dhhirajojha
Replies to this thread:

More by dhhirajojha
What people are reading
Subscribers
Subscribers
[Total Subscribers 1]

dhhirajojha
:: Subscribe
Back to: Kurakani General Refresh page to view new replies
 RAM BHOMJAN MUJI KO CHAMATKAR!!!!!!!

[Please view other pages to see the rest of the postings. Total posts: 24]
PAGE: <<  1 2  
[VIEWED 22216 TIMES]
SAVE! for ease of future access.
The postings in this thread span 2 pages, View Last 20 replies.
Posted on 02-03-09 4:58 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 
 
Posted on 02-05-09 9:04 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

>There was a pbs documentary about Tibetan monks


>surviving in sub zero temp. for long period without


>any proper clothes. May be body mind control capacity


>but still defies the common scientific knowledge known


>to mankind hence unknown.


 


Mr. Truth,


 


तिब्बतका रैथाने भिक्षुले होईन कुनै गर्मी मुलुकवासी भिक्षुले कुनै acclimatization बिना नै स्वाट्ट सब-जिरो ठण्डी असामान्य समयसम्म खपे भने (गैर भिक्षु control को तुलनामा, भनम् न) भने चाही केही चाखलाग्दो कुरा हुनेछ त्यो । नत्र भने हाम्रा शेर्पाहरुकै कुरा गरम् न, उनीहरुको metabolic economy कुइरेहरुको भन्दा धेरै छ ।


 


एउटा परीक्षण:


Himalayan porter's specialization: metabolic power, economy, efficiency and skill


http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1635507


 


जहाँसम्म mind power को कुरा छ मेरो सामान्य impression र अनुमान के छ भने non-mind जगतमा त्यसको प्रभाव Physical laws ले व्याख्या गर्न नसक्ने हदको चमत्कारिक हुन संभव छैन । Mind कै दुनियाँमा हो भने mind को power स्वाभाविक हो, अवश्य छ । तर त्यो यहाँ विषय होईन ।


 


Mind power द्वारा Physical दुनियाँमा चमत्कार देखाउन सक्नेहरुको लागि लाखौं डलर, पाउण्ड, रुपयाँ र क्रोनरको पुरस्कार राशी प्रतिक्षारत छन् भन्ने कुरा त भनिहालें ।


 


 Nepe


 
Posted on 02-05-09 9:52 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Materialists believe in Gyanendriya ( eye, ear, nose, skin, tongue) and mind is controlled by Gyanendriya.
Spiritualists believe beyond the power of Gyanendriya

I respect Bomjan for his life without food, which is impossible and even unbelievable. It's not like Sahi Baba (Jadu predominant) and Rajnish (Mesmerism- induce belief and blind confidency)

After the collapse of Soviet Union in 90s, they started to rebuild their destroyed 2500 churches on the slogan of perestroika (reconstruction) and glastnost (transparency).

This is just a fine example of the fact that even a SUPERPOWER have no life within materialism.
Last edited: 05-Feb-09 10:14 PM

 
Posted on 02-06-09 7:57 AM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

nepe,

here is the video from history channel but would like to present pbs doc. if time persist.




besides i'm not really talking about extra bestowed people like sherpas or bariyas, here i was talking about the power of meditation and mind and body power that defies the common scientific knowledge through it that anybody can acheive it not just himalayan dwelling people.  Whether you consider meditation scientific or not , it's your problem but miracle do happend although i would also like to define it within the science and natural laws after all  being a avid sceince reader and believer.  After one russian historian  revelation in 1970s  that Jesus actually learned so called miracle through buddhist monastry, it was  a interesting news and helped people to evalutate Jesus in more humananistic level which i consider was more helpful to christianity than harmful . You said that paranormal as a non-existed phenomenon which i say   wrong.  I would rather like to say , paranormal phenomenons have happend, unexplained, but to initiate it? that's the problem since  if anybody figures out it, laws of nature would defined it(meaning lab proof). Believe it or not these paranormal or so called psychic communication ability has been explained through quantum physics which exist right now in theory only yet to be complete  but who knows what future will tell ( and it will lead to longer discussion if you want to proceed) . So to these messiah of scientific communities who offers rewards after rewards, I have nothing against them except the fact that science can not explain everything because it is not complete yet. Until then, these so called miracle will happend & keep winning the hand , keep mesmerizing people. when woman suddenly wakes up after 20 yrs. ( which really happend if want proof will be provided) of vegetate state, do you think science knows everything? so i would like to request these messiahs to hold their gun to claim that they can explain everything through known science although i admire their effort to save people from daily new born highway robberies. I  would put forward paranormal videos ( which i consider highly reliable than any other source) if time allows . in between pardon my english though it's a mess....


 
Posted on 02-06-09 12:24 PM     Reply [Subscribe]
Login in to Rate this Post:     0       ?    
 

Mr Truth


 


Those skeptics are not saying anything. Their mouths are closed. Because they have put their money where their mouths were.


 


Now it’s the turn of the paranormal practitioners and their believers. The burden of the proof is on them !


 


As for the scientific support for the paranormal phenomenon, you certainly are talking about pseudoscience and not about science.


 


Here is a useful article on science vs. pseudoscience.


 


 


How to draw boundaries between science and pseudoscience


By Michael Shermer


When lecturing on science and pseudoscience at colleges and universities, I am inevitably asked, after


challenging common beliefs held by many students, "Why should we believe you?" My answer: "You


shouldn't."


I then explain that we need to check things out for ourselves and, short of that, at least to ask basic


questions that get to the heart of the validity of any claim. This is what I call baloney detection, in


deference to Carl Sagan, who coined the phrase "Baloney Detection Kit." To detect baloney--that is, to


help discriminate between science and pseudoscience--I suggest 10 questions to ask when


encountering any claim.


1. How reliable is the source of the claim?


Pseudoscientists often appear quite reliable, but when examined closely, the facts and figures they cite


are distorted, taken out of context or occasionally even fabricated. Of course, everyone makes some


mistakes. And as historian of science Daniel Kevles showed so effectively in his book The Baltimore


Affair, it can be hard to detect a fraudulent signal within the background noise of sloppiness that is a


normal part of the scientific process. The question is, Do the data and interpretations show signs of


intentional distortion? When an independent committee established to investigate potential fraud


scrutinized a set of research notes in Nobel laureate David Baltimore's laboratory, it revealed a


surprising number of mistakes. Baltimore was exonerated because his lab's mistakes were random and


nondirectional.


2. Does this source often make similar claims?


Pseudoscientists have a habit of going well beyond the facts. Flood geologists (creationists who believe


that Noah's flood can account for many of the earth's geologic formations) consistently make


outrageous claims that bear no relation to geological science. Of course, some great thinkers do


frequently go beyond the data in their creative speculations. Thomas Gold of Cornell University is


notorious for his radical ideas, but he has been right often enough that other scientists listen to what


he has to say. Gold proposes, for example, that oil is not a fossil fuel at all but the by-product of a


deep, hot biosphere (microorganisms living at unexpected depths within the crust). Hardly any earth


scientists with whom I have spoken think Gold is right, yet they do not consider him a crank. Watch


out for a pattern of fringe thinking that consistently ignores or distorts data.


3. Have the claims been verified by another source?


Typically pseudoscientists make statements that are unverified or verified only by a source within their


own belief circle. We must ask, Who is checking the claims, and even who is checking the checkers?


The biggest problem with the cold fusion debacle, for instance, was not that Stanley Pons and Martin


Fleischman were wrong. It was that they announced their spectacular discovery at a press conference


before other laboratories verified it. Worse, when cold fusion was not replicated, they continued to


cling to their claim. Outside verification is crucial to good science.


4. How does the claim fit with what we know about how the world works?


An extraordinary claim must be placed into a larger context to see how it fits. When people claim that


the Egyptian pyramids and the Sphinx were built more than 10,000 years ago by an unknown,


advanced race, they are not presenting any context for that earlier civilization. Where are the rest of


the artifacts of those people? Where are their works of art, their weapons, their clothing, their tools,


their trash? Archaeology simply does not operate this way.


5. Has anyone gone out of the way to disprove the claim, or has only supportive evidence


been sought?


This is the confirmation bias, or the tendency to seek confirmatory evidence and to reject or ignore


disconfirmatory evidence. The confirmation bias is powerful, pervasive and almost impossible for any


of us to avoid. It is why the methods of science that emphasize checking and rechecking, verification


and replication, and especially attempts to falsify a claim, are so critical.


West Island School – TOK – SJT Pseudoscience - 5 – Bias & Other Issues


6. Does the preponderance of evidence point to the claimant's conclusion or to a different


one?


The theory of evolution, for example, is proved through a convergence of evidence from a number of


independent lines of inquiry. No one fossil, no one piece of biological or paleontological evidence has


"evolution" written on it; instead tens of thousands of evidentiary bits add up to a story of the


evolution of life. Creationists conveniently ignore this confluence, focusing instead on trivial anomalies


or currently unexplained phenomena in the history of life.


7. Is the claimant employing the accepted rules of reason and tools of research, or have


these been abandoned in favor of others that lead to the desired conclusion?


A clear distinction can be made between SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) scientists and


UFOlogists. SETI scientists begin with the null hypothesis that ETIs do not exist and that they must


provide concrete evidence before making the extraordinary claim that we are not alone in the


universe. UFOlogists begin with the positive hypothesis that ETIs exist and have visited us, then


employ questionable research techniques to support that belief, such as hypnotic regression


(revelations of abduction experiences), anecdotal reasoning (countless stories of UFO sightings),


conspiratorial thinking (governmental cover-ups of alien encounters), low-quality visual evidence


(blurry photographs and grainy videos), and anomalistic thinking (atmospheric anomalies and visual


misperceptions by eyewitnesses).


8. Is the claimant providing an explanation for the observed phenomena or merely denying


the existing explanation?


This is a classic debate strategy--criticize your opponent and never affirm what you believe to avoid


criticism. It is next to impossible to get creationists to offer an explanation for life (other than "God did


it"). Intelligent Design (ID) creationists have done no better, picking away at weaknesses in scientific


explanations for difficult problems and offering in their stead "ID did it." This stratagem is


unacceptable in science.


9. If the claimant proffers a new explanation, does it account for as many phenomena as the


old explanation did?


Many HIV/AIDS skeptics argue that lifestyle causes AIDS. Yet their alternative theory does not explain


nearly as much of the data as the HIV theory does. To make their argument, they must ignore the


diverse evidence in support of HIV as the causal vector in AIDS while ignoring the significant


correlation between the rise in AIDS among hemophiliacs shortly after HIV was inadvertently


introduced into the blood supply.


10. Do the claimant's personal beliefs and biases drive the conclusions, or vice versa?


All scientists hold social, political and ideological beliefs that could potentially slant their interpretations


of the data, but how do those biases and beliefs affect their research in practice? Usually during the


peer-review system, such biases and beliefs are rooted out, or the paper or book is rejected.


Clearly, there are no foolproof methods of detecting baloney or drawing the boundary between science


and pseudoscience. Yet there is a solution: science deals in fuzzy fractions of certainties and


uncertainties, where evolution and big bang cosmology may be assigned a 0.9 probability of being


true, and creationism and UFOs a 0.1 probability of being true. In between are borderland claims: we


might assign superstring theory a 0.7 and cryonics a 0.2. In all cases, we remain open-minded and


flexible, willing to reconsider our assessments as new evidence arises. This is, undeniably, what makes


science so fleeting and frustrating to many people; it is, at the same time, what makes science the


most glorious product of the human mind.


West Island School – TOK – SJT Pseudoscience - 5 – Bias & Other Issues


______________________________________________


 



PAGE: <<  1 2  
Please Log in! to be able to reply! If you don't have a login, please register here.

YOU CAN ALSO



IN ORDER TO POST!




Within last 90 days
Recommended Popular Threads Controvertial Threads
TPS Re-registration case still pending ..
Toilet paper or water?
Sajha Poll: Who is your favorite Nepali actress?
ढ्याउ गर्दा दसैँको खसी गनाउच
Problems of Nepalese students in US
Mamta kafle bhatt is still missing
Tourist Visa - Seeking Suggestions and Guidance
Nepali Passport Renewal
To Sajha admin
From Trump “I will revoke TPS, and deport them back to their country.”
Are Nepalese cheapstakes?
अरुणिमाले दोस्रो पोई भेट्टाइछिन्
wanna be ruled by stupid or an Idiot ?
MAGA denaturalization proposal!!
Nepali Psycho
advanced parole
seriously, when applying for tech jobs in TPS, what you guys say when they ask if you have green card?
How to Retrieve a Copy of Domestic Violence Complaint???
NOTE: The opinions here represent the opinions of the individual posters, and not of Sajha.com. It is not possible for sajha.com to monitor all the postings, since sajha.com merely seeks to provide a cyber location for discussing ideas and concerns related to Nepal and the Nepalis. Please send an email to admin@sajha.com using a valid email address if you want any posting to be considered for deletion. Your request will be handled on a one to one basis. Sajha.com is a service please don't abuse it. - Thanks.

Sajha.com Privacy Policy

Like us in Facebook!

↑ Back to Top
free counters