"Whole Science" Website

[dalriada]

"What would happen if your mind, your consciousness, had the power to control the circumstances around you, to literally create your own reality? "

I generally find that sort of thing is a sure sign of spending way too much time on the internet- however I 'm going to encourage y'all to spend a little more time checking out the following website....

The Whole Science website

Very Well-designed site, glossy as all hell, liberal use of the words "Science" and "Scientific"* and a plug for the Sheldrake "Skeptical Investigations" website. The Usual Suspects are listed in a People to Know Section and there is a resource list of the Research Organisations who are producing much of the WHole Science (c) which this site purveys...

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

Somebody should sue for misuse of the word 'science'

[Fiona]

"What would happen if your mind, your consciousness, had the power to control the circumstances around you, to literally create your own reality? "

They say that like it would be a good thing. I personally can think of no more terrifying possibility.

It raises some really interesting questions though. I mean, imagine I got out of bed on the wrong side one morning (...I know, I know.....but imagine...) and I decided I wanted reality not to include my boss. Well of course in my reality she would not exist any more. But she would presumably exist in her own. How is that going to work? I am not going to be satisfied with a reality which only extends to me! I want one which is real reality. I do not think that is unreasonable. They prrrroooomiiiiissssed

[Mulder]

When I read that page (http://www.wholescience.net/categories/20080129_14) I can't help hearing it being declaimed out loud by a portentous Hollywood voice, like the ones you get with adventure movie trailers.

Anyone else hear it, or is just me?

[Dr B]

what a crock.......at least it's not in pink font with pictures of angels.....

[ws1]

Hi all!

When checking my webstats today I was surprised to find an inbound link from UK Skeptics...thanks for that

Its interesting to hear what you have to say regarding the website, and I would like to let you know that the website pertains to highlight a general paradigm shift in science. Coincidentally I have also recently changed the 'About' page which you quote from.

Dawkins himself admits science is 'under attack'... so there is something going on. Whole Science aims to encourage lively debate around the topic of the paradigm shift, so please keep your comments coming in, good and bad

Kerry

[Graham Lappin]

WS1 - I can't speak for other skeptics but I am glad to see you here and I hope you can exchange some views. I have had a look at your website and I am a little puzzled. I am a scientist and therefore I get a confused and sometimes upset, when I see scientific terminology used to bolster the credibility of something that is clearly not science. I am not trying to insult you and I would really like to see an honest, respectful debate, I assure you. Nevertheless, science is first about a testable hypothesis, then evidence then a theory. I can see the theory but I can't see the precursors. Just as an example, "From quantum physics to electromagnetism to telepathy"

Now it seems to me, and please correct me if I am wrong, but quantum theory and electromagnetism come from experimental evidence. As the evidence grows, so the theory is modified. If evidence is produced to nullify the theory then the theory goes. That is how science works. But in the same sentence you have telepathy - exactly how does this fit? I would say that you are stealing scientific credibility to add believability to pseudoscientific nonsense. How do you plead?

I want to be clear. I am not challenging your beliefs (yet) but the fact that you mix science with pseudoscience - that's my issue.

Also - science in crisis - what crisis? You quote Dawkins out of context I feel.

I look forward to hearing from you and, as I say, the debate may be direct but I will keep it clean if you will.

[dalriada]

Hi Ws1, there doesn't seem to have been any action on the Whole Science forum so it's nice to see you here.

You're right that there are paradigm shifts in Science and Richard Dawkin's selfish gene theory was just such a shift. As a result of this concept the world looks different in so many ways. He doesn't "admit" that Science is under attck, he argues that Science is under attack, that science is not funded in universities and schools the way it should be, that it is not understood in the popular media. He contends that there is a general dumbing down of society, that slickly presented, pseudoscience is sold by spin doctors to an unsuspecting public, deprived of real scientific substance and the basica thinking tools with which they might be able to discern the difference between real substance and sheer snakeoil. He believes that humanity is poorer as a result.

So do I.

I notice from your on-site bio that you have BA in communication and that then you went on to do a certificate in "Transpersonal and Counsciousness Studies"- Was this at Liverpool John Moores? Did you do the online option? As an arts graduate, you nevertheless have strong views on science (as your website demonstrates) and I was wondering if you could share with us what your definition of Science actually is?

You also note on your site that you are an author on the Psychology of Human consciousness (big subject!). Could you share some publication details? Have you found it difficult to write and publish in this area without an academic background in psychology? You also have a consultancy business in NLP, Hypnotherapy, Reiki and "Time-line Therapy" are there are reasons why you chose to train as " C.M.H. C.Hyp, MPNLP, MPTLT™" instead of, for example, choosing a recognised qualification in psychology which would have given you graduate basis for registration with the British Psychological Society?

I teach on a postgraduate course in evidence based practice for health professionals, so I would be interested to hear an evidence-based argument about how you feel the therapies which your business offers, based on the "expertise in the mind sciences" which you feel you have gained from NLP courses etc compares to the therapies which might be offered by, for example, a qualified psychologist or registered mental health nurse (CBT or whatever- you choose). An economic analysis would be interesting to see, maybe something showing the cost/benefits of employing you or your fellow consultants, versus the cost/benefits of an NHS professional? How much do you charge per hour for NLP anyway?

At this point I suppose I should "come out" and say that although it was purely for amusement and I would never put it on my CV (except for cheap laughs) , I have done quite a few "alternative" courses myself, (NLP, Reiki etc). So, as a well-attuned level 3, I obviously noticed that you list a Reiki level 1 qualification on your business website- is that considered grounding enough for you to charge for Reiki services where you live?

Finally, I noticed you have done your website marketing via "parapsychology" interest sites, did you feel there was a sound business argument for that? Do you have any particular sponsorship from the "parapsychologists" you promote on your website?


PS for Mulder, I didn't get the portenous Hollywood voiceover (Starwars, BenHur or whatever) I got plinky plinky tubular bells electronic imaginary music and a quizzical female voice. I can't spell quizzical, but I know it when I hear it (in my head)...

[dalriada]

Darn spellink...and all. Too late for edit!

[Admin]

It looks like the paradigm shift to Whole Science includes the criterion that you can claim anything you like without justifying it or backing it up in any way.

Much like pseudo-science, amazingly!

Hi all!

When checking my webstats today I was surprised to find an inbound link from UK Skeptics...thanks for that

The old 'you're helping my website' gambit!

keep your comments coming in, good and bad

Don't worry about that. We'll 'help your website' all we can.