(February 28, 2013 at 10:39 pm)oanghelidi Wrote:(February 28, 2013 at 9:55 pm)Baalzebutt Wrote: When conducting a scientific experiment, one follows where the evidence leads. One does not make baseless assumption based on what they believe and want to the evidence to say.
I find it interesting that when it comes to consciousness very few experiments have been done. All the scientists are only making hypotheses which is basically creating theoretical models.
Quote:One does not make baseless assumption based on what they believe and want to the evidence to say.I share your viewpoint. I find that way too many researchers are doing that. It is very hard to sift for the truth through the tons of invalid assumptions and false hypotheses. That is exactly why neuroscience is the only field where the basis of the neural code of the brain, has not been understood.
I mean: the neural code is the most basic stuff. Without it you have nothing. You don't know how memories are formed and stored, you don't know how to repair disease, you don't know what sleep is for, why the dual hemisphere is in there, and the list goes on and on...
And you have no way to define consciousness...
Honestly, how can you make an assertion that consciousness is separate from the brain when you can't even decide what consciousness is? You have to figure out what you are studying before you study it.
BTW, your journals weren't rejected because they didn't come from universities. They were rejected because you are a completely certifiable nutcase with no support for your conclusions that are based on poorly developed hypotheses and a fundamental misunderstanding of the scientific method.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." -Einstein