Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Quantum Physics Quackery

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

This what scientists actually think about quantum mechanics.

 

http://www.csicop.org/si/9701/quantum-quackery.html

 

It is written for laypeople but it is a much harder read than the

typical fluff written by new age pseudoscientists on the topic. And

therein lies the crux. Because the actual subject is too difficult

for most laypersons to grasp, they are easily duped by scientific

sounding tomes written by those who also do not understand quantum

mechanics. For one of the most egregious errors I have ever seen in

print, consider this excerpt from a forward to a book on alternative

veterinary medicine. I believe one of the editors was/is a CHA list

member.

 

quoting Victor Stenger at http://www.csicop.org/sb/9806/reality-

check.html

'Even veterinary medicine has not escaped the inroads of holistic

bioenergetics and its phony basis in quantum physics. In

" Introduction to Bioenergetic Medicine, " chapter sixteen of

Complementary and Alternative Veterinary Medicine: Principles and

Practice, Joanne Stefanatos says: " The principles of energy medicine

originate in quantum physics. Bioenergetic medicine is the study of

human and animal bodies as dynamic electromagnetic fields existing in

an electromagnetic environment. Based on Einstein's theories of

quantum physics, these energetic concepts are being integrated into

medicine for a comprehensive approach to disease diagnosis,

prevention, and treatment. "

 

Stefanatos is blissfully unaware that Einstein was deeply opposed to

the very interpretation of quantum mechanics that they attribute to

him and rely upon to support their delusions about a holistic

universe. It was Einstein who destroyed holism by showing that the

whole notion of simultaneous action throughout space, the very

concept of an absolute " now, " is meaningless. He derided the claims

that quantum fields act instantaneously across space as " spooky

action at a distance. " Furthermore, Einstein opposed the

indeterministic trends in quantum physics. He desired a return to

something like the very mechanical picture of Newtonian physics that

these authors decry.'

 

 

 

Stenger is correct as many of you know. Einstein did not believe in

quantum mechanics at all and went to his grave fighting against it.

To attribute the validity of QM in medicine as Einstein approved is

an incredibly ignorant statement and sadly is representative of the

complete and total misunderstanding of quantum physics in the world

of alt. med. Lets leave physics to the physicists. It is biology

that explains both consciousness and medicine. Those of you who like

popular science should read some of the more recent books on the

brain. The evidence for neurobiological view of consciousness is

pretty overwhelming, but you wouldn't know that if spend all your

time reading the words of uninformed pseudoscientists.

 

 

 

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should see what the Skeptical Enquirer has to say about

acupuncture! A few years ago, they published an article that bought

the whole quack-busters schpiel.

 

 

On Sep 30, 2005, at 2:05 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

 

>

>

> I almost fell off my chair when I went to your link at the Skeptical

> Enquirer. For those who have not read this mag it is a most bizarre

> conservative view which has little to do with reality or science. My

> roomate used to get and I cracked up when I read the info it

> contained.

> Let's just say, they would not agree with OM in any of our treatments.

>

> I would suggest that we check out people who have studied this

> rather than

> the obscure. You really know how to crack me up, Todd.

>

> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>

>

>> <

>>

>> cha

>> Quantum Physics Quackery

>> Fri, 30 Sep 2005 08:00:13 -0700

>>

>> This what scientists actually think about quantum mechanics.

>>

>> http://www.csicop.org/si/9701/quantum-quackery.html

>>

>> It is written for laypeople but it is a much harder read than the

>> typical fluff written by new age pseudoscientists on the topic. And

>> therein lies the crux. Because the actual subject is too difficult

>> for most laypersons to grasp, they are easily duped by scientific

>> sounding tomes written by those who also do not understand quantum

>> mechanics. For one of the most egregious errors I have ever seen in

>> print, consider this excerpt from a forward to a book on alternative

>> veterinary medicine. I believe one of the editors was/is a CHA list

>> member.

>>

>> quoting Victor Stenger at http://www.csicop.org/sb/9806/reality-

>> check.html

>> 'Even veterinary medicine has not escaped the inroads of holistic

>> bioenergetics and its phony basis in quantum physics. In

>> " Introduction to Bioenergetic Medicine, " chapter sixteen of

>> Complementary and Alternative Veterinary Medicine: Principles and

>> Practice, Joanne Stefanatos says: " The principles of energy medicine

>> originate in quantum physics. Bioenergetic medicine is the study of

>> human and animal bodies as dynamic electromagnetic fields existing in

>> an electromagnetic environment. Based on Einstein's theories of

>> quantum physics, these energetic concepts are being integrated into

>> medicine for a comprehensive approach to disease diagnosis,

>> prevention, and treatment. "

>>

>> Stefanatos is blissfully unaware that Einstein was deeply opposed to

>> the very interpretation of quantum mechanics that they attribute to

>> him and rely upon to support their delusions about a holistic

>> universe. It was Einstein who destroyed holism by showing that the

>> whole notion of simultaneous action throughout space, the very

>> concept of an absolute " now, " is meaningless. He derided the claims

>> that quantum fields act instantaneously across space as " spooky

>> action at a distance. " Furthermore, Einstein opposed the

>> indeterministic trends in quantum physics. He desired a return to

>> something like the very mechanical picture of Newtonian physics that

>> these authors decry.'

>>

>>

>>

>> Stenger is correct as many of you know. Einstein did not believe in

>> quantum mechanics at all and went to his grave fighting against it.

>> To attribute the validity of QM in medicine as Einstein approved is

>> an incredibly ignorant statement and sadly is representative of the

>> complete and total misunderstanding of quantum physics in the world

>> of alt. med. Lets leave physics to the physicists. It is biology

>> that explains both consciousness and medicine. Those of you who like

>> popular science should read some of the more recent books on the

>> brain. The evidence for neurobiological view of consciousness is

>> pretty overwhelming, but you wouldn't know that if spend all your

>> time reading the words of uninformed pseudoscientists.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> Chinese Herbs

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After checking out the Skeptical Enquirer, my favorite quote is:

" Treatment is effected by a man in a white coat calling himself a

'doctor of acupuncture.' He inserts needles without pain. His office

is adorned with posters of human bodies replete with strange lines

and Chinese hieroglyphics. Here, then, are all the ingredients for a

strong placebo cure. Many of the treatments of alternative medicine

depend upon such placebo action for their healing reputation. "

 

-Danny Johnson

 

On Sep 30, 2005, at 2:15 PM, wrote:

 

> You should see what the Skeptical Enquirer has to say about

> acupuncture! A few years ago, they published an article that bought

> the whole quack-busters schpiel.

>

>

> On Sep 30, 2005, at 2:05 PM, mike Bowser wrote:

>

>

>>

>>

>> I almost fell off my chair when I went to your link at the Skeptical

>> Enquirer. For those who have not read this mag it is a most bizarre

>> conservative view which has little to do with reality or science. My

>> roomate used to get and I cracked up when I read the info it

>> contained.

>> Let's just say, they would not agree with OM in any of our

>> treatments.

>>

>> I would suggest that we check out people who have studied this

>> rather than

>> the obscure. You really know how to crack me up, Todd.

>>

>> Mike W. Bowser, L Ac

>>

>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This is a great description of what one scientist

thinks, specifically, of new-age extrapolations

of quantum mechanics theory. The science is well

appreciated. However, Stenger goes way beyond

science. Besides denying new age non-science, he

denies God/god/Yahweh/Allah/Great Spirit,

Visions, religious experience, Divine

Inspiration, and the involvement of any

Intelligent Design in the origins of life. This

must, and will, color his interpretations of the

world around him - and his science.

 

 

--- < wrote:

 

> This what scientists actually think about

> quantum mechanics.

>

> http://www.csicop.org/si/9701/quantum-quackery.html

 

 

 

 

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, " J. Lynn Detamore "

<lynndetamore>

wrote:

>

> This is a great description of what one scientist

> thinks, specifically, of new-age extrapolations

> of quantum mechanics theory. The science is well

> appreciated. However, Stenger goes way beyond

> science. Besides denying new age non-science, he

> denies God/god/Yahweh/Allah/Great Spirit,

> Visions, religious experience, Divine

> Inspiration, and the involvement of any

> Intelligent Design in the origins of life. This

> must, and will, color his interpretations of the

> world around him - and his science.

 

 

It is not one scientists opinion. it is the consensus of most.

 

And I, like most scientists, agree with him on all these other points, as well.

 

I won't even dignify the plug for intelligent design with a response. I will

only point out to

those who didn't realize it that the acupuncture profession is clearly dominated

by those

who have much in common with religious fundamentalists. It is for this reason,

I have left

my teaching position and given up my license. I may still practice and teach

chinese

herbology, but I cannot in good faith (no pun intended) be part of a profession

that has a

religious worldview. At a recent graduation, a parent of one of my students

observed that

being an acupuncturist was like joining a religion. I knew my days were

numbered when I

heard that. I am deeply saddened by this trend which has infected American

politics and

will eventually be the downfall of our country. I urge those who have not yet

formed their

positions on these things to think very carefully about who you are and how you

want to

present yourself to the world. The chinese themselves never perceived the world

or their

medicine in this religious way. It is an american bastardization of the actual

tradition and

one that is highly offensive to every native Chinese herbalist I have ever met.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but I cannot in good faith (no pun intended) be part of a profession that has a

religious worldview.

>>>> you hit the nail in the head.When medicine becomes faithmedicine the

discussion is closed. The outcomes has already been decided.

 

 

 

 

Oakland, CA 94609

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I think J. Lynn has a good point here, Todd. Stenger's point

implies what has become a dogma in the scientific community, in other

words, that one cannot believe in G-d or spirit and be a reputable

scientist. As Richard Dawkins recently stated, " all believers are

fools and imbeciles " .

 

I think the present discourse on Darwinism and 'intelligent design'

is like the blue states/red states mentality that is dividing this

country. It only sees black and white, and doesn't acknowledge the

complexity of human beings and all the grey areas between the

extremes. I would hate to see this type of mentality dominate the

discourse in our profession as well.

 

One example that was recently discussed on CHA was the stem cell

debate. It was noted that Israel as a country and many of the

orthodox rabbis support stem-cell research and find no conflict with

Jewish law. Many religious Christians and Muslims also support stem-

cell research as well. I am not familiar with the Hindu and Buddhist

point of view here, I'll have to research that more.

 

 

On Oct 10, 2005, at 6:20 PM, wrote:

 

> , " J. Lynn Detamore "

> <lynndetamore>

> wrote:

>

>>

>> This is a great description of what one scientist

>> thinks, specifically, of new-age extrapolations

>> of quantum mechanics theory. The science is well

>> appreciated. However, Stenger goes way beyond

>> science. Besides denying new age non-science, he

>> denies God/god/Yahweh/Allah/Great Spirit,

>> Visions, religious experience, Divine

>> Inspiration, and the involvement of any

>> Intelligent Design in the origins of life. This

>> must, and will, color his interpretations of the

>> world around him - and his science.

>>

>

>

> It is not one scientists opinion. it is the consensus of most.

>

> And I, like most scientists, agree with him on all these other

> points, as well.

>

> I won't even dignify the plug for intelligent design with a

> response. I will only point out to

> those who didn't realize it that the acupuncture profession is

> clearly dominated by those

> who have much in common with religious fundamentalists. It is for

> this reason, I have left

> my teaching position and given up my license. I may still practice

> and teach chinese

> herbology, but I cannot in good faith (no pun intended) be part of

> a profession that has a

> religious worldview. At a recent graduation, a parent of one of my

> students observed that

> being an acupuncturist was like joining a religion. I knew my days

> were numbered when I

> heard that. I am deeply saddened by this trend which has infected

> American politics and

> will eventually be the downfall of our country. I urge those who

> have not yet formed their

> positions on these things to think very carefully about who you are

> and how you want to

> present yourself to the world. The chinese themselves never

> perceived the world or their

> medicine in this religious way. It is an american bastardization

> of the actual tradition and

> one that is highly offensive to every native Chinese herbalist I

> have ever met.

>

>

 

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...