Five things that modern science cannot explain:

[truedelphi]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by eppur_se_muova (a host of the Science group).

Everything from the placebo effect to the skipping stones of Death Valley.

http://www.sciencegymnasium.com/2013/12/5-mind-blowing-things-science-still.html

[NoOneMan]

1. Placebo

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2200277/Evolution-explain-placebo-effect-Human-immune-developed-mechanism-save-energy.html


Not scientific process, per se, but we'll figure it all out eventually to the point it stops working.

[longship]

2. Not science... Mystery mongering.

AFAIK, all these things are well understood.

This is pseudoscientific claptrap.

Placebo? Long ago figured out.
The skipping stones? Figured out.
The Biagong pipes? Figured out.
Klerksdorp spheres? Figured out.
Blank spot in the universe? Sheesh! There is no blank spot.

Google is your friend.

[Maraya1969]

4. Placebo is not "Long ago figured out"

There are still different theories depending on your beliefs.

[longship]

7. "depending on your beliefs"

But not the science.

Alas. Placebo is the null effect. In other words, doing nothing.

If people want to believe that a placebo can cure cancer, or malaria, or diabetes, etc., should people be able to market it claiming that they believe that the placebo can cure? Does belief really trump the science?

That would be unethical, I would think. And it is! Unless you go to an alternative medicine practitioner, who is likely unlicensed, uneducated, and often pitch their woo on the basis of the claim that "science does not understand the placebo effect."

Here's some links from Science Based Medicine Blog (with links to actual research):
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-placebo-effect/
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/placebo-effects-revisited/
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/placebo-again/

There's much more available. Try going to PubMed.

So, alas, science does understand placebo.

[bananas]

32. No, placebo is not "the null effect", placebo is not "doing nothing"

In scientific research, "doing nothing" is called "no treatment", not "placebo".

There are also well documented differences between active placebos and passive placebos, even though most placebo-controlled studies use only passive placebos.

Even color, shape, and size of the pill affects the effectiveness of both "real" drugs prospective treatments as well as placebos.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo

<snip>

A placebo described as a muscle relaxant will cause muscle relaxation and, if described as the opposite, muscle tension.[47] A placebo presented as a stimulant will have this effect on heart rhythm, and blood pressure, but, when administered as a depressant, the opposite effect.(48) The perceived consumption of caffeine has been reported to cause similar effects even when decaffeinated coffee is consumed,(49,50) although a 2003 study found only limited support for this.(51) Placebos represented as alcohol can cause intoxication(52) and sensorimotor impairment.(53) Perceived ergogenic aids can increase endurance,(54) speed(55) and weight-lifting ability,(56) leading to the question of whether placebos should be allowed in sport competition.(57) Placebos can help smokers quit.(58) Perceived allergens that are not truly allergenic can cause allergies.(59) Interventions such as psychotherapy can have placebo effects.(60)pp 164–173 The effect has been observed in the transplantation of human embryonic neurons into the brains of those with advanced Parkinson's disease.(61)

Because placebos are dependent upon perception and expectation, various factors that change the perception can increase the magnitude of the placebo response. For example, studies have found that the color and size of the placebo pill makes a difference, with "hot-colored" pills working better as stimulants while "cool-colored" pills work better as depressants. Capsules rather than tablets seem to be more effective, and size can make a difference.(62) One researcher has found that big pills increase the effect(63) while another has argued that the effect is dependent upon cultural background.(64) More pills,(65) branding,(66) past experience,(67) and high price(68) increase the effect of placebo pills. Injection(69) and acupuncture(18) have larger effect than pills. Proper adherence to placebos is associated with decreased mortality.(70)

<snip>

[longship]

33. Fine! If you get malaria, treat it with a placebo.

See how that works out for ya.

[bananas]

37. You've likely been treated with placebos many times

Doctors admit prescribing placebos
A study in the January 2008 issue of the Journal of General Internal Medicine found that 45 percent of Chicago, Illinois, internists report they have used a placebo for patients at some time during their clinical practice.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/dailydose/11/27/placebo.ethics/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

U.S. Doctors Regularly Prescribe Real Drugs As Placebo Treatments, Study Claims
Oct. 25, 2008 — Many rheumatologists and general internal medicine physicians in the US say they regularly prescribe "placebo treatments" including active drugs such as sedatives and antibiotics, but rarely admit they are doing so to their patients, according to a study on bmj.com.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081023195216.htm

Placebo effective: UK doctors admit to prescribing inactive substances
Published time: March 21, 2013
An overwhelming majority of British doctors admitted to having prescribed placebo treatments to their patients, new research reveals. They count on a psychological benefit or seek to reassure their clients on their state of heath.
http://rt.com/news/uk-doctors-prescribe-placebo-585/

[longship]

39. Not for malaria, they don't.

Also, it is unethical for a physician to prescribe placebo according to the standards of care. Also lying to a patient is against the standard of care. Not saying it's not done, but if I found out my doctor was doing either, I'd sue him for malpractice. And I'd win.

Placebos do not treat anything. It's the intervention by the doctor which provides the placebo, not the fucking sugar pill. And that only works for psychogenic, non-specific, and self-limiting symptoms. Real disease like malaria, infectious diseases, infections, diabetes, fucking cancer, etc do not respond to placebos, let alone a cordial bed manner. Some symptom relief may be provided by the interaction, but unless real medicine is provided, you're going to be in a world of hurt and morbidity if you just get placebo.

So stop pretending that placebo does something to heal, because when things come down to life and death, it does not.

So by all means, tell your doctor to treat you with placebo for your malaria. Then, buh-bye.

[bananas]

63. Wow - you've said so many things that are flat-out wrong

I'll just leave you with some reading:

http://listverse.com/2013/02/16/10-crazy-facts-about-the-placebo-effect/

10 Crazy Facts About the Placebo Effect
DAVID DECHER FEBRUARY 16, 2013

<snip>

[truedelphi]

79. Thank you for carrying on such a good fight.

And for your link.

BTW you might really enjoy the video that Du'er Zeemike provides for us in his reply number 75.

[zeemike]

11. Coming up with an explanation is not figuring it out

You need evidence and can demonstrate how it works...then you can say you have figured it out.
Anyone can come up with an explanation for anything...even why the earth is flat.

[longship]

17. Straw man.

Read the links in my post.(#7) Science is acutely aware of what placebo does and does not do.

It is not necessary to know precisely how it works, since psychology is very complex. But what it can do and cannot do is extremely well documented.

If you don't believe me, try a placebo for malaria and report how that works out for you. Or diabetes. Or cancer. Or smallpox. Or any other maladies on the hind side of non-specific pain, the discomfort of the common cold, or psychogenic symptoms, etc.

Placebo is a null treatment, meaning that in a placebo arm of a study the only treatment is the act of intervention by itself, in spite of the fact that nothing active is given. As psychology is complex, this has been known for many decades which is why drug tests are always blinded and placebo controlled.

Placebo is doing nothing other than the act of the intervention itself. It is incapable of curing anything beyond those non-specific, psychogenic, and self-limiting symptoms. That is well studied, too.

For details, see PubMed.

[truedelphi]

24. Actually there have been cases where the placebo effect helped people with cancer.

Larry Dorsey MD, offers up one very peculiar case in one of his early books. A patient was suffering from an extremely aggressive form of cancer. Such that you could run your hands across his body and feel the tumors.

Doctors were not giving him long to live, maybe weeks, maybe a month.
The patient found out about some new protocol that was supposed to be totally effective at curing cancer. (Ketamine, maybe? I don't really remember the substance that was supposed to have these remarkable attributes.)

Well, the patient's personal doctor got him some of the substance, figuring that since he had only a short time to live, what harm could it do.

But remarkably, after it was applied to his body, the tumors stopped growing and then began to atrophy. Within a week or ten days, he was tumor free.

The patient became so healthy he went back to his usual lifestyle and was even flying his planes again.

Then one day he read in a newspaper article that the substance he had been given, that had been believed to hold such promise for eliminating cancerous tumors, was bogus, as now experts realized it had no such abilities.

So within a short time, all the many tumors came back. His doctor confronted him with the news that there was a new improved version of the original miracle substance, and this time, applications of the miracle substance were made, but this time, unknown to the patient, all that was used was water. Just plain water.

And once again, the tumors fell away and the man became healthy. However within some months he found out that there was no new and improved version of the substance, and he again had the tumors aggressively come back, and he then died a short time later.

[longship]

30. If you get cancer I do not recommend that you give that a try.

Actually, this sounds like bull-pucky.

Citation please...

[zeemike]

27. Well I don't know anything about the placebo effect.

and really don't care.
But you may have an explanation on why those rocks move, but until you can demonstrate it you don't have proof...and that is different because it is a physical thing and you should be able to recreate it if you have it solved.
The problem I have is that some claim things that they cannot prove by demonstrating it...and that is not the scientific way.

The problem with things like the placebo effect is when they try it it sometimes does appear to work and so they must fine an explanation of why...but an explanation is not proof of anything but that you can find a way to explain it.
And there are lots of things in science like that...but ego makes them want to say they know all about it instead of simply saying they don't know why...and that is a problem with science and has been for a while...where as admitting you don't know the answer spurs on discovery.

Here is an example...the Memory of Water...

[longship]

31. Gees! Not the memory of water rubbish again.

Mark Crislip, infectious disease MD:

Homeopathy is the archetypal alternative medical beer goggles; it doesn’t alter the reality of disease, just the perception of it.

Read about it here:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/homeopathy-ramblings/

Unlike many here, I have actually taken coursework in quantum theory. There is nothing in quantum theory that says that the coherence exhibited at the atomic level is extant at the macro level. Also, there is no plausible mechanism for anything that could be likened to "memory" can be attributed to anything happening at the atomic, let alone the molecular, level.

These people are using people's ignorance of what quantum theory is, along with its so-called mysterious effects, to foist patently pseudo-scientific rubbish on people.

Those who actually have an actual education in physics could tell anybody that memory of water is utter poppycock. That won't stop the same people from repeating it over and over and over again.

It's still moonshine.

[zeemike]

44. Well really you make my case.

when you say that anyone who studies physics will tell you...when that is not the case at all.
Physic does not have the answers to all things...far from it.
But some claim that it is all figured out and they have all the answers and they don't...they have theory's to explain things...and a theory is just a theory.

And even water is not as simple as you think...for instance this...The Fourth Phase of Water: Dr. Gerald Pollack.

[longship]

45. The difference is that physicists do not just make shit up.

And they have this thing called peer review which is kind of a check and balance.

So, where is the peer reviewed paper from Nature, Science, Physical Review, or some other science journal that demonstrates, either experimentally or theoretically, this water memory? After all, this would be big science news, maybe even Nobel territory.

That's right. There isn't any such paper because water memory is just a special pleading argument for homeopathy, which itself is the lamest of pseudoscience.

[zeemike]

46. You mean like string theory?

They have lots of evidence for that I guess...with peer review experiments to show it to be a fact and not just made up to explain things that they have no explanation for.

But who the hell would dare try to duplicate his experiments when it has already ben condemned as woo...If that was my profession I would think twice about doing it.
Which goes back to what I see is the failures of science...the pressure of intimidation against anyone who challenges the prevailing wisdom....ego is at stake.

[longship]

47. It's condemned as woo because there is no supporting science.

There is no research published to support any claim of water memory, let alone a mechanism by which there could be water memory.

And Strings were a promising field of study. Sometimes these paths do not pan out, sometimes they do. The difference is that strings have plausibility and water memory is just made up shit, special pleading to justify abject quackery, homeopathy.

So where are the water memory papers?

[zeemike]

48. And that IS the point...they are condemned as woo.

not just saying that there is insufficient evidence to show it but condemned...which it the intimidation factor...no one in the science field wants to be condemned.

And why is string theory plausable?...that there are other dimensions of reality and that matter can exist in two places at the same time?...why is the memory of water woo and string theory which says things even more implausible not?
Where are the papers showing that these other dimensions exist and that matter exists in two places at the same time?...or the existence of a God particle which created the universe?

It amazes me that one thing can be woo, and the other solid science.

[longship]

49. This is a very common trait of woo proponents.

* They conveniently ignore the science and make up their own.
* They malign science by saying it doesn't know everything.
* Then, they joyfully cite science when they perceive that it backs up their falsified claims. (It doesn't.)

It is a puzzlement why they do not see the problem with these tactics.

Meanwhile, science moves on, plugging away at some very difficult problems while the woo folks are still stuck in -- in some cases -- 200 year old falsified stuff, for instance homeopathy.

Science sees all this and just shake their heads.

The intimidation is that science is not easy. It's based on mathematics. If the people advocating woo would bother to learn actual science they'd see why their hypotheses are not taken seriously and why some otherwise seemingly far out hypotheses, like strings, are taken seriously.

About strings...

Albert Einstein had to come to grips with a whole new mathematics to solve General Relativity. It is one of the most astounding advances in mathematical physics ever. The string theorists are attempting to do something similar. Just as GR added dimensions to the universe, the string model does so also. Nobody can detect the higher dimensions in strings anymore than they can see them in GR. We only see the effects of them. The string model is very complex and difficult. Myself, I believe William of Okham's razor gives strings a big shave. There are quite a few physicists who would agree with that.

But string theorists still work under the science methodology. They are accountable to the checks and balances. Woo adherents do none of that. They snipe from the sidelines and they still want to be taken seriously. That's why they are not. That, plus the fact that their claims have been long since falsified.

I'm done here.

[zeemike]

50. Saying that science does not know everything is not maligning it.

That is a factual statement, and the fact that they see it as malingering science is the problem exactly.
But I am way to tired to get into it with you...I need a nap.

[truedelphi]

70. And what was the name of that physicist who said, back in 1898, or 1899, that

Anything worth any type of serious thought had already been discovered with regards to physics. A lot of people on this topic seem to fall in line with that person's ideas.

Of course, just a smidge of time later, someone named Albert Einstein stood that proclamation on its head.

And people are still trying to determine new things regarding physics.
Here is yet another new theory of "everything" -
http://www.ted.com/talks/garrett_lisi_on_his_theory_of_everything.html

[zeemike]

71. I think it is a problem of ego.

It seems when they are emerged in a field where people are considered smart they have to protect that image, and so they can never admit they don't know it all.

And watching that TED talk shows that they don't really know shit when it comes down to it. And brings to mind the idea that the more we do know the more we realize how little we really do know about the nature of our existence.

Lately I have been interested in the new theory of the electric universe...which blows much of what we know about the cosmology of the universe out of the water...and explainers things that are unexplained...

[truedelphi]

74. I'd love a link to that new theory.

If you don't want to post it, feel free to Pm me.

And yes there are big drawbacks to the TED talk whose link I provided. For one thing, we will never figure out "reality" when we discount the other section of "reality."

So much work on earth gets accomplished in the non physical realm.

One example that I always refer to is the major escalation in tensions between the governments of India and Pakistan. I can't remember if it was 1998 or maybe as recent as 2002, but these escalations were so serious and so severe, that the US government got all their people out of the embassy in India, and almost all their people out of Pakistan.

The crisis was mentioned on Monday Tuesday Wednesday of that week, and then overnight it was resolved. But no comments were ever made on the Nightly News that I heard that week. It simply was no longer discussed!

And regarding, "The Right Stuff," I have always loved Tom Wolfe for putting that section of the book about the aboriginals and their Dreamtime music prayers that they employed while our spacecraft needed help.

[zeemike]

75. Sure no problem.

You may find this interisting...it goes a long way to explain many things both scientific and historical. And it is gaining acceptance in many circles.

&feature=share&list=PLwOAYhBuU3UfvhvcT1lZA6KbSdh0K2EpH

[truedelphi]

77. Thank you greatly. When I saw the depiction of the serpent that eats its own tail,

ZeeMike, I was reminded of how the Conquistadors and the monks an d priests that brought Europe's Inquisition over to the New World destroyed so many of the ancient South American tribal people's histories and science papers. All because they viewed any depiction of a serpent as being related to artwork encouraged by Satan. So all these wonderful texts and illustrations were burned, as they all had their margins embellished with that depiction of the serpent!

Can't finish it tonight, as I am falling asleep, but will tackle the rest of it tomorrow. Very wonderful film.

[mathematic]

72. A patent office administrator said that about inventions, not science

And he didn't even say it!

"Everything that can be invented has been invented" has been attributed to Charles Holland Duell but he never actually said that, or anything like that.

Physicists and other scientists were well aware of the gaps in scientific knowledge in 1900. In particular, in the example you refer to, the photoelectric effect was discovered in 1887 and explained in 1905 (by Einstein). In physics, the late 1800s were about working out the consequences of Maxwell's unifying work on thermodynamics (1865).

1900 also saw Hilbert's problems, the famous and influential list of 23 unsolved problems in mathematics. One called for the axiomization of physics. Much of 20th century mathematics can trace back to solving these problems. Incidentally, Hilbert was either an independent discoverer or co-discoverer of general relativity. Mathematicians like to give him joint credit with Einstein.

[Jim__]

73. It is a disputed quote from Lord Kelvin.

From wikiquotes:

There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.

• Although reportedly from an address to the British Association for the Advancement of Science (1900), the quote is only duplicated without citation to any primary source in various books, including Superstring : A theory of everything? (1988) by Paul Davies and Julian Brown; also in Rebuilding the Matrix : Science and Faith in the 21st Century (2003) by Denis Alexander. To be more credible, a source prior to the 1980s and close to 1900 is needed.
  
  
• Confusion may be due to Michelson who made a similar quote whilst mentioning Lord Kelvin: In 1894, Albert A. Michelson remarked that in physics there were no more fundamental discoveries to be made. Quoting Lord Kelvin, he continued, “An eminent physicist remarked that the future truths of physical science are to be looked for in the sixth place of decimals.

[Lordquinton]

36. The Memory of water:

POOP!

Lots and lots of poop. And pee, you're drinking dinosaur pee.

That's what the memory of water has in it (well, some of it, water has an interesting life)

[Maraya1969]

51. I went to a fire walking seminar once and at the end we all walked on hot red coals.

That started as a huge bonfire and burnt down during the evening so we knew it was hot coals, (and you could tell from the heat coming from them).

I was scared but I remembered that I was supposed to walk with the intention of going to the other side safely. And then I walked. And I was so excited I walked again and again.

Do not try and tell me that mind over matter is a fairy tail.

[longship]

53. Anybody can firewall.

ANYBODY!

It has to do with heat conductivity of hot coals. It's physics along with a fairly simple technique. One walks quickly. The coals have to be properly prepared.

I would never try it because if one does not do it correctly one can severely burn the bottoms of ones feet.

Read about it at the Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewalking
Explanation, and citations when it has gone horribly wrong when self-help guru kooks convinced people that it was mind over matter and they didn't do it right.

Here's a better explanation: http://www.skepdic.com/firewalk.html

It has nothing to do with mind over matter. Or, fairies. Or, unicorns.
It's just how the universe is constructed.

This myth is busted.

[Maraya1969]

54. It takes a special mindset by the person who is walking and if you do not have that

mindset you will be burned. Any person who just has to run through hot coals because of an emergency or something not planned will get burned. If you touch a hot coal to the bottom of your feet you will get burned.

There are physical explanations why a person can do this and not get burned but it depends on the state of mind of that person. I guarantee you if you think you would get burned you will.

[longship]

55. Nope. Heat conductivity.

It's merely a matter of not letting the coals contact your skin long enough to transmit the heat.

I won't presume that you clicked the links, so here's an analogy.

You preheat your oven to 450 degrees and yet when you put your hands in you don't get burned. Why? Because air has very low heat conductivity. If you touch the metal grate though, which has high conductivity, OUCH!

Coals have low heat conductivity so if you move fast, it will not burn you.

I have no doubt that it takes some considerable mental trust to try it. But it has nothing to do with mind over matter. It's simply physics.

I don't suppose that you will be convinced by this. That's okay. I just wouldn't waste too much time or money on somebody who claims that it is anything other than a technique that exploits particular facts of nature which are true for anybody no matter their mental state, other than overcoming the inherent fear to try it.

[Maraya1969]

59. After you do it I will believe you. Talk is easy and often filled with crap.

[Chemisse]

66. Good analogy, and good explanation.

[truedelphi]

80. At least one devoted fire walker would agree with you.

I forget the guy' s name but he often attended those "motivational seminars" and retreats where fire walking occurs.

He couldn't understand how with all the many numbers of people who safely get through fire walks, that anyone would ever dispute the idea of "mind over matter" and how it is involved with safely surviving the walk.

Then one week he injured his leg. He could only slowly hobble.

And since he couldn't speed through the walk, the callouses on his feet were not able to withstand the heat of the fire, and he ended up with burned feet.

[longship]

81. Well, my problem is not lack of callous.

It's very weak ankles and general inability to walk very well, something I've lived with all my life. I have twice broken a foot seriously enough to warrant weeks in a cast,both times while negotiating stairs, once ending in surgery to correct traumatic arthritis.

So, no. I would not try fire walking even though I understand the science behind why anybody can do it and the FACT that it has nothing to do with mind over matter, whatever that means.

A science education helps one understand some things, including the fire walking scam.

Now, a bed of nails? I am all over that, and have done it many times, including the time I did it with three others sitting atop of me while laying on very sharp nails.

Physics works. Mind over matter, not so much.

[Exultant Democracy]

15. Yes this is not a very good list.

[A Little Weird]

3. Interesting

But I've read about the sailing rocks and the Baigon pipes and they're pretty much solved.

The moving rocks are pretty cool -
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/How-Do-Death-Valleys-Sailing-Stones-Move-Themselves-Across-the-Desert-210843681.html

The pipes were discovered to actually be fossilized tree root castings. Sorry I don't have a link for that one.

[reACTIONary]

8. The moving rocks are pretty cool - and what make them cooler...

...for me is that I work with the guy who discovered the answer! Thnx for the post!

[d_r]

9. here you go

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4181

[Maraya1969]

5. I apologize for one person's rude behavior toward you. I like the article.

And whether or not the stuff has been proved it is all new to me. So thank you.

[liberal_at_heart]

40. I know. I wondering just how many people I'm going to have to put on ignore today.

Every single thread I have opened today has had people being mean, nasty, and rude. Maybe I should just take a break from the whole damn site for a while.

[Maraya1969]

52. Oh it has happened to me too and I bet quite a few others.

I think the people do not use the same etiquette on the internet that they do in their every day life. I have been guilty of it myself. But I am trying to make sure that I do not hurt people's feelings anymore. It just shows how upset I am with me and with me is where I should be looking for the answer to my problems.

"Everything that is not love is fear."

[Vashta Nerada]

6. They have been figured out by science.

[alp227]

10. This thread should be locked. This is creationist type crap.

Creationists say science doesn't explain the parts of evolution that go over their heads.

So here are some links explaining these things:

Placebo effect article on RationalWiki

The Klerksdorp spheres are explained in article Out-of-place artifact on Rationalwiki.

LiveScience has an article about those moving stones.

Skeptoid did a show about the Baigong pipes.

[truedelphi]

26. Thanks for the link to the moving rocks.

It actually mentioned the work of Jim McAllister, the father of a close friend of mine.

And I believe that by the 1980's, Jim had home movies of the rocks actually moving.
He loved Death Valley, and didn't go there only in the summer, but in all types of weather.

As far as creationists, I don't hold with them. I thought the list was interesting, and I knew if posted here in science forum, someone would have some answers.

But I also don't believe in total as modern day scientists do about evolution. I totally believe that there is no missing link, and that humankind is from its own special part of the Tree of Life, and not connected to primates. (Same belief that the Native Americans possess.)

[gcomeau]

35. The genetic evidence conclusively refutes your belief

In particular the nested hierarchical structure of endogenous retroviral insertions in primates is ironclad evidence of common ancestry among the entire group. Including humans.


Being skeptical of that in this day and age is on par with having reservations about the theoretical possibility of this heavier than air flight thing people keep talking about. While standing on a runway. As aircraft fly over your head.

It's a settled issue.

[truedelphi]

57. So you are saying that this endogenous retroviral insertion makes humans like primates.

At least according to the experts.

So why is it decided on that this one insertion is what makes us similar, in terms of common ancestor? It certainly doesn't make us so similar that you or I would marry a baboon, or chimpanzee. (At least I wouldn't, not on most days. But I suppose if I met a baboon that was rich enough and charming enough, it might work.)

Anyway both you and I live in a society where many humans don't even see other humans as worthy of life. Witness how the Nazis behaved in the 1940's, or how the American government has trained its military to behave ever since.

So if I don't accept how the definition of "relationship, genetically" and common ancestry should come from an endogenous retroviral insertion, I am not sure that that means I am naive or stupid.

[gcomeau]

60. Insertions. Plural.

And no they don't "make us like primates". They are ironclad evidence that we share common ancestry with the other primates.

Here, I wrote this a long while back:

http://duelingdogma.blogspot.com/2010/05/proving-evolution-post-5-non-coding.html

Just scan down to the section on ERVs for the explanation.

If you want the really simplified presentation, ERVs are genetic traces left by retroviral infections. Sometimes those infections get into a germline cell and then they get passed down from generation to generation. sometimes they get spread so widely after a number of generations that every single member of a species carries them and they become fixed. Every member of the species after that is also going to have them.


They're not features of design, they're the fingerprints left behind by long ago infections.


Now let's say you were grading a class, and you had three students turn in massive final reports that look an awful lot like they were plagiarized from the same source.

You notice entire cited passages are identical. Word for word. But then they say "well you can't fault us for happening to cite the same sources! We're writing about the same subject after all!"

You notice the page formatting is even the same. And then they say "well we all looked at the same standard school references on how we should format things!"

Etc, etc.

This is the kind of bullshit creationists always pull when all the other massive genetic evidence is pointed out. But ERVs aren't like that. They're not coherent source material anyone would use to put together the report. They're not standard rules of formatting or presentation.

They're the coffee stain from when someone was eating their lunch while writing the original.

And oops, the idiots photocopied entire pages of the original and there's the exact same coffee stain on page 14 in every one of them.

There is no explaining that away. Our plagiarists are busted.


Just as there is no explaining away common identical ERV insertions carried in exactly identical locations in germline cells among multiple species. Evolution deniers are busted. Those insertions came from a common ancestral source that was the original infection point.

[truedelphi]

61. You're making a nice analogy. One I can follow.

My last class in biology was 1967. Long before this ERV insertions stuff became understood? (I believe?)

I still feel emotionally opposed to the idea that we humans share some common ancestor. I keep reaching for the keyboard to tell you you are wrong, but the "coffee stain" part of your description made something clearer.

So why are we human beings talking, building things, arranging entire societies, getting in rockets and walking on the moon, and monkeys are just sitting there out in the open, scratching their behinds?

[gcomeau]

64. Well...

My last class in biology was 1967. Long before this ERV insertions stuff became understood? (I believe?)

Yep...

So why are we human beings talking, building things, arranging entire societies, getting in rockets and walking on the moon, and monkeys are just sitting there out in the open, scratching their behinds?

Because the evolutionary branch taken by our ancestors for the millions of years since the population that eventually evolved into humans diverged from the rest of the group experienced mutations and development that was more focused on things like higher reasoning and facilitating tool use than those experienced on the other evolutionary branches that resulted in those other species...

Things just worked out that way.

[truedelphi]

65. Of course, there sometimes seems to be an entire branch of human beings who

Simply sit around in the open, scratching their behinds. So perhaps I shouldn't fault those darn monkeys!

Anyway I enjoyed the biology lesson. Thank you for it.

[geckosfeet]

12. Lets start with gravity. Sure we have the inverse square law to descibe

it but how it works? Still a question mark as far as I know.

[truedelphi]

28. I got an "A" on the electronics quiz:

Question: How does electricity work?

My answer: On account of how the littlest of elves and fairies propel the energy around.

It is as good an answer as any other. Protons and electrons, okay, but then what about positive and negative charge? We in the 21st Century are stuck inside the logic of a box we have created in terms of how we view various phenomena.

Psychics state that the people in other realities such as Atlantis utilized the energy of crystals to do everything that needed doing - propulsion, lighting,heating, cooling etc. We haven't a clue about this and would even dismiss the idea of crystal energy as being absurd and ridiculous.

One thing that remains beyond scientific understanding is clairvoyance. Yet one of the psychic members who went along with Rolling Thunder's traveling show used to be listened to by various people at the FAA and at Amtrak. On one occasion he was allowed in to look over diagrams of the railways that made up hundreds of miles of the Illinois Central RR. He knew that a rail was about to come loose, and then a train would be derailed. With his looking through the books on the rails, he located the problematic rail, and the RR officials stopped rail traffic on that part of the rail line, and went out and repaired that rail, avoiding a calamity. Where does that sort of information come from - that some people just KNOW?

[geckosfeet]

38. Bull hockey. Biggest load o crap i have been subjected to in quite some time.

Nasa sends spacecraft around the universe based on scientific understanding of natures behavior. Not woo and crystals.

[longship]

41. Hoo boy! Where to start...

That was an "A"???

Electricity and magnetism...
Try on this on your next quiz:


That's how electricity and magnetism work. And light. And radio. And X-rays. And Gamma rays.

Of course, I could post Einstein's relativistic equations from his 1905 paper, but I think Maxwell will keep you busy for a while.

About your answer on the electronics quiz... I would have marked you wrong and called you into my office to ask you why you weren't taking the course work seriously.

[truedelphi]

56. I went to a rather small school and had already written a physics paper on all that.

I think my teacher realized what I knew and didn't know.
But to explain it in one or two English sentences, let's have you do that.
I have been trying to figure out how to do that for a long time.

[longship]

58. Fine.

Tell me again how Atlantis has anything to do with this.

I rest my case.

Thanks.

[Thirties Child]

76. Yes!

[Betsy Ross]

13. Yeah, but what about the tides

and whatever Billo was ranting about.

[awoke_in_2003]

14. the tide goes in, the tide goes out

you can't explain it

[Scootaloo]

18. And fucking magnets!

How do they work?

[TekGryphon]

16. The one and only comment on that page does a great job debunking it:

1. placebo effect is explainable, partially because part of the symptoms are psychosomatic.
2. The moving stones were explained years ago, it's not just wind, but rain, and freezing temperatures. Portions of the lakebed freeze into a floating ice sheet, and the wind pushes the rocks and ice together. The weight of the rocks is partially lifted by the ice, and the winds in that area are quite strong.
3. the "pipes" have been explained, they are fossilized tree root casts, and not so metallic as implied.
4. The spheres are mineral concretions, and their balance was never tested by NASA, the rotating is a misquote of a museum curator who said they rotated in their cases due to numerous tremors from nearby gold mine blasting.
5. Is completely made up. What was found was a "cold spot" in the cosmic microwave background radiation, which has several competing explanations, one theory is a void, an area with less matter (stars, galaxies, dust, gas) so, less galaxies in that direction was predicted, a dip was found, but then found not to correlate well with the direction of the cold spot. There is no huge empty hole found.
This article is full of inaccuracies, misquotes, and wild speculation turned around into "proven evidence" -

[iamthebandfanman]

20. the pipes...

the wiki page for it says the following

"According to an 2003 article in the Xinmin Weekly,[4] Chinese scientists using atomic emission spectroscopy found the Baigong Pipes to contain organic matter of plant origin. In addition, the news article also stated that tree rings were found in sections of these rock formations and, as a result, they were judged to be fossil trees or tree roots. However, like many other aspects of the Baigong Pipes, this news report remains unsupported by either any scientific publication or other reliable primary or secondary source that discusses and documents these findings in any detail.

The state run newspaper Peoples Daily reported on a 2007 investigation; where a research fellow from the Chinese Earthquake Administration reported they had found some of the pipes to be highly radioactive. "

and does give citation... for what its worth..

[stopbush]

19. This bullshit again?

Does it ever end?

[Phlem]

21. Very cool.

-p

[Deep13]

22. okay now, each in succession:

1. Placebo:
Still a mystery, but they're working on it. Remember, science is not a set of answers, but a method for finding them.
It appears that something in the ritual of taking something convinces the one's mind that she or he feels better. I heard a story on NPR a year or so ago about research showing that placebos can work even if the patient KNOWS they're placebos.

2. moving stones:
winter conditions leave enough ice on the stones to make it easy for wind to push them along.

3. pipes:
They're not pipes, they're iron deposits that formed naturally in natural stone fissures.

4. spheres:
1st, their perfection is overstated. They're just balls with interesting grooves. And geologists have no trouble explaining their origin as the result of a well-understood process.

5. intergalactic void:
not a solved problem, but it appears to be caused by the space-expanding dark energy, discovered at the end of the 20th c. and responsible for the expansion of the university.

Honestly, these aren't even especially challenging, except for the void thing, but even there there are plausible, preliminary explanations.

[truedelphi]

25. Thank you.

Your post is simple to understand, lacks the rudeness of some other replies found here, and even admits that there is a mystery or two that still remain.

I also knew that there was a logical explanation for the "moving stones" (which in some cases are more like moving boulders.) But I think that your explanation was what I was told about twenty years ago, by a geologist who loved to watch those things glide across the desert floor.

A narrator for a TV show on the phenomena stated that "no one has ever seen the stones move" and that the reason people knew they moved was because of the trails they leave in the sand.

But this geologist had home movies of them moving. And of course, he went down to Death Valley in the winter, so I think that is what the TV show producer didn't realize - he had only talked to summer inhabitants of Death Valley.

[skepticscott]

23. The only thing science cannot explain

is why people keep dredging this kind of nonsense up, thinking that no one has ever bothered to examine it.

[Deep13]

34. Actually, the psychology of that is pretty well understood.

But, yeah, I wish people would use just a little curiosity to find real answers.

[defacto7]

43. Hear hear!

[Unknown Beatle]

29. What about Sharknado?

Aha! Explain that, y'all. Or, or...the Starchild skull.

Also, did you know that Rush Lamebrain and Chris Christie came together from the planet Nutziod in the same spaceship?

[pnwest]

42. Bummer. I was really jazzed by the idea

of ancient alien pipes! I so wanted that one to be true! LOL

[Bradical79]

62. If there were adequate explanations for everything

there would be no scientists :-P

Really though, for reasons explained further up the thread, it's a pretty poor list. It's more like 5 things the author finds mysterious but can't be bothered researching properly. Basically, it's probably a lazy writer trying to make a deadline, lol.

[mindquaker]

68. This article is full of inaccuracies, misquotes, and wild speculation

1. placebo effect is explainable, partially because part of the symptoms are psychosomatic.
2. The moving stones were explained years ago, it's not just wind, but rain, and freezing temperatures. Portions of the lakebed freeze into a floating ice sheet, and the wind pushes the rocks and ice together. The weight of the rocks is partially lifted by the ice, and the winds in that area are quite strong.
3. the "pipes" have been explained, they are fossilized tree root casts, and not so metallic as implied.
4. The spheres are mineral concretions, and their balance was never tested by NASA, the rotating is a misquote of a museum curator who said they rotated in their cases due to numerous tremors from nearby gold mine blasting.
5. Is completely made up. What was found was a "cold spot" in the cosmic microwave background radiation, which has several competing explanations, one theory is a void, an area with less matter (stars, galaxies, dust, gas) so, less galaxies in that direction was predicted, a dip was found, but then found not to correlate well with the direction of the cold spot. There is no huge empty hole found.

[gopiscrap]

69. welcome to du

[Heddi]

78. Why did you copy, word for word, another poster's reply

as noted here http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1228&pid=25799 ??