Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "Dana Tweedy" <tweedyd@cvn.net>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: To all earlier responders
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:52:16 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: University of Ediacara
Lines: 60
Sender: root@darwin.ediacara.org
Approved: robomod@ediacara.org
Message-ID: <bt4eoj$37ok7$1@ID-35161.news.uni-berlin.de>
References: <BmTIb.35848$Vs3.16793@twister.socal.rr.com> <3MYIb.44477$dP1.178333@newsc.telia.net> <SH%Ib.36352$Vs3.31790@twister.socal.rr.com> <vv95u3s8369b1d@corp.supernews.com> <If1Jb.3562$ml6.833@bignews4.bellsouth.net> <bt2buf$7t8$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <6di9vvkcg81vrb5btrt3n6hmlc8fhiagqp@4ax.com> <3ff4ec31_4@corp.newsgroups.com> <bt3oo0$7dc$1@atlantis.news.tpi.pl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: darwin
X-Trace: darwin.ediacara.org 1073069536 59557 128.100.83.246 (2 Jan 2004 18:52:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@darwin.ediacara.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:52:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Orig-NNTP-Posting-Host: user119.net1138.oh.sprint-hsd.net (69.68.47.119)
X-Orig-X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1073069652 3400327 69.68.47.119 ([35161])
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:1554
"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
news:bt3oo0$7dc$1@atlantis.news.tpi.pl...
snipping
> > Yes. See what happens when you do some elementary research before
> posting?
> >
> > Shoulda done that before you yammered ignorantly about the "moon dust"
> > and the "we only use ten percent of our brains", huh.
> >
>
> I've already retracted the moon dust on the advice of other Christians,
Instead of just relying on the advice of others, why not check them out for
yourself?
> I
> was just pointing out that some, including my pastor, still isn't buying
the
> retraction.
Since your pastor is not a scientist, and hasn't studied the matter for
himself, why should his opinion matter?
>
> As for the percentage of brain use, so far, unless I missed something,
there
> has been only anecdotal, journalistic evidence put up by the total use
side.
Again, you haven't produced any evidence for the "small fraction" claim, and
the evidence for full usage comes from actual scientists who have studied
the brain using PET, and MRI scans. I already provided you with links to
that evidence. If you missed it, here's some more:
http://www-u594.ujf-grenoble.fr/people/mdojat/papers/aim2000.pdf
http://www.theness.com/articles/brain-nejs0201.html
http://www.alzheimersupport.com/library/showarticle.cfm/ID/1582/e/1/T/Alzheimers/
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/37/2/17
Also see:
Kalat, J.W. (1995)
Biological Psychology, 5th ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publ. Co.
B.L. Beyerstein, Whence Cometh the Myth that We Only Use 10% of Our Brains?
in Mind Myths. Exploring Popular Assumptions about the Mind and Brain edited
by S. Della Sala, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pages 3-24, 1999
Note also you were wrong about Archeopteryx being a Hoazin, there being only
one Archae fossil, and nearly every other scientific claim you have made.
With that kind of batting average, don't you think it might be a good idea
to check out the claims, before making them?
DJT
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 |
| 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 |
|