Quote:
Originally Posted by alextsakiris  It's nice to imagine one experiment might 'revolutionize' some part of science, but that's too much to expect. Sheldrake, Radin and Schwartz (among others) have shown how difficult it is to open a closed mind... closed institutionalized science. |
Well, there is being open-minded, and there is having your brain falls out of it. (skeptical sayings).
Love that.
Anyway, all the advocates of pseudo-science use that can of argumentations: the science is not open-minded enough, blablablabla, there is an evil conspiration/cover-up by science for suppress/dismiss proofs of our claims, blablabla.
We're earing that from the pro-homeopathic people, from the ufologists, from the astrologists, Intelligent Design believers, the anti-vaccination lobby and so on. The list is endless...
In woo-woo land, the rule is:
if you want to put up a pseudo-science claims, just claim also that science is close-minded and has a evil cover-up against it.
It's just laughable.
Come on... Do you really understand what science is? I doubt it... I found your view of science kind of simplistic.