted from a transverse wave into a longitudinal wave for the length of each sheath of mylenation at which point it is converted back to a transverse wave. This repeats the length of the axon until it hits the synapse. It makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint because the signal is much faster w/ mylenation than w/o (in fact people who have multiple sclerosis suffer from mylenation destruction which prevents full signal transmission because the resistance of the axon is greater than the induced signal at the soma.)

So it is quite possible our brains, at the lowest level of neurons, are interacting with space-time in such a manner that we can not currently measure. Not even with functional magnetic resonance, positron emission tomography, or magneto-encephalography. Sure we can measure at the synapse and along the nodes of ranvier w/ direct probes into the brain, but when you get to the mylen sheath...the signal just "disappears" and jumps to the next node!

So, how are we to know that there are not other mechanisms in effect which overlap with our "material" bodies? This is probably the most profound thing that I have learned about our bodies and it wasn't in a class. The signal conversion is not theory. It was demonstrated by Tesla 100+ years ago, it is currently demonstrated by a number of others. The application of understanding this mechanism in our brain just had not happened yet and as I speak I have friends in neuroscience labs who would shake their head at me in disbelief (then again they think I'm nuts for claiming 9/11 was something other than what the TV told them...and it doesn't help that the one Gentile is surrounded by you know who...), but they lack the background in electricity/physics, and the inquisitive nature to wonder what the hell is happening when the signal "jumps". All they know is what they are taught within the program...

The definition of "material" is a problem when considering this phenomena of longitudinal waves and dark matter/energy.