Art Bell

[Lt.Uhura]

The Hancocks and Sitchenses and Danikens I dislike mainly because piles of big rocks don't amount to extraordinary evidence of Type II civvies.  Though the romance of it all is mighty enticing...

Such grand revisions are more compelling â€" in my view â€" when the technology is kept at a "just the facts, ma'am" level.  There are fascinating mysteries and stories...

No need to be brash or cruel, but I do side with the sentiment favoring exciting science over exciting speculation.

I think it's expected to call BS on speculative claims in any field of research.  However there are unexplained phenomena that are difficult if not impossible to verify using standard scientific methods. 

Medicine is one field where expected outcomes are often confounded by unexplained factors.  As someone who's worked for decades in western medicine and also studied various mind-body techniques, I can accept that things aren't always as they seem.  Unfortunately we live in a culture of extremes, lacking a middle ground where some of these issues might best be explored.  We are handicapped by our rigid right-wrong, left-right, either-or attitudes.

[nika01]

I don't want to go into detailed discussion in here, I read both "Fingerprints" and its criticisms a long time ago but I remember the author of this article gives quite reasonable reasons why what Hancock claims can't be true. This is just an article that he wrote for any average person browsing the Internet and it's a review of a book, it obviously contains his opinions. You could find hundreds of academic papers describing the origins of each of the structures Graham makes claims about that are based on peer-reviewed archeological work that includes lots of digging and lab work, something Graham never did. I would love for Graham to write a follow-up that tackles the objections made in this review, I would certainly read it. Phillip Coppens did just that after the "Ancient Aliens Debunked" was released.

Well, the "Bad Archaeologist" uses the word falsification when Hancock posits a theory about the Sphinx. For me, that sort of phraseology is not appropriate and it invalidates (for me) virtually anything the guy has to say. He is pretty bad. He isn't objective or scientific. He is merely spewing academic dogma.

[No Quarter]

piles of big rocks don't amount to extraordinary evidence of Type II civvies.  Though the romance of it all is mighty enticing. 

I would have to agree with both points above; however, our scientific history has many examples of an existing paradigm that was challenged (and subsequently proven to be true) by those who would not so easily submit to those paradigms:

Copernicus, who challenged it when he suggested that the planets in our solar system orbited the sun (to be fair, he also thought the sun to be the center of the universe, so he wasn't completely correct).

Galileo, who also defended the same heliocentric model against a dogmatically myopic church.

Heinrich Schliemann, who ignored those that claimed Troy was a made up location for a story, and found it in the 19th century.


While I am not saying that Messrs Hancock, von Daniken, West, et al., are necessarily correct, they too, have been publicly excoriated by those who would perpetuate the existing paradigm and completely dismiss their claims out of hand. Sure, some of these theories seem rather crack-pot on the surface, but they can (and sometimes do) lead to revolutions in our knowledge of the history of this planet and those who have walked it.

The coelecanth was long-thought extinct, until one was found of the coast of Africa in the early 20th century. The world was also thought to be flat.

There also seems to be a very fine line between those who challenge the paradigm and those who are just bat-sh*t crazy

(and sorry - did not intend for the wall of text)

[Radio Activity]

I like good radio and Hancock interviewed by Art Bell is good radio. I also had jello today.

[Roswells, Art]

I like good radio and Hancock interviewed by Art Bell is good radio.

That is it in a nutshell.

[No Quarter]

I like good radio and Hancock interviewed by Art Bell is good radio.

+1

[Bounder]

> Uhura

Do we live in a black-and-white extreme world?  If yes, it's not the one I see on my walks to the library.  The body of scientific knowledge increases, theories are tested and refined, and slowly the state of technology improves.

I think most of us live in the moderate middle â€" don’t we?  Even if, at heart, our attitudes and opinions are sharply at odds with our neighbors: don’t we wear a social veneer to make life livable? 

Maybe Art's show and MV's forum are your hoped-for "middle ground."

> Nika

“Falsification” â€" falsifiable?  A synonym of “testability.”  The sign of a hypothesis’ strength, not weakness.  This is the teapot problem.  If you can’t falsify it, the theory generally speaking has no practical utility.  Not to say it isn’t creative.  Much folklore and mythology is richly dreamed.

Unless you’re talking about an assertion, on Bad Astro’s part, that Graham had manufactured or forged or hoaxed the evidence upon which he draws his conclusions. 

> Quarter

It’s a seductive pitch.  The world-changers of the past serve as finger-pointers for “alternative researchers” like Graham & Co.  “See?  What does this ridicule remind you of . . . ?”

And the story, so well known, tells itself.

I know Graham would be flattered by the comparison to such lights at our path.  I personally think it demands too much of the man.

Schliemann also thought he’d discovered the tomb of Agamemnon.

In the other direction: Koldewey, discoverer of Babylon, thought with absolute certainty he had discovered evidence that the ancients walked the streets with dinosaurs.  (Cf. “sirrush”).  What are we to make of this?

One helpful thought experiment is: which theory better explains the evidence?  Were the Egyptians lying when they explained their achievements in human terms?  What about the tombs that aren’t quite pyramids, but litter the landscape?  Do they alter the Orion scheme?  Are they not tombs, either?

> Gravy, Roswells, Quarter again

It’s fun listening for sure.  +2.

[ks3484]

2015 Equinox-Eclipse: Graham Hancock on Magicians of the Gods: JamesTyberonn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kahs1Ye7D1E


Graham Hancock on Good and Evil

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktsA9BHImns

[No Quarter]

> Quarter

It’s a seductive pitch.  The world-changers of the past serve as finger-pointers for “alternative researchers” like Graham & Co.  “See?  What does this ridicule remind you of . . . ?”

And the story, so well known, tells itself.

I know Graham would be flattered by the comparison to such lights at our path.  I personally think it demands too much of the man.

Schliemann also thought he’d discovered the tomb of Agamemnon.

In the other direction: Koldewey, discoverer of Babylon, thought with absolute certainty he had discovered evidence that the ancients walked the streets with dinosaurs.  (Cf. “sirrush”).  What are we to make of this?

One helpful thought experiment is: which theory better explains the evidence?  Were the Egyptians lying when they explained their achievements in human terms?  What about the tombs that aren’t quite pyramids, but litter the landscape?  Do they alter the Orion scheme?  Are they not tombs, either?

Well said. And as you rather astutely point out, not all theories proposed by those lights have all proven true 

Personally, I think the biggest danger is that we refuse to pull our heads out of the sand and ignore any evidence (or theories, for that matter) that might allow us to better understand both ourselves and the universe we inhabit. Sure, the price we pay for listening to alternative theories is that we have to listen to charlatans, snake-oil salesmen, and other crack-pots, but if nothing else -  they are entertaining.   

[nika01]

> Nika

“Falsification” â€" falsifiable?  A synonym of “testability.”  The sign of a hypothesis’ strength, not weakness.  This is the teapot problem.  If you can’t falsify it, the theory generally speaking has no practical utility.  Not to say it isn’t creative.  Much folklore and mythology is richly dreamed.

Unless you’re talking about an assertion, on Bad Astro’s part, that Graham had manufactured or forged or hoaxed the evidence upon which he draws his conclusions. 

Its not clear what was in Bad Archaeo's head, but I can read what he wrote. Its self justifying. I do believe he was intentionally making the reader believe it was un-true intentionally. However you slice and dice it, he is not much of a hard scientist. Facts generally rule, and on this particular point, Hancock has just as much right to speculate as the next guy without having to defend against diffuse attacks by alleged experts, who have no more way of knowing the real truth than anyone else does about what went on thousands of years ago,

[morgana213]

Hancocks's theories are compelling to me. Can't wait for his interview with Art.

[Cwn Annwn]

I don't see much connection between what people (experts, the majority, or whatever) believe, what they are prepared to believe, the grounds upon which they are prepared to believe, and what I believe, what I am prepared to believe, and the grounds (if any are specifiable) upon which I am prepared to believe.

"Falsifiability," "objectivity," "science," and the rest are simply normative terms with an air of universal import. They can be used as a scalpel, if you please, or a bludgeon. My preference is to leave them lie.

I find Hancock's work fascinating, in the etymological sense of the term. I'm only willing to believe what can fascinate me. This is why I will continue to listen and enjoy whenever Hancock appears on Art's show, and the same goes for any other enchanting narrator.

[No Quarter]

I'm only willing to believe what can fascinate me. This is why I will continue to listen and enjoy whenever Hancock appears on Art's show, and the same goes for any other enchanting narrator.

Couldn't agree more. I would prefer to believe that we live in a universe of constant wonder and compelling mystery, which is why I love hearing from people like Mr. Hancock and others of his ilk.

Otherwise, we just live on a boring, tiny floating rock in the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the Milky Way Galaxy...

[Bounder]

I don't see much connection between what people (experts, the majority, or whatever) believe, what they are prepared to believe, the grounds upon which they are prepared to believe, and what I believe, what I am prepared to believe, and the grounds (if any are specifiable) upon which I am prepared to believe.

"Falsifiability," "objectivity," "science," and the rest are simply normative terms with an air of universal import. They can be used as a scalpel, if you please, or a bludgeon. My preference is to leave them lie.

I find Hancock's work fascinating, in the etymological sense of the term. I'm only willing to believe what can fascinate me. This is why I will continue to listen and enjoy whenever Hancock appears on Art's show, and the same goes for any other enchanting narrator.

I admire especially your closing pledge, Cwn.

Might observe only slightly more care in redefining terms . . . certainly any of the three you picked out could be replaced with god, religion and holy.

Fascination, enthusiasm, joy â€" if a subject brings you these, you're fortunate.  July, come soon!

[Cwn Annwn]

Might observe only slightly more care in redefining terms . . . certainly any of the three you picked out could be replaced with god, religion and holy.

Absolutely! In another forum I may have picked those very terms.

[serenity]

Aye there's the rub. Any one whose theories don't jive with "Main Stream" or "accepted" science will be torched by those who are afraid to be proven wrong. Sad really. Who knows how many correct or true theories have been squashed out of fear.
I'm not going to name any, had enough arguments last night lol


May we never go to Hell.......well cause we might prove it exists and what a shit storm that would cause the "experts"

[Lt.Uhura]

> Uhura

Do we live in a black-and-white extreme world?  If yes, it's not the one I see on my walks to the library.  The body of scientific knowledge increases, theories are tested and refined, and slowly the state of technology improves.

I think most of us live in the moderate middle â€" don’t we?  Even if, at heart, our attitudes and opinions are sharply at odds with our neighbors: don’t we wear a social veneer to make life livable? 

Maybe Art's show and MV's forum are your hoped-for "middle ground."

Opposing theories and beliefs are one thing, it's how those beliefs can narrow or expand one's professional practice and even basic human interaction that concerns me. 

For example, when I was taking courses in mind-body medicine, the doctors and nurses I worked with kidded and laughed at me...A woman arrived in the ER after calling 911 for anxiety-related symptoms and one of my colleagues said, "Why don't you go practice your hocus-pocus on her."  Lol, well I did...come to find out, the woman had recently lost a baby to SIDS and had unresolved grief, something western medicine is often ill-equipped to handle--especially in the ER.  Fortunately using techniques I'd learned in a hypnotherapy course, she opened up to me and allowed me to give her information and resources for follow up. 

On the other end, in the mind-body courses I attended, I frequently had to listen to professionals from other fields bad-mouth the evils of western medicine.  Ugh...   

Yes there's certainly some extremes here too, but lots of interesting "middle-ground" types on BellGab.  I look forward to Art's return and openness to new guests!

[klaatu]

Davebots, Repent !!

[Skunk Ape]

This is the right way to dispute about guests.

I'm a little perturbed that the word "Nocock" hasn't been used in any of these recent back-and-forths.

[onan]

Opposing theories and beliefs are one thing, it's how those beliefs can narrow or expand one's professional practice and even basic human interaction that concerns me. 

For example, when I was taking courses in mind-body medicine, the doctors and nurses I worked with kidded and laughed at me...A woman arrived in the ER after calling 911 for anxiety-related symptoms and one of my colleagues said, "Why don't you go practice your hocus-pocus on her."  Lol, well I did...come to find out, the woman had recently lost a baby to SIDS and had unresolved grief, something western medicine is often ill-equipped to handle--especially in the ER.  Fortunately using techniques I'd learned in a hypnotherapy course, she opened up to me and allowed me to give her information and resources for follow up. 

On the other end, in the mind-body courses I attended, I frequently had to listen to professionals from other fields bad-mouth the evils of western medicine.  Ugh...   

Yes there's certainly some extremes here too, but lots of interesting "middle-ground" types on BellGab.  I look forward to Art's return and openness to new guests!

I agree with you, some alternative methods of managing pain both physical and emotional are looked down upon. Clinical studies show meditation to actually increase surface areas of some structures of the brain. At the same time, the studies involving acupuncture are somewhat more vague. For full disclosure, my wife has had significant pain in her shoulders radiating down to her thumbs and index fingers. All normal physical therapy and medications have been ineffective. Acupuncture has helped her tremendously. Even though studies show that the placement of needles seems to have no correlation to specified areas. As one psychiatrist told me, all treatments work if there is belief that the treatment will help. That is even true with medications, including antibiotics.

Where I start to pitch a fit is when, as you point out, alternative practitioners eschew western medicine.

[Lt.Uhura]

Where I start to pitch a fit is when, as you point out, alternative practitioners eschew western medicine.

Yes.  Perhaps the best place to try and bridge the divide is in the language we use.  Alternative typically means "instead of" (Western Medicine, etc.)  Whereas Complementary, or even Adjunctive therapy implies a continuum of care. 

Glad to hear your wife has had found pain relief with acupuncture.

[sydtron]

http://artbell.com/art-bells-new-show-faq/


Ahem!! This is great! But nothing new for us.  Wonder who the other Moderated forum is?

[Mind Flayer Monk]

http://artbell.com/art-bells-new-show-faq/


Ahem!! This is great! But nothing new for us.  Wonder who the other Moderated forum is?

From the link:
"Secondly, there are two BBS style message forums that we will have links to, one moderated and one not. So you can pick your playground. More on this later."

[jazmunda]

http://artbell.com/art-bells-new-show-faq/


Ahem!! This is great! But nothing new for us.  Wonder who the other Moderated forum is?

What if this is the moderated forum they are referring to? Can you imagine the cluster[censored] the other forum would be?

[popple]

From the link:
"Secondly, there are two BBS style message forums that we will have links to, one moderated and one not. So you can pick your playground. More on this later."

Gimme BellGab. Where you can place small objects like pebbles and crayons up your nose & keep them there!

[serenity]

So...anyone know what happened to U7? No website, no stream, Damn it was a good one too!

[bateman]

What if this is the moderated forum they are referring to? Can you imagine the cluster[censored] the other forum would be?

There are no other Art Bell forums, don't be ridiculous.

[Heather Wade]

There are no other Art Bell forums, don't be ridiculous.

And if there are, BellGab is the only one that matters.  Science.  Sayin'.  *drops mic*

[Art Bell]

For what it's worth I have cameras all over the place, pan/tilt at that. I believe in Security and the hardware to back it up.

I really love the fact that I will have two Skype connections to the board. To many times the U.S and Canada keep it so busy that the rest of the World has a tough time getting through.

I may do a night of pure open lines just to test everything out before the first official show.

Art

[Bounder]

John Lear used to talk about other fora.  Fantastic something?  Maybe ATS?  Sacrilege, I know.  Grasping at straws.

Red, as per usual, completely right.