Nothing is wrong with me! Daric there are these things called 'books' and shops which sell them, and often
there is a section called 'popular science'. That's science written for non specialists to read. Some are written by science
journalists, whilst others by scientists themselves, such as Stephen Hawking's Brief History of Time. Sometimes these people
give public lectures for the general public, as opposed to presenting specialist papers to their peers. The video you posted was one such example. OK? Clear on this now? So what you get is the 'popular' narrative of science, not the actual science.
The model is actually very good, but no model is perfect. That's how science works. It abstracts from unique events concepts. Now a concept is a generality. Take for instance DMT, (well you do!) the effects described scientifically will be general, each person taking the drug will have a unique experience, not a general one. And yes - scientists need equipment to test their theories - in the real world, (they don't simply take LSD and note the revelations given...) and yes she looks to a better - not perfect - understanding of the real world. Now that is sanity, insanity is where people think they are Napoleon, or God, or know everything. (Or they may be tripping...)killing raven sun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:17 amyeah, i already paraphrased what she saidbut ten minutes in she delineates exactly the major problems, the breakdowns are already well knownshe advocates making better models of the broken model but gee we dont have the computational power, so the future is where she lives, total insanity
That is what she actually does, evidence from experiments to confirm or refute an hypotheses. Not base an idea of reality on some hallucination from a now very trendy drug.killing raven sun wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:17 amno, the alternative is to do real science based on observation and experimentation, but im not surpised you dont know that