From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Sun Mar 28 1999 - 22:33:15 MST
In a message dated 3/28/99 9:05:07 PM, you wrote:
> According to Benveniste, if the
> cause of such biochemical events were simply due to
> random collisions between adrenalin molecules and
> their receptors (the currently accepted theory of
> molecular signalling), then it should take longer than
> it does to get angry.
Well, he certainly doesn't know much about neurobiology. We get
angry via synaptic transmissions, which happen in a small number of
milliseconds, just as predicted by physics.
Whole-body hormonal adrenal events are predicted to require up to
several minutes and that turns out to be correct too.
> Nature's attempted debunking exercise failed to find
> evidence of fraud, but concluded that Benveniste's
> research was essentially unreproducible, a claim he
> has always denied.
"Failed to find evidence of fraud" is an *extremely* charitable way
of putting it. Randi switched some of the bottles without telling
Beneviste. The bottles that *had* been treated - but that Beneviste
thought hadn't - showed no reaction. The bottles that *had not*
been treated - but that Beneviste thought had - had a reaction!
Clearly the effect was quite bogus, and that's certainly evidence
for fraud. Fraud wasn't *proved*, because Beneviste could be a
wishful incompetent.
So now somebody whose experiments are, intentionally or unintentionally,
fudged, has found a new implausible effect which solves a "problem"
which actually doesn't exist. Pardon me if I'm not impressed.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:25 MST