Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to About Demonology
I don’t want to drag this out, Gome…
But I am reluctant to leave Bhaskar’s comments unchallenged, since many readers will then assume that I have accepted what he has said. I will, therefore, make this one additional comment, and then will not comment in this discussion any further, no matter what answers are forthcoming.
Looking at a position “…from all sides…” is not useful when discussing a scientific matter. The only perspectives that should enter such a discussion are scientific perspectives – the several scientific hypotheses that seem to explain the facts in evidence, if you will. To be “…closed…” to pseudoscience is a positive quality, because this kind of silliness doesn’t belong in a rational discussion, except in a mode to show the fraud for what it is.
In this ongoing blog, Gome, you often take on the Christian perspectives that run counter to scientific knowledge. I’m here to tell you that the Christians don’t have a monopoly on such silliness. Specifically, the Hindus and the Buddhists are leagues ahead of the Christians when it comes to arrogant presumptions of superior knowledge and “spiritual enlightenment.”
Bhaskar speaks about the moisture in the dying leaf I used as an example without even understanding the basic principle I alluded to. He has managed to reverse cause and effect in his proposed explanation. In fact, the reason the leaf dries out is very simple. When it was attached to the tree, its moisture supply was continuously replenished, so that evaporated moisture was replaced. Once it was removed, however, it continued to evaporate moisture, but without replenishment, and so it dried out. It has nothing to do with “energy” (except in the strictest sense of basic energy exchange in physics), “weakness,” spirituality, or any other religious or psychic BS.
The leaf “…placed on the plate and then torn in half and ‘photographed’…” where the missing part still can be seen has a very simple, scientific – non paranormal – explanation. When the leaf was whole and laid on the plate, some of its moisture was transferred to the plate. Tearing it in half and putting part of it back on the plate did not remove the original moisture on the plate, so the original moisture still affected the photograph. Were you to wipe the plate dry first, then you would only see an image of the torn leaf.
Bhaskar quotes the Kirlian website you referenced (without giving credit, by the way): “…If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum.” He doesn’t even seem to realize that this simple statement thoroughly disproves his underlying contention, since – in fact – Kirlian effects DO disappear in a vacuum.
Finally, Bhaskar states that he “…seek[s] deeper answers than science is able to explain…” This is the essence of your blog, Gome, at least as I see it. You continuously challenge religious fanatics to justify their positions, beliefs, and contentions. The human race has discovered, and continues to discover, that there simply are no deeper answers than those science provides. Non-Christian religious beliefs appear exotic and strange to our “Christian”-conditioned thought patterns, but they are no more valid, no more meaningful than debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
posted by
arGee
on November 13, 2007 at 8:31 AM
| link to this | reply
Gome, No I am not defending you. I wonder whether you have read
my comment just below the one to which you seem to have responded, where I have commended arGee at having made a good point. While I have no intention of having a go at arGee and I love constructive criticisms, I will not have myself commented in derogatory terms, and that too, in someone else's blog. My question in the probably 'unread' one to which I referred to above, remains unanswered.
As for Marquess of Queensberry rules, you will find me a lowly exhibitionist of fair play.
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on November 13, 2007 at 2:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Bhaskar.ing - no need to defend me, as much as anyone dislikes criticism I
am forced to agree that arGee is right in this instance.
Auras and the Kirlian effect are long ago passing interests for me, as I dusted off these topics from my blog archives, what little I knew about them in the past had become muddled and confused. In hindsight I should have brushed up a little before posting but the beauty of finding one's self in a position of lacking credibility in one of their posts is that it can so easily be cured by a little research and editing.
I appreciate the opinions of both you and arGee, if you must go at each other, let us not forget to brush up on our Marquess of Queensberry rules.
posted by
gomedome
on November 12, 2007 at 10:26 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee, my last line is as an answer to your comment to Gome, where you
seem to underestimate all others' intelligence except yours, by observing " ...
unwarranted assumptions juxtaposed to real science so the reader really has no way to distinguish them, unless he or she is scientifically educated".
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on November 12, 2007 at 9:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Bhaskar is being his typically ignorant, nonscientific self, Gome...
When it comes to a discussion on an ongoing subject, we must look at it from all perspectives, and if we do not, then it is simply non-scientific. This is my comment and contention with you arGee, to begin with. At least that is where I am always open. To be closed is to be otherwise, non-scientific. And this is why I am willing to accept a good point you make on the subject of living things and moisture with regard to Kirlian photography. Nowhere do I deny it, but going a little back, ask the question why while dying or nearing end, the moisture becomes less? This is because the energy of drawing up of moisture by a leaf becomes weak. Why only in a leaf, this phenomenon you'll find everywhere - even in human beings. This energy, in Hinduism, has been called Prana Shakti. Another language, another denomination, but the meaning remains the same, the implications remain the same.
Allegedly, this special method of "photographing" objects is a gateway to the paranormal world of auras. Actually, what is recorded is due to quite natural phenomena such as pressure, electrical grounding, humidity and temperature. Changes in moisture (which may reflect changes in emotions), barometric pressure, and voltage, among other things, will produce different 'auras'.
Living things are moist. When the electricity enters the living object, it produces an area of gas ionization around the photographed object, assuming moisture is present on the object. This moisture is transferred from the subject to the emulsion surface of the photographic film and causes an alternation of the electric charge pattern on the film. If a photograph is taken in a vacuum, where no ionized gas is present, no Kirlian image appears. If the Kirlian image were due to some paranormal fundamental living energy field, it should not disappear in a simple vacuum.
There have even been claims of Kirlian photography being able to capture "phantom limbs," e.g., when a leaf is placed on the plate and then torn in half and "photographed," the whole leaf shows up in the picture. If this is not due to paranormal forces, then how do you explain the phenomena?
I call a question a question only if it cannot be answered. And, if it can be, then what type of a question it is? The question remains: How could the ancient minds, in the absence of all that we have available today for our scientific investigations, be able to depict the halo which, no doubt is more pronounced around the head? Could it be due to the absence of a conception? My Q is centred around this point.
I seek deeper answers than science is able to explain. That is my spiritual, or to be more specific, another denominational word: 'scientific' research. Please feel free not to call it so.
Also I declare that this be kept in mind that my moisture is not, at present, depleted. And that is why my questions will continue to be troublesome for the uninitiated who, instead of understanding the whole perspective, pick up a part, and pick up fight. Thank you arGee.
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on November 12, 2007 at 9:09 PM
| link to this | reply
I couldn’t agree more with you regarding halos, Gome…
But I have to take issue regarding “auras.” You imply that living things produce auras. That simply isn’t so. The Kirlian “aura” really is a gas plasma discharge in the gas surrounding whatever object is place inside the high voltage high frequency field – animal, plant, rock, or a bottle beer. The most dramatic examples of these are the Tesla generators (sometimes called van de Graff generators) that you frequently see at science centers for kids. The discharge, the “aura,” has nothing to do with the object, except in a superficial way, in that it can be modified by the amount of local moisture on the object (which, on a person, affects the skin’s galvanic response). This is why successive Kirlian images of a dying leaf shows the “aura” shrinking as the leaf dies – not because some mysterious life-force is ebbing, but simply because the leaf’s moisture is evaporating as it dries.
There actually is a measurable electromagnetic field around living things that have neuron systems, generated by the electrical discharge of the synapses. There is, however, nothing mystical or revealing about these fields. Except for their sensitivity to synaptic discharges, and whatever specifically causes the discharges at any given time, they reveal nothing at all about the “being” generating them. Your link is a bit misleading, because it makes unwarranted assumptions juxtaposed to real science so the reader really has no way to distinguish them, unless he or she is scientifically educated.
posted by
arGee
on November 12, 2007 at 2:35 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I think most people would fall into the ignorant category when it
comes to the scientific nitty-gritty of these principles.
I know that I barely have a handle on it myself. But having said that, I'm not willing to concede my skepticism to others who can make their parallel level of ignorance sound more convincing than mine. I do know that all living things have an individual energy field within which they exist which we refer to as an aura. This is without exception and though invisible to the naked eye, we know that it exists. Therefore when I run into claims of people who are able to see this aura in others, in my mind there are only 2 possibilities. The individual who is making this claim has a capability to see things outside of the normal human range of the color and light spectrum. Though I know of no corroborating medical evidence that suggests that this is even possible, or they are a scam artist. There's no big trick in claiming to see something that we all know exists. . . . there is a point to this.
Getting back to the ancient artistic renderings of spiritual leaders with "glowing heads". I contend that this almost routine artistic depiction has nothing at all to do with auras or the Kirlian efffect but more to do with artists of the day wanting to depict individuals held in reverence as being enveloped in, or projecting light. In simpler terms; this type of depiction became an efficient way of distinguishing between the anointed and common individuals in any form of artistic rendering and therefore became popularized. The similarities of these depictions to what we now know to be true of auras is coincidental, though in the typical revisionist and wishful thinking mindset of those who are less discerning; certain select people over history walked around in life with glowing heads. (talk about a surefire way to get beat up a recess)
posted by
gomedome
on November 12, 2007 at 10:33 AM
| link to this | reply
Bhaskar is being his typically ignorant, nonscientific self, Gome...
To set the record straight, Michael Talbot is decidedly NOT a scientist. He is a “New Age” guru who appears incapable of understanding, from a scientific perspective, any of the concepts about which he writes. His book The Holographic Universe is a new age mishmash of pseudo science, out-of-context quantum mechanical and relativity terms, Hindu and Buddhist iconic references, mixed in with a dose of von Daniken and Velikovsky. The guy is a joke!
Kirlian Photography is not the same as Aura Photography, athough they are often confused, as Bhaskar does. In Kirlian Photography, an object, such as a leaf, is placed on a metal plate charged with high voltage at high frequency. A contact photographic print of the object produces an image of the corona discharge caused by the high voltage at high frequency. Kirlian Photography is the basis of modern Xerography.
To put so-called Aura Photography into context, it is entirely a “scam,” in the sense that what you see is not what you get. It is accomplished by putting the hands on a form of galvanometric surface with sensing points corresponding to so-called acupuncture nodes that correspond (according to acupuncture lore) to specific body areas. The galvanometric plates pick up skin resistance at each of the sensor points, which is translated (by inference) to a location on the body, which, in turn, lights colored LEDs corresponding to the levels of skin resistance. These LEDs are located in groups at positions roughly analogous to the inferred acupuncture positions. The aura photograph is actually a Polaroid photo of the glowing LEDs. The operators really believe that their devices are photographing the aura, and so are not intellectually participating in the scam, but the entire thing is a clever pseudoscience scam designed to get your money – nothing more.
posted by
arGee
on November 12, 2007 at 9:23 AM
| link to this | reply
Bhaskar.ing - You pose an interesting question
"How could the pictures of Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, be conceived to have this aura behind their heads, painted by artists thousands of years ago?"
This reality has been a source of ongoing debate which I feel should begin with the question of whether or not the depictions in question were actually illustrating the auras of these human beings? If they were, the illustrations were incomplete in the sense that the aura envelopes the entire body and not just the head as seen in the depictions. Nor is it anywhere near as pronounced around the head as seen in the depictions. It is more likely that the halos, the heads enveloped in light and other similar depictions from ancient artists of great spiritual leaders, are artistic renderings pandering to popular opinion.
The Kirlian effect, our ability to detect and even photograph an aura, when looked at objectively; are not a perfect match to these ancient artistic depictions. We tend to overlook the aspects that don't quite fit simply because of the undeniable striking similarities. So far, aura photography has yet to capture an image of a human being with beams of light extending from their heads to the same degree as in these ancient artistic renderings.
posted by
gomedome
on November 12, 2007 at 6:40 AM
| link to this | reply
There is vast amount of research on this subject and Michael Talbot book 'The Holographic Universe' gives plenty of examples on this subject.
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on November 11, 2007 at 10:37 PM
| link to this | reply
Gome, you brought some memories through your post on Kirlian
Kirlian, a Russian scientist, as far as I remember was able to capture photographically the energetic emissions of a given object in a high frequency field. These emissions are the high electric field that a sample of energy-producing medium, such as one's body is surrounded by at all times. The "aura" as it is known, the scientific community refers to as "Meissner" field. I think he was able to capture the aura of a rose bud even before it had flowered to its full bloom. It is in fact, a picture of the future. How could the pictures of Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, be conceived to have this aura behind their heads, painted by artists thousands of years ago? I wonder and marvel.
There was an experiment conducted to determine the response of the human brain. This experiment consisted of three detectors. The experiment was to measure the time delay be an event and hoe the human body, the human brain and the aura or human energy field reacts to this event. Subjects were seated in front of a small intense light source which was turned off. The subjects were told that as soon as they see the light coming on they should press a switch (similar to the one that we have on quiz programs) which was placed handy.
The calculated time delay between the hand hitting the light coming on and the switch operation or the response of the hand was measured to be 0.01 second.
An Electroencephalogram, which measured the brain response registered a change in 0.001 second
The Kirlian photography for measuring the energy field of the body responded in 0.00001 second or 10 microseconds.
So what are we?
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on November 11, 2007 at 10:33 PM
| link to this | reply
I like your posts
posted by
Kayzzaman
on November 11, 2007 at 9:30 PM
| link to this | reply
gomedome
good post. Thanks for sharing
posted by
richinstore
on November 11, 2007 at 6:03 PM
| link to this | reply