Guest guest Posted July 6, 2003 Report Share Posted July 6, 2003 There are still scientists that view the brain as a stand alone chemically driven organ that determines our identity, and which contains all our thoughts and memories. Of course they are as wrong as the scientists at the time of Galileo who believed the earth was the center of the universe. The brain is a massively parellel processor of quantum information and there is mounting evidence to suggest all information, past present and future exists in the zero point field, some have a name for its identity , such as the " quantum hologram " . Scientists studing the disconnected evolution of many lines our ancestors (pre homo-sapiens) are convinced that an external (to earth) intelligence is the only possible explanation for separate lines of evolution resulting in near identical brain constructs over thousands of years for separate lineages of pre man. Most people have an intuitive belief that their consciousness is eternal and therefore must exist outside their physical existance, even though they have not studied the emerging scientific discoveries occuring every day that are bringing us closer to a generally accepted theory of the " non-locality of our consciousous entity " . Religious and spiritual beliefs have traditionally filled the gap in understanding this " mystery " but pure science is starting to fill in many of the gaps in understanding the essence of our universal existance. This in no way minimizes a religious or spiritual conviction. The more one begins to understand the magnificence of the universal live force the more we marvel at the creator. So, this apparent " mystery " of how to explain the intelligence, knowledge and information demonstrated by those souls with extremely limited (physical) brain capacity is just one more nicely fitting piece in the puzzle of understanding the non locality of our energetic existance. Barry at QWC " Kunold " <*@...> wrote: >dear group, >i recevied this from another group. it seriously puzzled me. >huh???????????????? >weird. >marlene > >----- Original Message ----- >> http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm >> >> Is your brain really necessary? >> >> Do you really have to have a brain? The reason for my apparently >> absurd question is the remarkable research conducted at the >> University of Sheffield by neurology professor Lorber. >> When Sheffield's campus doctor was treating one of the >> mathematics students for a minor ailment, he noticed that the >> student's head was a little larger than normal. The doctor >> referred the student to professor Lorber for further examination. >> The student in question was academically bright, had a reported >> IQ of 126 and was expected to graduate. When he was examined by >> CAT-scan, however, Lorber discovered that he had virtually no >> brain at all. >> >> Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 >> centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of >> cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column. >> The student was suffering from hydrocephalus, the condition in >> which the cerebrospinal fluid, instead of circulating around the >> brain and entering the bloodstream, becomes dammed up inside the >> brain. >> >> Normally, the condition is fatal in the first months of >> childhood. Even where an individual survives he or she is usually >> seriously handicapped. Somehow, though, the Sheffield student had >> lived a perfectly normal life and went on to gain an honours >> degree in mathematics. >> >> This case is by no means as rare as it seems. In 1970, a New >> Yorker died at the age of 35. He had left school with no >> academic achievements, but had worked at manual jobs such as >> building janitor, and was a popular figure in his neighbourhood. >> Tenants of the building where he worked described him as passing >> the days performing his routine chores, such as tending the >> boiler, and reading the tabloid newspapers. When an autopsy was >> performed to determine the cause of his premature death he, too, >> was found to have practically no brain at all. >> >> Professor Lorber has identified several hundred people who have >> very small cerebral hemispheres but who appear to be normal >> intelligent individuals. Some of them he describes as having 'no >> detectable brain', yet they have scored up to 120 on IQ tests. >> No-one knows how people with 'no detectable brain' are able to >> function at all, let alone to graduate in mathematics, but there >> are a couple theories. One idea is that there is such a high >> level of redundancy of function in the normal brain that what >> little remains is able to learn to deputise for the missing >> hemispheres. Another, similar, suggestion is the old idea that >> we only use a small percentage of our brains anyway -- perhaps as >> little a 10 per cent. >> >> The trouble with these ideas is that more recent research seems >> to contradict them. The functions of the brain have been mapped >> comprehensively and although there is some redundancy there is >> also a high degree of specialisation -- the motor area and the >> visual cortex being highly specific for instance. Similarly, the >> idea that we 'only use 10 per cent of our brain' is a >> misunderstanding dating from research in the 1930s in which the >> functions of large areas of the cortex could not be determined >> and were dubbed 'silent', when in fact they are linked with >> important functions like speech and abstract thinking. >> >> The other interesting thing about Lorber's findings is that they >> remind us of the mystery of memory. At first it was thought that >> memory would have some physical substrate in the brain, like the >> memory chips in a PC. But extensive investigation of the brain >> has turned up the surprising fact that memory is not located in >> any one area or in a specific substrate. As one eminent >> neurologist put it, 'memory is everywhere in the brain and >> nowhere.' >> >> But if the brain is not a mechanism for classifying and storing >> experiences and analysing them to enable us to live our lives >> then what on earth is the brain for? And where is the seat of >> human intelligence? Where is the mind? >> >> The only biologist to propose a radically novel approach to these >> questions is Dr Rupert Sheldrake. In his book A New Science of >> Life Sheldrake rejected the idea that the brain is a warehouse >> for memories and suggested it is more like a radio receiver for >> tuning into the past. Memory is not a recording process in which >> a medium is altered to store records, but a journey that the mind >> makes into the past via the process of morphic resonance. >> >> But, of course, such a crazy idea couldn't possibly be true, >> could it? > > > > > > >............................................ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2003 Report Share Posted July 6, 2003 very interesting.who made the holograp theory had the same experients with a rat.cut up /poor rats/ brain more and more parts and finally nothing left and the rats made the same teached things /how to get his food /again & again.The brain is in 4 dimension in virtual same name as space time or quantum ,in paralelport ways. But these aarticle sacking everyone.I do believe in .aaccording my recent learnings. by-by gyorgyi > dear group, > i recevied this from another group. it seriously puzzled me. > huh???????????????? > weird. > marlene > > ----- Original Message ----- > > http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm > > > > Is your brain really necessary? > > > > Do you really have to have a brain? The reason for my apparently > > absurd question is the remarkable research conducted at the > > University of Sheffield by neurology professor Lorber. > > When Sheffield's campus doctor was treating one of the > > mathematics students for a minor ailment, he noticed that the > > student's head was a little larger than normal. The doctor > > referred the student to professor Lorber for further examination. > > The student in question was academically bright, had a reported > > IQ of 126 and was expected to graduate. When he was examined by > > CAT-scan, however, Lorber discovered that he had virtually no > > brain at all. > > > > Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 > > centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of > > cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column. > > The student was suffering from hydrocephalus, the condition in > > which the cerebrospinal fluid, instead of circulating around the > > brain and entering the bloodstream, becomes dammed up inside the > > brain. > > > > Normally, the condition is fatal in the first months of > > childhood. Even where an individual survives he or she is usually > > seriously handicapped. Somehow, though, the Sheffield student had > > lived a perfectly normal life and went on to gain an honours > > degree in mathematics. > > > > This case is by no means as rare as it seems. In 1970, a New > > Yorker died at the age of 35. He had left school with no > > academic achievements, but had worked at manual jobs such as > > building janitor, and was a popular figure in his neighbourhood. > > Tenants of the building where he worked described him as passing > > the days performing his routine chores, such as tending the > > boiler, and reading the tabloid newspapers. When an autopsy was > > performed to determine the cause of his premature death he, too, > > was found to have practically no brain at all. > > > > Professor Lorber has identified several hundred people who have > > very small cerebral hemispheres but who appear to be normal > > intelligent individuals. Some of them he describes as having 'no > > detectable brain', yet they have scored up to 120 on IQ tests. > > No-one knows how people with 'no detectable brain' are able to > > function at all, let alone to graduate in mathematics, but there > > are a couple theories. One idea is that there is such a high > > level of redundancy of function in the normal brain that what > > little remains is able to learn to deputise for the missing > > hemispheres. Another, similar, suggestion is the old idea that > > we only use a small percentage of our brains anyway -- perhaps as > > little a 10 per cent. > > > > The trouble with these ideas is that more recent research seems > > to contradict them. The functions of the brain have been mapped > > comprehensively and although there is some redundancy there is > > also a high degree of specialisation -- the motor area and the > > visual cortex being highly specific for instance. Similarly, the > > idea that we 'only use 10 per cent of our brain' is a > > misunderstanding dating from research in the 1930s in which the > > functions of large areas of the cortex could not be determined > > and were dubbed 'silent', when in fact they are linked with > > important functions like speech and abstract thinking. > > > > The other interesting thing about Lorber's findings is that they > > remind us of the mystery of memory. At first it was thought that > > memory would have some physical substrate in the brain, like the > > memory chips in a PC. But extensive investigation of the brain > > has turned up the surprising fact that memory is not located in > > any one area or in a specific substrate. As one eminent > > neurologist put it, 'memory is everywhere in the brain and > > nowhere.' > > > > But if the brain is not a mechanism for classifying and storing > > experiences and analysing them to enable us to live our lives > > then what on earth is the brain for? And where is the seat of > > human intelligence? Where is the mind? > > > > The only biologist to propose a radically novel approach to these > > questions is Dr Rupert Sheldrake. In his book A New Science of > > Life Sheldrake rejected the idea that the brain is a warehouse > > for memories and suggested it is more like a radio receiver for > > tuning into the past. Memory is not a recording process in which > > a medium is altered to store records, but a journey that the mind > > makes into the past via the process of morphic resonance. > > > > But, of course, such a crazy idea couldn't possibly be true, > > could it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2003 Report Share Posted July 6, 2003 forget one more thing.my knowlige the thaugs coming from the kidney and hearts.according my bible studiesg > dear group, > i recevied this from another group. it seriously puzzled me. > huh???????????????? > weird. > marlene > > ----- Original Message ----- > > http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm > > > > Is your brain really necessary? > > > > Do you really have to have a brain? The reason for my apparently > > absurd question is the remarkable research conducted at the > > University of Sheffield by neurology professor Lorber. > > When Sheffield's campus doctor was treating one of the > > mathematics students for a minor ailment, he noticed that the > > student's head was a little larger than normal. The doctor > > referred the student to professor Lorber for further examination. > > The student in question was academically bright, had a reported > > IQ of 126 and was expected to graduate. When he was examined by > > CAT-scan, however, Lorber discovered that he had virtually no > > brain at all. > > > > Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 > > centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of > > cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column. > > The student was suffering from hydrocephalus, the condition in > > which the cerebrospinal fluid, instead of circulating around the > > brain and entering the bloodstream, becomes dammed up inside the > > brain. > > > > Normally, the condition is fatal in the first months of > > childhood. Even where an individual survives he or she is usually > > seriously handicapped. Somehow, though, the Sheffield student had > > lived a perfectly normal life and went on to gain an honours > > degree in mathematics. > > > > This case is by no means as rare as it seems. In 1970, a New > > Yorker died at the age of 35. He had left school with no > > academic achievements, but had worked at manual jobs such as > > building janitor, and was a popular figure in his neighbourhood. > > Tenants of the building where he worked described him as passing > > the days performing his routine chores, such as tending the > > boiler, and reading the tabloid newspapers. When an autopsy was > > performed to determine the cause of his premature death he, too, > > was found to have practically no brain at all. > > > > Professor Lorber has identified several hundred people who have > > very small cerebral hemispheres but who appear to be normal > > intelligent individuals. Some of them he describes as having 'no > > detectable brain', yet they have scored up to 120 on IQ tests. > > No-one knows how people with 'no detectable brain' are able to > > function at all, let alone to graduate in mathematics, but there > > are a couple theories. One idea is that there is such a high > > level of redundancy of function in the normal brain that what > > little remains is able to learn to deputise for the missing > > hemispheres. Another, similar, suggestion is the old idea that > > we only use a small percentage of our brains anyway -- perhaps as > > little a 10 per cent. > > > > The trouble with these ideas is that more recent research seems > > to contradict them. The functions of the brain have been mapped > > comprehensively and although there is some redundancy there is > > also a high degree of specialisation -- the motor area and the > > visual cortex being highly specific for instance. Similarly, the > > idea that we 'only use 10 per cent of our brain' is a > > misunderstanding dating from research in the 1930s in which the > > functions of large areas of the cortex could not be determined > > and were dubbed 'silent', when in fact they are linked with > > important functions like speech and abstract thinking. > > > > The other interesting thing about Lorber's findings is that they > > remind us of the mystery of memory. At first it was thought that > > memory would have some physical substrate in the brain, like the > > memory chips in a PC. But extensive investigation of the brain > > has turned up the surprising fact that memory is not located in > > any one area or in a specific substrate. As one eminent > > neurologist put it, 'memory is everywhere in the brain and > > nowhere.' > > > > But if the brain is not a mechanism for classifying and storing > > experiences and analysing them to enable us to live our lives > > then what on earth is the brain for? And where is the seat of > > human intelligence? Where is the mind? > > > > The only biologist to propose a radically novel approach to these > > questions is Dr Rupert Sheldrake. In his book A New Science of > > Life Sheldrake rejected the idea that the brain is a warehouse > > for memories and suggested it is more like a radio receiver for > > tuning into the past. Memory is not a recording process in which > > a medium is altered to store records, but a journey that the mind > > makes into the past via the process of morphic resonance. > > > > But, of course, such a crazy idea couldn't possibly be true, > > could it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2003 Report Share Posted July 7, 2003 Wits my english is these good!Everything what I do learn I looking the light of Bible/an a " how to use " instruction from God to us.Anithing we buy does have an istruction.God do not left us without one.AllQUANTUM fact are the wery good proof for me to the Bible truth.Except one things.In these holograp system we are connected by the nerves systemsonly.God givet us so much responsability what we are doung on personal level.Withouth that the Bible is unvalid.God put the counscesness to our heart ,to kultivate that to able to select the good actions.What is good is written in the Bible.God laws are excellent .And He will going to giving back all lost lives to whom ever lived in these Eart/except sinners whom delibetary want to be bad peoples.If Adam do not fallow Eva,still we live forever,because family level the final say-so belong to the man./to the arguments somhow end/So jezus bought back what adam lost. ddo time everything changing back. So i do not believe the new fashions ;all mind is connected the way they think.The connectednes is on differents level. BUT OTHER WISE WITH quantum we even able to understand how jezus even resurected the death.What for me not was a mirecle,just used the laws of the universe spacetime,time sace subspace virtual field Lots.of name above has a same meaning.The very-very small particles do more than the 3 dimension state of matter.Barry sorry I put here as connected by your amazing writing but for me probably You are whom really KNOWS and has very deep understanding.gyorgyi > > >dear group, > >i recevied this from another group. it seriously puzzled me. > >huh???????????????? > >weird. > >marlene > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >> http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm > >> > >> Is your brain really necessary? > >> > >> Do you really have to have a brain? The reason for my apparently > >> absurd question is the remarkable research conducted at the > >> University of Sheffield by neurology professor Lorber. > >> When Sheffield's campus doctor was treating one of the > >> mathematics students for a minor ailment, he noticed that the > >> student's head was a little larger than normal. The doctor > >> referred the student to professor Lorber for further examination. > >> The student in question was academically bright, had a reported > >> IQ of 126 and was expected to graduate. When he was examined by > >> CAT-scan, however, Lorber discovered that he had virtually no > >> brain at all. > >> > >> Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 > >> centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of > >> cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column. > >> The student was suffering from hydrocephalus, the condition in > >> which the cerebrospinal fluid, instead of circulating around the > >> brain and entering the bloodstream, becomes dammed up inside the > >> brain. > >> > >> Normally, the condition is fatal in the first months of > >> childhood. Even where an individual survives he or she is usually > >> seriously handicapped. Somehow, though, the Sheffield student had > >> lived a perfectly normal life and went on to gain an honours > >> degree in mathematics. > >> > >> This case is by no means as rare as it seems. In 1970, a New > >> Yorker died at the age of 35. He had left school with no > >> academic achievements, but had worked at manual jobs such as > >> building janitor, and was a popular figure in his neighbourhood. > >> Tenants of the building where he worked described him as passing > >> the days performing his routine chores, such as tending the > >> boiler, and reading the tabloid newspapers. When an autopsy was > >> performed to determine the cause of his premature death he, too, > >> was found to have practically no brain at all. > >> > >> Professor Lorber has identified several hundred people who have > >> very small cerebral hemispheres but who appear to be normal > >> intelligent individuals. Some of them he describes as having 'no > >> detectable brain', yet they have scored up to 120 on IQ tests. > >> No-one knows how people with 'no detectable brain' are able to > >> function at all, let alone to graduate in mathematics, but there > >> are a couple theories. One idea is that there is such a high > >> level of redundancy of function in the normal brain that what > >> little remains is able to learn to deputise for the missing > >> hemispheres. Another, similar, suggestion is the old idea that > >> we only use a small percentage of our brains anyway -- perhaps as > >> little a 10 per cent. > >> > >> The trouble with these ideas is that more recent research seems > >> to contradict them. The functions of the brain have been mapped > >> comprehensively and although there is some redundancy there is > >> also a high degree of specialisation -- the motor area and the > >> visual cortex being highly specific for instance. Similarly, the > >> idea that we 'only use 10 per cent of our brain' is a > >> misunderstanding dating from research in the 1930s in which the > >> functions of large areas of the cortex could not be determined > >> and were dubbed 'silent', when in fact they are linked with > >> important functions like speech and abstract thinking. > >> > >> The other interesting thing about Lorber's findings is that they > >> remind us of the mystery of memory. At first it was thought that > >> memory would have some physical substrate in the brain, like the > >> memory chips in a PC. But extensive investigation of the brain > >> has turned up the surprising fact that memory is not located in > >> any one area or in a specific substrate. As one eminent > >> neurologist put it, 'memory is everywhere in the brain and > >> nowhere.' > >> > >> But if the brain is not a mechanism for classifying and storing > >> experiences and analysing them to enable us to live our lives > >> then what on earth is the brain for? And where is the seat of > >> human intelligence? Where is the mind? > >> > >> The only biologist to propose a radically novel approach to these > >> questions is Dr Rupert Sheldrake. In his book A New Science of > >> Life Sheldrake rejected the idea that the brain is a warehouse > >> for memories and suggested it is more like a radio receiver for > >> tuning into the past. Memory is not a recording process in which > >> a medium is altered to store records, but a journey that the mind > >> makes into the past via the process of morphic resonance. > >> > >> But, of course, such a crazy idea couldn't possibly be true, > >> could it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >............................................ > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2003 Report Share Posted July 8, 2003 In a message dated 7/8/2003 7:15:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, gyorgyibaunok@... writes: Scientific discoveries occurring every day that are bringing us closer to a generally accepted theory of the "non-locality of our consciousness entity." Religious and spiritual beliefs have gyorgyi, Thank you for your reply and apparent compliment, however I must admit translating your English is at times only slightly less difficult than trying to understand the many mysteries of the universe. I appreciate your strong religious convictions, and have often noted your reference to the Bible. I, probably as much as anyone have been educated, trained and exposed to traditional religious dogma but have come to realize the only meaningful spiritual beliefs one learns to live by are those which we can embrace on our own terms, and in our own way and may bear no resemblance to traditional teachings, be they based on the Bible, the Koran, Buddhism, the Hindu cultures and on and on. Sorry Gyorgyi, this is not a condemnation of traditional religious beliefs but merely a reminder that many of us prefer to keep our religious and spiritual lives strictly on a one-to-one relationship with the creator. Barry at QWC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2003 Report Share Posted July 8, 2003 Thanks for sending this on. I don't know what to make of it either, but it is certainly fascinating! Jim Syfers Fw: [oxyplus] No Brainer dear group, i recevied this from another group. it seriously puzzled me. huh???????????????? weird. marlene ----- Original Message ----- > http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm > > Is your brain really necessary? > > Do you really have to have a brain? The reason for my apparently > absurd question is the remarkable research conducted at the > University of Sheffield by neurology professor Lorber. > When Sheffield's campus doctor was treating one of the > mathematics students for a minor ailment, he noticed that the > student's head was a little larger than normal. The doctor > referred the student to professor Lorber for further examination. > The student in question was academically bright, had a reported > IQ of 126 and was expected to graduate. When he was examined by > CAT-scan, however, Lorber discovered that he had virtually no > brain at all. > > Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5 > centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of > cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column. > The student was suffering from hydrocephalus, the condition in > which the cerebrospinal fluid, instead of circulating around the > brain and entering the bloodstream, becomes dammed up inside the > brain. > > Normally, the condition is fatal in the first months of > childhood. Even where an individual survives he or she is usually > seriously handicapped. Somehow, though, the Sheffield student had > lived a perfectly normal life and went on to gain an honours > degree in mathematics. > > This case is by no means as rare as it seems. In 1970, a New > Yorker died at the age of 35. He had left school with no > academic achievements, but had worked at manual jobs such as > building janitor, and was a popular figure in his neighbourhood. > Tenants of the building where he worked described him as passing > the days performing his routine chores, such as tending the > boiler, and reading the tabloid newspapers. When an autopsy was > performed to determine the cause of his premature death he, too, > was found to have practically no brain at all. > > Professor Lorber has identified several hundred people who have > very small cerebral hemispheres but who appear to be normal > intelligent individuals. Some of them he describes as having 'no > detectable brain', yet they have scored up to 120 on IQ tests. > No-one knows how people with 'no detectable brain' are able to > function at all, let alone to graduate in mathematics, but there > are a couple theories. One idea is that there is such a high > level of redundancy of function in the normal brain that what > little remains is able to learn to deputise for the missing > hemispheres. Another, similar, suggestion is the old idea that > we only use a small percentage of our brains anyway -- perhaps as > little a 10 per cent. > > The trouble with these ideas is that more recent research seems > to contradict them. The functions of the brain have been mapped > comprehensively and although there is some redundancy there is > also a high degree of specialisation -- the motor area and the > visual cortex being highly specific for instance. Similarly, the > idea that we 'only use 10 per cent of our brain' is a > misunderstanding dating from research in the 1930s in which the > functions of large areas of the cortex could not be determined > and were dubbed 'silent', when in fact they are linked with > important functions like speech and abstract thinking. > > The other interesting thing about Lorber's findings is that they > remind us of the mystery of memory. At first it was thought that > memory would have some physical substrate in the brain, like the > memory chips in a PC. But extensive investigation of the brain > has turned up the surprising fact that memory is not located in > any one area or in a specific substrate. As one eminent > neurologist put it, 'memory is everywhere in the brain and > nowhere.' > > But if the brain is not a mechanism for classifying and storing > experiences and analysing them to enable us to live our lives > then what on earth is the brain for? And where is the seat of > human intelligence? Where is the mind? > > The only biologist to propose a radically novel approach to these > questions is Dr Rupert Sheldrake. In his book A New Science of > Life Sheldrake rejected the idea that the brain is a warehouse > for memories and suggested it is more like a radio receiver for > tuning into the past. Memory is not a recording process in which > a medium is altered to store records, but a journey that the mind > makes into the past via the process of morphic resonance. > > But, of course, such a crazy idea couldn't possibly be true, > could it? ............................................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2003 Report Share Posted July 12, 2003 Barry, thank you for your comments, I agree with you. As I have more and more experiences in this world. If we only did what is in our higher consciousness hearts and left words out of it, we would all act very similar toward each other and ourselves. Meaning, the act of unconditional love is the same. Re: Re: Fw: [oxyplus] No Brainer In a message dated 7/8/2003 7:15:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, gyorgyibaunok@... writes: Scientific discoveries occurring every day that are bringing us closer to a generally accepted theory of the " non-locality of our consciousness entity. " Religious and spiritual beliefs have gyorgyi, Thank you for your reply and apparent compliment, however I must admit translating your English is at times only slightly less difficult than trying to understand the many mysteries of the universe. I appreciate your strong religious convictions, and have often noted your reference to the Bible. I, probably as much as anyone have been educated, trained and exposed to traditional religious dogma but have come to realize the only meaningful spiritual beliefs one learns to live by are those which we can embrace on our own terms, and in our own way and may bear no resemblance to traditional teachings, be they based on the Bible, the Koran, Buddhism, the Hindu cultures and on and on. Sorry Gyorgyi, this is not a condemnation of traditional religious beliefs but merely a reminder that many of us prefer to keep our religious and spiritual lives strictly on a one-to-one relationship with the creator. Barry at QWC ............................................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 <html><body> <tt> There are still scientists that view the brain as a stand alone chemically driven organ that determines our identity, and which contains all our thoughts and memories. Of course they are as wrong as the scientists at the time of Galileo who believed the earth was the center of the universe. The brain is a massively parellel processor of quantum information and there is mounting evidence to suggest all information, past present and future exists in the zero point field, some have a name for its identity , such as the " quantum hologram " . Scientists studing the disconnected evolution of many lines our ancestors (pre homo-sapiens) are convinced that an external (to earth) intelligence is the only possible explanation for separate lines of evolution resulting in near identical brain constructs over thousands of years for separate lineages of pre man. Most people have an intuitive belief that their consciousness is eternal and therefore must exist outside their physical existance, even though they have not studied the emerging scientific discoveries occuring every day that are bringing us closer to a generally accepted theory of the " non-locality of our consciousous entity " . Religious and spiritual beliefs have traditionally filled the gap in understanding this " mystery " but pure science is starting to fill in many of the gaps in understanding the essence of our universal existance. This in no way minimizes a religious or spiritual conviction. The more one begins to understand the magnificence of the universal live force the more we marvel at the creator. So, this apparent " mystery " of how to explain the intelligence, knowledge and information demonstrated by those souls with extremely limited (physical) brain capacity is just one more nicely fitting piece in the puzzle of understanding the non locality of our energetic existance. Barry at QWC <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> " Kunold " <*@...> wrote:<BR> <BR> >dear group,<BR> >i recevied this from another group. it seriously puzzled me.<BR> >huh????????????????<BR> >weird.<BR> >marlene<BR> ><BR> >----- Original Message -----<BR> >> <a href= " http://www.alternativescience.com/no_brainer.htm " >http://www.alternativesc\ ience.com/no_brainer.htm</a><BR> >><BR> >> Is your brain really necessary?<BR> >><BR> >> Do you really have to have a brain? The reason for my apparently<BR> >> absurd question is the remarkable research conducted at the<BR> >> University of Sheffield by neurology professor Lorber.<BR> >> When Sheffield's campus doctor was treating one of the<BR> >> mathematics students for a minor ailment, he noticed that the<BR> >> student's head was a little larger than normal. The doctor<BR> >> referred the student to professor Lorber for further examination.<BR> >> The student in question was academically bright, had a reported<BR> >> IQ of 126 and was expected to graduate. When he was examined by<BR> >> CAT-scan, however, Lorber discovered that he had virtually no<BR> >> brain at all.<BR> >><BR> >> Instead of two hemispheres filling the cranial cavity, some 4.5<BR> >> centimetres deep, the student had less than 1 millimetre of<BR> >> cerebral tissue covering the top of his spinal column.<BR> >> The student was suffering from hydrocephalus, the condition in<BR> >> which the cerebrospinal fluid, instead of circulating around the<BR> >> brain and entering the bloodstream, becomes dammed up inside the<BR> >> brain.<BR> >><BR> >> Normally, the condition is fatal in the first months of<BR> >> childhood. Even where an individual survives he or she is usually<BR> >> seriously handicapped. Somehow, though, the Sheffield student had<BR> >> lived a perfectly normal life and went on to gain an honours<BR> >> degree in mathematics.<BR> >><BR> >> This case is by no means as rare as it seems. In 1970, a New<BR> >> Yorker died at the age of 35. He had left school with no<BR> >> academic achievements, but had worked at manual jobs such as<BR> >> building janitor, and was a popular figure in his neighbourhood.<BR> >> Tenants of the building where he worked described him as passing<BR> >> the days performing his routine chores, such as tending the<BR> >> boiler, and reading the tabloid newspapers. When an autopsy was<BR> >> performed to determine the cause of his premature death he, too,<BR> >> was found to have practically no brain at all.<BR> >><BR> >> Professor Lorber has identified several hundred people who have<BR> >> very small cerebral hemispheres but who appear to be normal<BR> >> intelligent individuals. Some of them he describes as having 'no<BR> >> detectable brain', yet they have scored up to 120 on IQ tests.<BR> >> No-one knows how people with 'no detectable brain' are able to<BR> >> function at all, let alone to graduate in mathematics, but there<BR> >> are a couple theories. One idea is that there is such a high<BR> >> level of redundancy of function in the normal brain that what<BR> >> little remains is able to learn to deputise for the missing<BR> >> hemispheres. Another, similar, suggestion is the old idea that<BR> >> we only use a small percentage of our brains anyway -- perhaps as<BR> >> little a 10 per cent.<BR> >><BR> >> The trouble with these ideas is that more recent research seems<BR> >> to contradict them. The functions of the brain have been mapped<BR> >> comprehensively and although there is some redundancy there is<BR> >> also a high degree of specialisation -- the motor area and the<BR> >> visual cortex being highly specific for instance. Similarly, the<BR> >> idea that we 'only use 10 per cent of our brain' is a<BR> >> misunderstanding dating from research in the 1930s in which the<BR> >> functions of large areas of the cortex could not be determined<BR> >> and were dubbed 'silent', when in fact they are linked with<BR> >> important functions like speech and abstract thinking.<BR> >><BR> >> The other interesting thing about Lorber's findings is that they<BR> >> remind us of the mystery of memory. At first it was thought that<BR> >> memory would have some physical substrate in the brain, like the<BR> >> memory chips in a PC. But extensive investigation of the brain<BR> >> has turned up the surprising fact that memory is not located in<BR> >> any one area or in a specific substrate. As one eminent<BR> >> neurologist put it, 'memory is everywhere in the brain and<BR> >> nowhere.'<BR> >><BR> >> But if the brain is not a mechanism for classifying and storing<BR> >> experiences and analysing them to enable us to live our lives<BR> >> then what on earth is the brain for? And where is the seat of<BR> >> human intelligence? Where is the mind?<BR> >><BR> >> The only biologist to propose a radically novel approach to these<BR> >> questions is Dr Rupert Sheldrake. In his book A New Science of<BR> >> Life Sheldrake rejected the idea that the brain is a warehouse<BR> >> for memories and suggested it is more like a radio receiver for<BR> >> tuning into the past. Memory is not a recording process in which<BR> >> a medium is altered to store records, but a journey that the mind<BR> >> makes into the past via the process of morphic resonance.<BR> >><BR> >> But, of course, such a crazy idea couldn't possibly be true,<BR> >> could it?<BR> ><BR> ><BR> ><BR> ><BR> ><BR> ><BR> >............................................<BR> ><BR> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.