Dylan Klebold used a sawed-off shotgun?!
But … but … but, that would be illegal! :eek:
Just for fun, I found a review of the book. Actually, I read about four reviews, but this one struck me as informative and balanced.
The kookier bits were highlighted in the OP. There evidently are much better written essays in addition to the crackpots.
G. Nome said:
Funny, I didn’t ask who it was, I asked very clearly:
You answered neither question.
And besides – Dean Radin? ROFL! Yeah, he’s proven, um, nothing. If you’re talking about his studies that allegedly show people have a “sixth sense” that can tell, for example, when somebody is staring at them, I refer you to this test showing it to be untrue. Also, here is a review of Radin’s book which discusses a few of his problems.
Those are just a couple things I found in a quick search. It would help an awful lot if you would have answered the questions I asked instead of just tossing out a name.
This could turn into a great debate, but this page:
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/tables/index.html
lets you view the deaths in Northern Ireland from 14 July 1969 to 31 December 1998. There are various tabulations, including “Summary of Organisation responsible for the killing”. Here si the information from that table:
British Security 363
Irish Security 5
Loyalist Paramilitary 991
not known 78
Republican Paramilitary 2043
TOTAL 3480
amanset said:
Pretty much all of the claims being made here are great debates (and have probably already been debated 
).
So…you want I should punt the whole sorry mess over to YOUR forum?
This thread only barely touches on the literary world. And there’s nary a meatloaf recipe in it.
You know we’re in a bad way when no mod wants the thread in their forum…
Thanks for the link. I detect more than a whiff of quackery there.
No, thanks. I don’t buy any of it.
A book review by G. Nome? Hell yes, I’m buyin’ it.
Ukulele Ike wrote:
Heat 2 tbsp. olive oil in a large skillet. Add 1/2 lb. of sausage, 1 chopped red bell pepper (cored and seeded), 1 cup chopped onion, 1 1/2 tsp. cayenne pepper (if a spicy recipe is desired), 2 cloves of minced garlic, 1/2 tsp. thyme, and 1/2 tsp. dried oregano. Cook for 15 minutes over low heat, then put it in a bowl and let it cool until it’s comfortable to touch with your hands.
Stir 1/2 cup tomato sauce, 1/2 cup broth, and 1/4 cup of fresh bread crumbs into the bowl. Then break up 2 lbs. of lean ground beef and add it too. When you’re done kneading, transfer the mixture to a loaf pan and bake at 350 degrees Fahrenheit for 45 minutes. Pour off some of the fat, and let stand for 10-15 minutes. Makes 8 servings.
There.
So…George Bush and the Hinckleys. Just like “that” eh?
Well, the book needs more charts and graphs, even I can see that. I’d rather leave the Serbian thing alone though if that’s ok. The article on Yugoslavia, especially the first paragraph, is just too anti-American. It’s poisonous. But, as I said in another thread, after reading the book my philosophy remains largely unchanged. When all is said and done the American way is preferable to a lot of other ways. I mean, look what happens to Lebanese people who do “Yasir Arafat and the Door thing: what’s that about?” threads in the Lebanon:
“Yasir’s boys took an uncooperative Lebanese newspaper publisher captive, dismembered him one joint at a time and sent a piece of the corpse to each of the Beirut foreign press corps with a photo of the man being tortured alive.”
Who said this book is not useful?
Regarding the book’s “wackiness”: I don’t think you could call anything Noam Chomsky says particulary wacky otherwise he’d be on the cover of Time. Personal experience allows me to relate to what he has to say about the media. It’s not pleasant.
David B evinced interest in having this fruit salad of a thread moved over to Great Debates, so that’s where it’s going.
I’ll drop by later today to watch Gaudere throw crockey at his head, a la “Maggie and Jiggs.”
– Uke, passing around the tracer meatloaf sandwiches
Where’s KO/Connie when you need him? He’s so much better at this than the gnome.
Ukulele Ike wrote:
I don’t just let anyone touch my meatloaf, y’know.
Just popping in to say that Michael Parenti is an ill-informed, inflammatory, ideological jackass who makes liberals look bad six ways from Sunday.
Regarding the Oklahoma bomb, not only would the arc of the blast be different at different points but also the walls of the building will have slightly different stress levels at different points. Therefore some parts of the wall will have been able to absorb more of the blast than other parts.
The different stresses on the wall would be caused by such things as the position of the windows, the condition of the mortar between the bricks, the condition of the bricks themselves.
Also the expertise with which the bricks were laid - several guys will have worked on building that wall, maybe some were better than others at laying bricks. So their parts of the wall will be stronger.
Since we are dealing with an explosion, which is a random event, you need to bring in Chaos Theory. No two explosions are ever exactly the same.
In order to fully mathematically explain the Oklahoma blast we would need to adequately bring into our theory the following factors:
-
a random explosion from inside a van
-
the arc of the blast
-
the stress levels of different parts of the wall
-
the layout of the building inside (ie: where the internal walls were - a lot of them concentrated in one place would strengthen the external wall)
-
prevailing weather conditions
All in all, we would require a much greater understanding of Chaos Theory than we currently have. We would need to be at a point where we can accurately predict the results of chaotic experiments.
We’re some way off from that at the moment so theres no way you can say for sure what pillars should have fallen and what pillars shouldn’t.
No… give me a break. People don’t violate gun laws. I’m sure he got the NFA background check and everything to do that.
I think the only thing “weird” about Columbine is that Harris and Klebold were still playing Doom in *2000.
That’s really, really lame.
*Or maybe 1999. I can’t remember when the Hell that all happened anymore.
Yet he was clearly weilding his Tec DC-9 left handed? The surveliance tapes show him doing so. In fact, they also show the shoulder strap secured around his left shoulder, too. Sorry, but the book was wrong.
And as for this “precreation” movie, just what is it? Is there some title that we might be able to find out information on it with? Any source we might be able to find information on it that isn’t an opinionated, biased source (As this book sounds to be)? With any similarity to the Columbine shooting beyond the fact that there were teens, guns, possibly police, and a school caffeteria and/or library? And also, what evidence is there of this supposed “third shooter” that hasn’t been thoroughly debunked already?
(And what the heck is a “humanitarian rifle?”)
G. Nome, I think David B was correct in asking for the evidence in support of a claim, not the credentials of the person making the claim. I couldn’t resist taking a peek at Dean Radin’s credentials, and --since we’re talking credentials–I was bamboloozed on a few points.
What is a consciousness research outfit doing in a centre for Environmental Studies? Not that its location invalidates its research in any way, but I wonder, why not put this in a more appropriate location, such as the Psychology department or the Life Sciences building? Here are Facility details on the Harry Reid Center for Environmental Studies.
Let’s take a closer look at the CRD itself. The centre’s Web page is http://www.psiresearch.org/ and it’s not terribly good. Note that Radin advertises his own book on the Centre’s index page! This site is filled with a lot of scientific claptrap assertions for the most part, and doesn’t really seem anything to be proud of. From what I can tell, the CRD is a one-man show, run and operated by its founder. Maybe someone at the Harry Reid Center took pity on him and gave him a corner somewhere, which may explain his location.
Since when are mind-matter interactions, precognition, and distant healing considered ANY kind of “common”?? These “phenomena” have never been observed by science!
His work so far sounds bogus, and his credentials assume as a matter of course that all these mysterious powers and hidden energies actually exist and are available for study. I’d be satisfied if he were actually able to observe half the things he discusses, never mind study them.
Conducting a lot of research according to his bio, but no mention of any results.
This and the part below put Dr. Radin on the map, more as a technician or electrical engineer than a research scientist unlocking the secrets of the mind.
So his Ph.D. is not in a hard science or in psychology or even in parapsychology (if there is such a degree), but in a branch of psychology that involves the application of psychological theory and science to the educational process. I am sure Dr. Radin can be very persuasive, given his choice in PhD, but not a single one of his degrees is related to the field he espouses.
Yet another society dedicated to the scientific investigation of phenomena that are, thus far, wholly undetected by science. For the Parapsychological Association Web site, see http://www.parapsych.org. The “Association” is actually a corporation, and here is what the requirements to become a full member are, with my emphasis:
Nowhere did I find what the fees are. It’s also interesting to go to their Peer-Reviewed Published Articles page. The articles consist of a few articles by a fellow named Charles T. Tart and nothing else. The Skeptic’s Dictionary addresses Tart right here and it’s not too good. Just to give you an idea of how serious and honest these “scientists” are. Now back to Dr. Radin’s bio:
Getting into little details and positions that are probably insignificant/irrelevant now. But I do want to share this gem from the Society for Scientific Exploration mentioned above. I managed to find an SSE book review of Radin’s own book:
I find this passage completely astounding for a book review in a scientific organization. There is no data in favour of the existence of psi, and a few words in a book review or even a book aren’t going to change that. There are a lot of claims in favour of psi, but no favourable data. The quote above doesn’t surprise me too much though, given the heavily biased tone of the whole piece and the fact that this is probably nothing more than a sales pitch by someone with an axe to grind (he really doesn’t like “anti-psi skeptics”!). Laughable.
What was the outstanding achievement that was rewarded by the Parapsychological Association?? Writing a paper on phenomena that are STILL wholly undetected and unsupported by science and therefore entirely conjectural?
Special Merit awards could be as simple as “employee of the month”. I don’t feel like looking up the Rhine Research Center, as I have had enough of psi-related organizations for one day and need to find a distance healer who can cure my headache.
That is quite a flattering print media list, but having your “research” reviewed isn’t really a seal of quality. Were the reviews informed? What was the verdict? And where are the peer-reviewed publications that are supposed to review research?
Well this list says it all!
Publishing a lot of technical reports isn’t exactly a feat, especially if you work for AT&T. Damn, when I think of all the whitepapers I have let go to waste…
So there you have it for credentials, I don’t think they are so impressive when you take a closer look.