| Great, thank you. I think what your initial comment was missing is it implied just being a quack was somehow a path to new ideas. What his is missing, in the context of Seyfreid, is that what Seyfreid is promoting: 1. Has been studied quite extensively.
2. The results of said studies do not match his claims.
3. He can't even get the details right on the data he's trying to present. The examples you gave are different in that while the action was not understood, they explained existing data. In particular, I think the challenge with your initial comment is that spouting bullshit is an entirely free enterprise. Testing bullshit is an expensive enterprise. So your system provides no meaningful actionable way to get to a new, coherent, understanding of the world. And, let's be honest, Tesla is a mixed bag. He was a total crank in a lot of ways. But also a genius in other ways. Linus Pauling is similar. Complete crank around vitamin C. |