Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

PlanetSpores.ca
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

Community > The Pub
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]
Re: TED Censorship [Re: ilus]
    #17977431 -

You know after reading the blog and the first page of comments and the reissued response from TED, I've actually changed my mind a bit.

My dismissal of Hancock came from having read some of his books. The first I found enlightening and brilliant, but after that I find his works to greatly diminish in plausibility, provability and factual information to the point of laughter. However, I highly disagree with TED pulling his speech based on his references to ayahuasca. Had he championed it's use Tim Leary style I might have agreed with them, but he specifically stated that he was not advocating the recreational use of psychedelics. As Hancock mentions in his rebuttal, other TED organizers have mentioned the use of psychedelics in the origins of Silicon valley and have not been removed or given warnings for it.

Still, I find it egregious that he (Hancock) reacted as if he had some right to be featured on their Youtube channel. I also wish that the boards weren't muddied up with his followers, but that's what you get when a sensationalist mystic cries censorship on social media.

I'm definitely more interested in reading some Sheldrake now, even though my suspicion is that he's throwing out reasonable assertions in his video that will deteriorate into the equivalent of religious arguments in his overall hypothesis. (Mainly that reductionist materialist science can't solve for x in this case, therefor crystals and god and universal consciousness, yet still no proof for any of those) I don't mean to make assumptions against Sheldrake as an individual, but I've been down this road enough times to recognize it when I see it. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong and his credentials do seem a cut above the average pseudoscientist so we'll see.

On one hand I can almost hold the removal of his video against TED, since he was asked to speak on the topic of challenges to the prevailing scientific body of literature and that's exactly what he did.

Still, you can't fault TED for not wanting to use bandwidth on videos that might have damaged their reputation, even though it's ironically more damaged now for removing them. TED claims to promote "Ideas Worth Spreading" and if they don't feel that these guys ideas are worth spreading, tough shit for Hancock and Sheldrake. It's not like TED is the only medium through which they can advance their ideas.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: RiderOnTheStorm]
    #17977540 -

censorship = bullshit

big sciencey types can't hold their own water? stupid primpy bitches.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: JOE ROGAINE IS A TOOL [Re: NWlight]
    #17977544 -

NWlight said:
FUCK i really wanted to fucking watch this but fucking joe rogaine is in it, fuck.

cannot stand that man and his moronic pseudo-intellectualism, nor his stoner sheep followers.

the amount of harm that joe rofag has done to the movement with his disinformation and presenting speculation as fact :nonono:




ugh sorry i am just crankey and tired :bored:



I like Rogan, he's funny, but I have to agree with you.  He's one of those dudes who reads a book or a website and suddenly solves all of mankind's problems- a perfect example of the dangers of a little learning.

With subjects like drugs which most people are utterly ignorant of you can spout off for a long time before anyone will call you on your nonsense, and this seems to be what has allowed his ego to remain unchecked.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: JOE ROGAINE IS A TOOL [Re: johnm214]
    #17977548 -

why does Joe Rogan have to be the arbiter of truth and science on the matter of tripping on drugs? isn't that the Shroomery's job?

can't Joe Rogan just be Joe Rogan? :shrug:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: JOE ROGAINE IS A TOOL [Re: akira_akuma]
    #17977703 -

seriously get off his nuts haters


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #17977914 -

Prisoner#1 said:
a drug does not provide one with spiritual growth, that come from within
which is why some lose their spirituality while others find it and others
still it strengthens it. the drug is just a drug and for those that are
finding some spiritual nature to the drug they do so because that's
something they've always harbored but also doubted


Of course a drug all by itself doesn't do that. But to achieve any sort of growth without them for me seems very very hard. And if it is available I don't see why I shouldn't utilize it. Despite that, I do assess the mushroom to contain a built in pathway to enlightenment.

But enlightenment is a tricky thing and might mean different things for different people. But in todays' world most people are extemist-relativists. They think that anything goes and that whatever they call it, that's it and that's final.

I don't think you are right about my explanation. It is a worthy notion to me, what I got out of it last time. Call it an intoxication if you like. But it is presumptuous of you to tell me I was merely beating myself down.

Your words strike me as oppositional. I don't know why.

Quote:
the key to enlightenment is to fist understand that there is no enlightenment
that it's all a construct of our minds just as the pompous alex grey
believes he's some great visionary, these 'judgements' dont come from my
ego but from the fact that I wont feed the egos of others that tend to try
and hold themselves above others such as grey


That is what I said, enlightenment doesn't make you have an aura of white light or something fancy. I don't know all that much about Alex Grey. I do not know if he believes himself to be some visionary. How do you?

Quote:
and yet you're suggesting that I conform through your own judgements,
holding my views to be invalid because they dont mesh with yours, telling me that I shouldnt hold my opinion of someone I view as a pretentious twat because it's a 'harsh judgement being fed by my ego' without actually looking at the man I'm talking about and how others are seeing him


Well, we are both guilty of doing that perhaps.  I will say no more because we seem to get into an oppositional mood. We aren't resonating in tune.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: ilus]
    #17978941 -

Under immense pressure of the internet community, TED yesterday has decided on a fresh take regarding the controversial talks of Hancock and Sheldrake,

Today, TED published two blog posts, to each respectively, to open up new discussion which they hope will give them an idea how to go forward.

http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/19/the-debate-about-graham-hancocks-talk/
http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/19/the-debate-about-rupert-sheldrakes-talk/

However, I don't think TED has (yet) decided to put the videos of the talks back on their channel.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: akira_akuma]
    #17979365 -

akira_akuma said:
censorship = bullshit


Agreed, but there is no censorship here. Yes TED moved the videos off of their TEDx Youtube channel, but that's not abnormal. Out of 25,000 videos only a few hundred are on there.

They moved the videos to their blog, which is getting tons of traffic and lots of comments. TED has acknowledged their mistakes and are using their boards to host discussions about them. This is not how censorship is done. TED had every right to remove the videos altogether and had no obligation to answer for the move, yet they have for the sake of greater understanding. I applaud TED for handling this like mature and reasoned people.

Quote:
akira_akuma said:big sciencey types can't hold their own water? stupid primpy bitches.


In the last few months TEDx, which is put together by organizers that are not employed or funded by TED, has been bombarded with inane babble in the form of provably incorrect pseudoscience that has damaged their reputation. They have obviously overreacted here, but they were doing so in the name of scientific integrity. It happens, at least they're not trying to cover it up as religious institutions historically have.

There's no water to hold against Hancock, who spits mysticism and subjective jargon that offers no empirical testability.

True science will hold it's own as it always does and Sheldrake will either be exposed or his ideas will be tested and advanced. The fact that he only has one example of a scientific study for each of his grandiose claims is generally not a good sign, but I have not read his book yet or seen a rebuttal to it. This is the first time in a long while that an idea this far outside of mainstream scientific acceptance has really intrigued me and I'm sure I'm not alone. Don't count out a counter by rational scientists.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: RiderOnTheStorm]
    #17979563 -

I'll have to check this out. Thanks for sharing.

I like TED-- it's a shame to hear of the controversy.... though I never imagined them to be purely altruistic or non-profit. At least, not once I found out how it all worked. lol.  Still, I think they're doing a lot of good by releasing all their material free to the public. TED has blown my mind more than once.


And Eddie Huang is the shit.  :laugh::thumbup:


--------------------
------------------------
I am me. We are You.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: RiderOnTheStorm]
    #17979932 -

RiderOnTheStorm said:
akira_akuma said:
censorship = bullshit


In the last few months TEDx, which is put together by organizers that are not employed or funded by TED, has been bombarded with inane babble in the form of provably incorrect pseudoscience that has damaged their reputation. They have obviously overreacted here, but they were doing so in the name of scientific integrity. It happens, at least they're not trying to cover it up as religious institutions historically have.

There's no water to hold against Hancock, who spits mysticism and subjective jargon that offers no empirical testability.

True science will hold it's own as it always does and Sheldrake will either be exposed or his ideas will be tested and advanced. The fact that he only has one example of a scientific study for each of his grandiose claims is generally not a good sign, but I have not read his book yet or seen a rebuttal to it. This is the first time in a long while that an idea this far outside of mainstream scientific acceptance has really intrigued me and I'm sure I'm not alone. Don't count out a counter by rational scientists.


Thank you for your posts and logical reasoning.  I'm glad we have weeded out the cult-ness to one person's "fellowship" and have narrowed the issue down really to just the TEDx events.  I know very well the guys that put on TEDxUF and have any many friends and even old bosses speak at that and other pretty big TEDx events.  I feel better each day about how TED is handling this, even if it wasn't properly done at first.  I know that at TEDxUF they are very strict and the speakers they pick are mainly local scientists and entrepreneurs - I have never heard a threat of pseudoscience. 

I think the problem for the 2 censored videos is the theme of the event:

"Visions for Transition: 12th January 2013

Challenging existing paradigms and redefining values (for a more beautiful world)"

And you invite these guests obviously knowing what they are going to talk about?  That seems to be the biggest issues (and solution) to me. I also think it distinctly divides the viewers into two categories, those who haven't experienced anything like what he (Hancock) explains, and those who have in whatever form.  It's a touchy subject, but what do you expect when 'Visions & Challenging Paradigms' is your topic for a a TEDx conference?!  They hit the nail on the head for the topic!  :p


--------------------
Message me for Mushroom Tinctures
Lion's Mane, Reishi, Turkey Tail, Chaga, Shiitake / Extracts / CBD Isolate, Oil
----
My Art, Design, Sculpture & Music:  http://www.conceptflow.org

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: ilus]
    #17980642 -

yeah, why were they invited to begin with? did the TED conference promoters not "deduce" that their speeches were going to be drivel? hmmm, speaks volumes about their "scientific integrity".

plus, implications that this "pseudoscience" is so "damaging" is really crass and superficial. it's just some shit on top of more shit. so what? it's people talking in a conference, about stuff that may or may not have relevance to one or another. it's not like they are so "damaging" with their "incorrectness" that it's going to bludgeon the scientific community or hurt "TED talks" reputation. that's just asinine.

but scientists have to protect what's "rightfully" theirs, like any institution, i guess. :shrug:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: akira_akuma]
    #17980821 -

Last post on TED

"I am weary and disillusioned by the way the folks at Ted.com have behaved. Yes they have retracted and struck out the inaccurate and misleading comments they originally made about my “War on Consciousness” presentation, and yes they have published my rebuttal of those comments: http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/14/open-for-discussion-graham-hancock-and-rupert-sheldrake/
But their latest tactic (see here: http://www.facebook.com/Author.GrahamHancock/posts/10151560463442354 ) is so underhand and devious that I have decided I will no longer play their game by participating any further in their ever-receding blog pages of “discussions”, all of which are designed to distract public attention from the disastrous way they’ve handled this matter. I see now that even if the public remains engaged and continues to express outrage on the new Blog page they’ve created, TED has prepared an exit strategy. As they state on the page itself (http://www.ted.com/conversations/17190/the_debate_about_graham_hancoc.html ) they intend to shut the conversation down completely in less than two weeks.

It remains my hope that free thinking people everywhere who have found any merit in my “War on Consciousness” presentation will upload it wherever they are able to on the net. I guarantee that I for one will not pursue them for copyright violation and that they will have my thanks.

Now onwards to brighter and better things!"

- Hancock


--------------------
Message me for Mushroom Tinctures
Lion's Mane, Reishi, Turkey Tail, Chaga, Shiitake / Extracts / CBD Isolate, Oil
----
My Art, Design, Sculpture & Music:  http://www.conceptflow.org

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: ilus]
    #17980852 -

Not trying to derail the thread but any of you guys see last week how crazy drunk he was on his podcast? lol



  Fucking goof...


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: ilus]
    #17980886 -

This whole story has me scratching my head.

For one thing, why the hell did TED feature Graham Hancock? I mean, Graham Hancock? Graham Hancock? You expect him to get up there and say something that isn't batshit crazy?

Of course, the anger over a situation like this is like striking the hornet's nest-- all those self-important nerds come out of their study to comment on what science is and isn't, how pseudoscientific Hancock is, :blah:. God forbid anybody have a fucking imagination in their approach to a problem that has confounded science since its inception. :facepalm:


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: Sophistic Radiance]
    #17980950 -

The TEDx conference promoters are not part of TED though, a key point that a lot of people are missing.

Any chapter of TEDx can say, "Let's hold a conference on the modern practicality of astrology," film the speakers and then try to upload the videos to the TEDx channel. If the TED (not TEDx, mind you) board of review determines that the conference topic was not something that they want to pass off as an "idea worth spreading," they can choose to remove the videos from their channels.

That's exactly what happened here, only they neglected to realize that Graham Hancock would incite his mass of followers to cry censorship. When they demanded a response, TED's bloggers gave a shitty one, which was quickly picked apart.

Akira - I'd debate you on the fact that pseudoscience is highly damaging and has caused the deaths of many people, but don't really care to do that since I don't believe it would change your mind or any of our audiences, given the nature of this website.

While these talks certainly won't 'bludgeon the scientific community,' to assert that they cannot hurt TED's reputation is preposterous. Youtube videos have destroyed the reputation of many individuals and businesses. If Science Daily started publishing articles on the use of electromagnetic devices in the hunt for ghosts, I would find a better source for contemporary science news. TED is no different and certainly not immune to having it's reputation hurt, otherwise they wouldn't be defending it as hard as they are right now.

While I think that Hancock's video was removed for unpalatable reasons, he is really pushing the sensationalism of this whole thing to a next level, no doubt squeezing every ounce of much needed credibility out of this debacle. The implication that his video and the discussions surrounding it deserve more than two weeks of TED's full attention is self-entitled garbage. He should be happy that TED has garnered him any attention at all, if it weren't for this he'd just be another guy rattling on about Atlantis, the Face on Mars and the subjective values of psychedelics. Not only that but it only made sense for TED to give each video it's own debate forum, it was a mess trying to figure out whether each commenter was referring to Sheldrake's vid or Hancock's. Graham is trying to make it appear on his facebook page that TED made the move to bury him even deeper. Sensationalism, plain and simple.


--------------------

Edited by RiderOnTheStorm (03/19/13 08:52 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: Liquid_Dimension]
    #17980958 -

Lol, eh, it's his show.  I don't have a problem with the guy, but also don't watch him regularly, only when something special comes up.  I don't think he has bad intentions, just a bit of a bro, brah.


--------------------
Message me for Mushroom Tinctures
Lion's Mane, Reishi, Turkey Tail, Chaga, Shiitake / Extracts / CBD Isolate, Oil
----
My Art, Design, Sculpture & Music:  http://www.conceptflow.org

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: RiderOnTheStorm]
    #17980990 -

I have to admit that Hancock's work is more than a little too confabulatory for TED's standards, I still find the blowback kind of obnoxious. Skeptics shouldn't be tearing down "unscientific" ideas about the origins of consciousness when science itself has nothing definitive to say about the subject. This is an overextension of their responsibility.


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: Sophistic Radiance]
    #17981056 -

BlindSophist said:
I have to admit that Hancock's work is more than a little too confabulatory for TED's standards, I still find the blowback kind of obnoxious. Skeptics shouldn't be tearing down "unscientific" ideas about the origins of consciousness when science itself has nothing definitive to say about the subject. This is an overextension of their responsibility.


I could almost agree with you on this, except that in Sheldrake's case specifically he is tearing down the scientific ideas about the origins of consciousness and offering up his own ideas based on what appears to be very limited scientific evidence. How is it unfair for people to criticize this? Would you also care to enlighten me what the "responsibilities" of skeptics are and where you've received the authority to make those declarations?

Just because there's no general consensus about the origins of consciousness does not mean that any or all ideas are equal in merit or somehow outside the realm of peer review and critique, imo.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: RiderOnTheStorm]
    #17981069 -

I'm not familiar with Sheldrake and I haven't seen either video. I just happen to have some idea of what Hancock said to piss people off.

Also, what ideas are offered by empirical science to explain how neurobiological circuitry results in our experiences? Now I hope to be misinformed about this but AFAIK there are no viable hypotheses, much less established theories on how this is possible. As for the responsibility of the skeptics, they should focus their energy on debunking bogus claims, not outlandish approaches to outlandish problems.


--------------------
Enlil said:
You really are the worst kind of person.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: TED Censorship [Re: Sophistic Radiance]
    #17981118 -

I see. After watching both videos, reading all three of TEDs rebuttals and reading a large portion of the comments in the original discussion thread, I still don't see what Hancock said that pissed people off. That's my biggest problem here, he was very clear about the fact that he did not mean to encourage kids or adults to go try ayahuasca. I don't see eye-to-eye with the guy but I think he did his responsible duty when encroaching such a sensitive topic publicly.

If anything Sheldrake's comments pissed me off more, as he made the claim that science does not accept that other animals possess consciousness, among other half-truths. He then side-stepped the accusation in his rebuttal to TED.

Neurobiology is definitely not my strong suit, but from what I understand there have been some plausible hypotheses put forward on the topic of consciousness, there just isn't a consensus yet or a comprehensive theory that is widely accepted. I do not believe that you are correct about there being no viable hypotheses but I am not studied in this field so I can't give you any reading recommendations.

I guess I don't see the distinction you are making between a bogus claim an outlandish approach to an outlandish problem. Sheldrake is offering a claim that consciousness is streamed like a radio signal, rather than originating in the individual's mind. I am open minded to the idea (rather romantic about it if I'm being honest), but the only way to advance discourse on it is to let the skeptics and scientists have at it. In what other manner would his hypothesis be proven or dismissed?

As I said to Akira earlier, I agree that nobody should waste time rebutting Hancock's ideas as they are not objective challenges to anything in particular (at least not in this video).


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Community > The Pub
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* What happened to Ted talks? Straight trash now.
( 1 2 all )		 danielx 712 20 04/12/16 10:29 PM
by Mickalopagus
* TEDx Censorship: Graham Hancock & Rupert Sheldrake banned videos Keru 2,985 15 03/21/13 05:43 PM
by KremrBigSikter
* Alex Grey - TEDx
( 1 2 all )		 trampis 1,920 21 04/07/13 02:52 PM
by RiderOnTheStorm
* TED Talk -- Does Money make you Mean?
( 1 2 3 all )		 AsanteM 556 48 12/19/16 09:54 AM
by Prisoner#1
* Everything we know about addiction is wrong. Watch this TED talk. It's wort. Patlal 649 10 08/21/15 10:14 PM
by Crystal G
* Herbie Hancock Baked Goods? Aninator 366 1 08/30/10 12:14 PM
by PartyMarty4000
* Talk TED Talks akira_akuma 809 14 09/04/14 07:19 AM
by akira_akuma
* △ Graham Hancock questions Richard Dawkins on psychedelics and challenging his world view Playful Hate 868 8 08/09/12 11:49 AM
by Mad_Larkin

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
3,635 topic views. 3 members, 161 guests and 135 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.