(July 26, 2018 at 5:13 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:(July 26, 2018 at 4:13 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: A number of people have criticized Ted Talks for effectively banning Sheldrake's talk and demoting it to, at the very least, second class status. Aside from the credibility of Sheldrake's claims in and of themselves, Ted Talks actions seem to prove Sheldrake's point about intransigent conservatism in science. Regardless of the validity of Sheldrake's claims, was Ted Talks doing the right thing by demoting the video, or were they simply taking a bad situation and making it worse? What should the role of Ted Talks be in discriminating against some views and not others, and according to what criteria?
More on the background behind Ted Talks actions and the "TEDx" branded talks is given in the post Graham Hancock and Rupert Sheldrake, a fresh take at TEDblogs.
Or they simply don't want to be assosciated with that load of utter navel gazing load of bollox.
He makes claims that effectively appeal to phrenology as being "valid science", namely, the constants of nature (such as 'c', the speed of light) are changing because Galileo, once upon a time, using lanterns, thought that it could be "infinite".
