Worth remembering that eugenics was the smart idea among many intellectuals in the earlier 20th century. The fascinating list of eminent adherents include J. Maynard Keynes, Winston Churchill, T. Roosevelt, Francis Crick, Linus Pauling, Herbert Hoover, J.H. Kellogg (of corn flake fame), Oliver Wendell Holmes, GB Shaw, Sidney Webb (early socialist, co-founder of the LSE & the Labour Party) and William Beveridge who created the British National Health System (NHS). Apparently Hitler wrote "There is today one state in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.". (Mein Kempf).
'Cutting emissions'. Trouble is that if folk are convinced this is so negative they'd do something about it - and they do not. Conclusion?
The renewables revolution has been accompanied by a steady increase in emissions. For emissions read carbon dioxide (no argument from anyone about toxic gases) which is a carbon source for plant growth and as we know, is pumped into greenhouses to increase production. Satellite pictures confirm greening of the Earth in many areas.
This does not have to be a counter argument but the emission story would be more convincing to a lot of people if other factors like this (and the difficult question of just how do you decrease energy use without impoverishing people?) were discussed in the public forum in a balanced way as with dissenting views from those distinguished scientists evidently holed up on luxury yachts financed by the oil industry. 'I think you are wrong because ...' or 'you have a point in that respect but ... '. In a nutshell let's get the discussion onto what used to be called 'an adult level'.
Example: Today's Guardian
"In case of any doubt about Norway’s commitment to maintain – and expand – its production of gas and oil offshore, the energy minister, Terje Aasland, has a pithy response: “We will develop, not dismantle, activity on our continental shelf.”
It's claimed that around 90% of Americans are choline deficient. Eggs are one the best nutritional sources for choline. There are several papers linking low choline levels with Altzheimer disease so it would not be surprising to find a link between egg consumption and Altzheimer incidence. Sponsored studies should indeed be treated with much caution but is anyone suggesting such authors invent positive results or ignore highly inconvenient results? Such behavior would be reprehensible and not something with which a researcher would wish to be associated.
> such authors... ignore highly inconvenient results?
There are plenty of examples where that does seem to happen. Not sure if anyone has done a comparison with rate of non-publication by non-interest group funded studies. Probably difficult given there's not much motivation to uncover non-publication without the anti-corporate sensationalism.
Racist? No! Perhaps other definitions will differ but here are two at random:
'A person who believes a particular race is superior to others OR a person with
A prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others'. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=racist+definition&atb=v475-1&ia=we... (Wiktionary) and
'Having, reflecting, or fostering the belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race' (Merriam Webster) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racist.
I read nothing of that in the statement by the Indian, Bose, to suggest that. It just a different mindset. I do agree with you regarding the hold that orthodoxy has on a number of areas of research. We should periodically check that it doesn’t neglect significant evidence pointing in another direction.
In a ResearchGate pdf, we read 'In India, where spirituality and mysticism are deeply ingrained in cultural practices, investigating parapsychological phenomena can provide significant insights into human consciousness.' Nothing racist, just one of the fascinating welcome differences of focus on the part of who happen to live in a different general cultural milieu from the West.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/399124147_Mysticism...
I do appreciate how AI has been taught to spell properly as in the difference between its and it's. Here, initially I thought you'd left out the apostrophe in its, but then I realized you might be saying 'the reason it is not conscious is because of -its- software - the latter not being conscious. Context and interpretation are rather critical. (I know - a truism!)
My thought too. The title appears to assume there's nothing special about the 'communicating' but there is about the 'practicing'. Should it not be 'New research suggests people can practice skills and even communicate while dreaming'.
I would like to know more.
Call me crazy, but maybe allowing privatization of public transportation, security, healthcare, etc is where this all started. The incentives need to stop.
reply