Would you care to explain why you exactly think that? And who are “these people”?
Aaaah, look guys-his first woosh! Isn’t it cute?
Does that apply to individual posts and threads, or is that global? Could a MOD change one post in one thread without it being obvious that they had turned off the tags? (BTW, I have no reason to believe any of the MODS would do this or even care enough about this thread to go to the trouble.)
I was surprised to find this information by following up on Iamonfire’s wiki link.
I’m not sure how noise and harsh sound are defined, or if this research is so old as to be past its sell-by date, but on the surface it looks valid.
Nah, it’s nonsense, like pretty much everything else Iamonfire has posted. Despite Bose’s achievements in physics, much of his work in plants has not been verified. I would note that no citation is given for the allegation that “his work was experimentally verified later on” with regard to the allegation that “plants grow faster in pleasant music and its growth retards in noise or harsh sound.” The tension-cohesion theory for the ascent of sap is now generally accepted, rather than those espoused by Bose. And while there is evidence for transmission of electrical signals in plant tissues, this is quite different from having “nervous systems like those of animals.”
Since absolutely nothing of substance is cited, I am curious as to how you can reach an evaluation either way as to the validity of the research.
You are all haters - if Contracuntal had read the link he would have seen that the experiments were actually confirmed in "Wildon et al (Nature, 1992, 360, 62–65) I don’t remember Nature publishing any old codswollop.
Collibriate has just abused me, the admins are changing my posts. It really is beyond me - I’m just trying to put my point across and am turned upon.
No, we are reasoners.
We don’t accept the idea of “if it feels good, it must be true!”
On one is persecuting you. We are just a practical, hard-headed bunch of folks, living in an era of wooly thinking.
I hope you remember & retain the above quote. It can change your life.
This may vary according to vB version – and my WAG is the newer ones are more flexible – but in the older 2.x the automatic “last edited by”+name+date can be turned on/off for admins as a group. From the options pages:
Of course, it could be turned off, a post made, then turned on afterwards to accomplish something devious.
Please understand I am not suggesting that our mods/admins do any such thing, nor do I think they are that unethical. But the technical functions exist for that to happen without a code hack (at least in some versions).
Iamonfire, if you think your post has been changed, why don’t you try posting it again? Surely the mods wouldn’t dare do it twice in a row while we are all watching!
I think the reference is to electrical conduction versus chemical conduction. I have not been able to find anything to substantively back the claim that his experiments with music and plant growth were valid. But I am trying.
The Wiki link does not mention Nature. The second lnk does not mention Backster. What are you talking about?
Why did you not complain about the altering of your posts until the second time I pointed it out to you, rather than when you first noticed it?
No, as I said, although Wildon et al and other experiments have shown the existence of electrical signals in plants (which is not the same as having a nervous system), most of Bose’s other allegations have either not been confirmed or have been refuted.
Assuming you are referring to me (and is that supposed to be some kind of insult?), no, I have not abused you. I have made a simple statement of fact. Most of what you have posted here, and elsewhere on the board, has been nonsense. If you feel that pointing this out is “abuse,” you are far too sensitive for this board.
This is a lie. Your posts are exactly the same as they have always been. In any case, it would be rather difficult to change them to make you look worse than what you have already written.
You have been remarkably ineffective in putting your point across. Perhaps you should actually post some serious data and evidence instead of insulting other posters. And here’s a hint - a Wiki article isn’t really considered to be a serious reference.
I’m confused. I thought the citation was for a Nature article too.
I’ve even gone so far as to browse their website http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html looking for the article.
What does Nature in the wiki citation refer to?
Here is the abstract of the article:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v360/n6399/abs/360062a0.html
Contrapuntal was mistaken; the Wiki article does cite the Nature article. However, the Nature article does not confirm Iamonfire’s assertions.
preview :smack: preview :smack: preview :smack: preview :smack:
I’m sure you realize this after your most recent post, but for the benefit of others, those are different articles from the one cited in Wiki (the first one cites Wildon et al 1992; the second is another more recent article by him).
Just in case anyone has such poor reading comprehension as to think Iamonfire gave a cite to back him up, the full paragraph in the Wiki article reads:
IOW, the confirmation was of an entirely different set of experiments than the plants can feel pain or understand affection experiments. Suggesting otherwise means we’re being lied to.
Boy, I bet you’re turned on by acting this way. 
Now the Mods are changing my posts!
It’s also worth noting the general incoherence of that Wiki paragraph. It’s particularly interesting to note “[h]is . . . demonstration of the electrical nature of the conduction of . . . chemical agents . . .which were earlier thought to be of chemical in nature.”
But seriously, I appreciate you pointing that out, Colibri. I didn’t realize that. I’m not very familiar with citation formats. I might have realized it eventually, but pointing it out, without rubbing my nose in it, helps.
I’ve been trying to use other resources besides wikipedia, but with a topic like this it’s like going from preschool to pre-med.