Scientists prove existence of sixth sense as form of telepathy

SCIENTISTS claim they have found a 'sixth sense' which can detect light without the use of sight - and could even be a form of telepathy.

They implanted detectors for invisible infrared light into the part of rats’ brains that control tactile feeling.

When the light was shone, the animals responded by preening their whiskers, indicating that they thought they were being touched. They soon began to detect the source of the ‘contact’ and move towards the signal.

The team at Duke University, North Carolina, said that – for the first time in adult animals – their other senses were not affected but simply augmented.

Neurobiologist Miguel Nicolelis said: ‘We didn’t use the skin to deliver this signal ... the animal is feeling light, not seeing light. It’s very interesting.’

He added the technology could one day be used to help the blind or to allow paralysed individuals to feel objects.

Dr Nicolelis also claimed the concept had been extended to ‘brain-to-brain interface’ meaning the rats could carry out a form of telepathy.

Scientists prove existence of sixth sense as form of telepathy | News.com.au

This is awesome! - nice find also, very interesting :3

Will be cool to see what comes from this on the lucid end of things.

This is an example of journalists completely misunderstanding a paper. Here is the abstract from the paper:

"Sensory neuroprostheses show great potential for alleviating major sensory deficits. It is not known, however, whether such devices can augment the subject’s normal perceptual range. Here we show that adult rats can learn to perceive otherwise invisible infrared light through a neuroprosthesis that couples the output of a head-mounted infrared sensor to their somatosensory cortex (S1) via intracortical microstimulation. Rats readily learn to use this new information source, and generate active exploratory strategies to discriminate among infrared signals in their environment. S1 neurons in these infrared-perceiving rats respond to both whisker deflection and intracortical microstimulation, suggesting that the infrared representation does not displace the original tactile representation. Hence, sensory cortical prostheses, in addition to restoring normal neurological functions, may serve to expand natural perceptual capabilities in mammals."

So actually they implanted an infra-red detecting device into the rat's sensory cortex, artificially inducing an ability to sense infra-red. This 'sense' wasn't there before. It's just an example of how plastic the brain can be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick

This is an example of journalists completely misunderstanding a paper. Here is the abstract from the paper:

"Sensory neuroprostheses show great potential for alleviating major sensory deficits. It is not known, however, whether such devices can augment the subject’s normal perceptual range. Here we show that adult rats can learn to perceive otherwise invisible infrared light through a neuroprosthesis that couples the output of a head-mounted infrared sensor to their somatosensory cortex (S1) via intracortical microstimulation. Rats readily learn to use this new information source, and generate active exploratory strategies to discriminate among infrared signals in their environment. S1 neurons in these infrared-perceiving rats respond to both whisker deflection and intracortical microstimulation, suggesting that the infrared representation does not displace the original tactile representation. Hence, sensory cortical prostheses, in addition to restoring normal neurological functions, may serve to expand natural perceptual capabilities in mammals."

So actually they implanted an infra-red detecting device into the rat's sensory cortex, artificially inducing an ability to sense infra-red. This 'sense' wasn't there before. It's just an example of how plastic the brain can be.

---

So your saying we can't induce something from the mind without using a device? You are wrong, have you learned anything about induced lucid dreams?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

So your saying we can't induce something from the mind without using a device? You are wrong, have you learned anything about induced lucid dreams?

---

Hahahahahahahhahaahahah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

So your saying we can't induce something from the mind without using a device? You are wrong, have you learned anything about induced lucid dreams?

---

The burden of proof is on you. You've currently failed to provide any - this study has absolutely nothing to do with what you claim it does. Did you even read it? Any of it?

--having nothing to do with the original link above

What about the actual third eye found in animals? Has anyone done any studies on it?

Reptiles have an actual third eye which allows them to sense other frequencies of light that their normal eyes can't. On some snakes this third eye is fairly visible as a diamond shape scale on the center of their forehead. Just like the bindi in Hinduism. (probably not a coincidence)

As far as common knowledge goes, humans do not have this actual third eye. But we have the gland thats associated with it, the pineal gland. In spiritual circles this gland is extremely important in opening your spiritual third eye.

This makes me believe that there is a scientific correlation between our pineal gland and the experience of a third eye. In other words, when people claim to have a third eye experience they aren't just randomly hallucinating, they really are engaging in this pineal gland in some way.

Anyways, its something to look into.

The leading hypothesis on where DMT is created in the body is the pineal gland. For those of you who don't know DMT is one of the most powerful psychedelic drugs and is suspected to be involved with dreaming. (From what I heard, could be wrong)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

your saying

---

No. Please no.

Thanks for the likes, and those who want more proof from this link, then idk what to say. What else do you need to make you believe in it? I guess it would be a waste of time to even ask.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

What else do you need to make you believe in it?

---

The scientific paper actually remotely supporting the claim you made would be a good start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

Thanks for the likes, and those who want more proof from this link, then idk what to say. What else do you need to make you believe in it? I guess it would be a waste of time to even ask.

---

Why is this always the standard response from those who provide shoddy evidence for their claims when people don't buy into it?

Btw, I liked both the original post and the rebuttal of the actual scientific paper. I liked the original post because I think it would be cool if it were so. I like the rebuttal containing the actual scientific paper because it is always good to learn what the actual study said, even if it were neat if it had said something different. Although personally I think what the research actually showed is really neat too: it's amazing what kind of research scientists nowadays do.

There's another study that was done on humans where they tried to create a new sense. They used a belt that vibrated in the direction of north. They participants wore this for six weeks. Afterwords they had them navigate a shape blindfolded using their new sense. It seemed to work, but I don't really know much about the study.

There's an episode of BBC's Horizon that shows it, it's at the end of the episode. It's on youtube, it's called seeing is believing or something like that.

Don't people ever think why we are opt out in evidence from scientists? Do you know that certain scientists (the ego ones) want certain evidences kept confidential when it comes to awesome things like telepathy? Like come on, do you EVER think this? They don't want to reveal certain things because God knows what, it might be the most epic proof ever? But still kept things hidden, who knows if governments want these things to tested on us in various ways, like tv, internet, cell phones, mind chips.
Don't you people ever think such things and things like these can be bought out for $$$$?

Don't people ever think why we are opt out in evidence from scientists? Do you know that certain scientists (the ego ones) want certain evidences kept confidential when it comes to awesome things like telepathy?
Like come on, do you EVER think this? They don't want to reveal certain things because God knows what, it might be the most epic proof ever? But still kept things hidden, who knows if governments want these things to be tested on us in various ways, like tv, internet, cell phones, mind chips.
Who knows i think personally governments now own scientists and media and all bullcrap, so they can build a business and probably get to know what the fuck you are thinking right now, remember big brother is watching you and probably know what you are thinking and you don't know it.
Don't you people ever think such things and things like these can be bought out for $$$$? Yes question why this is deemed as proof when there isn't much and WHY did it make a story on the news, yes question THAT. But please do question why this is proof and scientists consider it so, why so hesitant when scientist just proved an existence? Is it because they are knowing something WE don't know and try and get away with it? i think so.
Sorry i will just keep my own mind opened now while other peoples' are closed.

The paper is about CREATING a new sense, not discovering one. Can't you just accept that?

Uhm, they implanted electrodes into the rat's brains that stimulated areas of their brain that process touch information. Then said electrodes stimulated that area when an infrared sensor mounted on their heads picked up infrared light.

Stimulating the brain based on the output of some sensor that the animal didn't previously have has nothing to do with the "sixth sense" you guys are rambling about.

There is a difference between being able to learn to use new sensory input when it's added, and already having supposed input available, but not knowing about it. The former is what the scientists did, the latter is what mystics believe in with the "third eye" malarkey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrOMGWTF

The paper is about CREATING a new sense, not discovering one. Can't you just accept that?

---

It doesn't matter, creating/discovering, what ever,....you want the paper, the proof, etc, don't be mad with me, go ask the scientist that is working with governments and don't want YOU to know this paper/evidence.
Question that. But don't question me or expect an answer, because something is up with scientists now and they are leaving you high and dry.
Everyone focuses on the paper too much they don't even focus on why it's not being forwarded and revealed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forsaken

Uhm, they implanted electrodes into the rat's brains that stimulated areas of their brain that process touch information. Then said electrodes stimulated that area when an infrared sensor mounted on their heads picked up infrared light.

---

question where and on what they are going to use these implants next, after deeming proof of existence. what they do on rats will be next on us. don't think it won't, and i am being openly honest here, come on guys think! wake up.

Please tell me wtf is this then Google Glass - Home
Don't even tell me it has nothing to do with it because it is well close enough to your brain! eyes meet brain, yes?
Then what's next? huh, tell me, because i am 100x more ahead of everyone who denies the hint i am trying to give you.
Oh sure, ya, keep thinking i'm nuts until a device enters your brain without you even thinking it's plausible to even control you and what you think.
$1,500 for this crap glasses? SEE what money they are getting, when i mean they, i mean corporations and governments, and we get jack shit back from them then a measly google glasses.
But who knows, maybe governments want only authorities to read peoples minds using some device, but that doesn't mean we can't actually read minds, we can, but seems like authorities want us to think we do not, making us more vulnerable to our own selves, hell i don't want to be in that position!

Hathor, folks, relax. There is enough room in this universe for more than one belief.
This study points to the brain's ability to interpret new data that is inputted into it. For example: they mounted a little video camera onto some sunglasses and a little thing that converted the video data to auditory sounds that went to an ear-piece. A blind man puts it on and for a few days all he hears is static and meaningless sounds. But after a few days, the brain learns what the noise means , like learning a new language. The blind man can now "see". This is efficient in Nature. An animal can evolve a new sense or a heitened sense without having to evolve a new brain. A mole can "see" with his nose, and a fish can feel electromagnetic fields in the water, and dolphins and bats can use sonar. Imagine if we fastened an ultra-violet camera to the glasses? We can have more than 5 senses. But I have no idea where the journalist got the idea of telepathy (probably heard the words 'extra senses'). Not that I don't believe in telepathy, but these scientists are looking in the wrong place for telepathy.

By the way, only a small amount of DMT and other tryptamines are made in the pineal gland. The pineal gland does have light receptors. Most of the tryptamines are made in the gut and don't cross the blood/brain barrier. But it is the stuff made in the pineal that reaches all the receptors in the brain. There is the serotonin system and the dopamine system in the brain that reflects our mood, state of consciousness, etc.

But telepathy is not a brain phenomenon. In fact, the brain interferes with telepathy.

Yes don't believe in the journalist, question why it's a proven existence and why scientists are keeping it from us and not fully telling us. Yet i believe in telepathy very much, and refuse to have authority brush it aside and leave us with nothing and still say there is proven existence! This makes me mad.

This conspiracy theory of scientists keeping it from us is a belief. It may be true, it may be not, or both, or neither.
But I am almost certain that scientists don't know anything about telepathy, because it is not a material phenomena.
And neither is awareness. That is why it eludes science. Awareness and telepathy are not material or substantial.
Do you want awareness and telepathy to be a material brain phenomena? Do you believe that it is a brain phenomenon?
Then why do we think that scientists are an authority on awareness? What information would they have that you don't have
that you would need? A lucid dreamer thinking that scientists are withholding secrets of awareness and the mind?
The laboratory for investigating the mind is the mind itself, and lucid dreamers are the ones in that laboratory.

Telepathy is more of a heart phenomena, but not the physical organ of the heart.
And awareness! Find out what awareness is and you know the nature of the whole universe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

This conspiracy theory of scientists keeping it from us is a belief. It may be true, it may be not, or both, or neither.
But I am almost certain that scientists don't know anything about telepathy, because it is not a material phenomena.
And neither is awareness. That is why it eludes science. Awareness and telepathy are not material or substantial.
Do you want awareness and telepathy to be a material brain phenomena? Do you believe that it is a brain phenomenon?
Then why do we think that scientists are an authority on awareness? What information would they have that you don't have
that you would need? A lucid dreamer thinking that scientists are withholding secrets of awareness and the mind?
The laboratory for investigating the mind is the mind itself, and lucid dreamers are the ones in that laboratory.

Telepathy is more of a heart phenomena, but not the physical organ of the heart.
And awareness! Find out what awareness is and you know the nature of the whole universe.

---

Scientists know quite a bit about awareness. Check out that episode of BBC's Horizon I was talking about. It hasn't been studied enough, but it's being studied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StonedApe

Scientists know quite a bit about awareness.

---

No they don't.

All they know about is perception. They are confusing that with awareness. :)

hathor, you're simply lying now. The study you presented had nothing to do whatsoever with humans being telepathic. This is plain for everybody to see: you know it's true too. Why are you getting so angry at people who are just telling the truth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

But I am almost certain that scientists don't know anything about telepathy, because it is not a material phenomena.
And neither is awareness. That is why it eludes science.

---

Ya, you don't know how science works. It doesn't need to be a 'material phenomenon'. It just needs to be observable, which is an extremely reasonable request to make of a claim.

Telepathy is the idea that two minds can exchange information without any interface. This is extremely easy to test, and the negative results are why it's not accepted as fact.

If you have reason to believe the contrary, do your own rigorous study. If it works, publicise your data.

So you mean animals can form telepathy and humans can't? Ask yourself a question, why do we test on animals for? If no one knows the answer then, wow.

I can't work out if you're flat-out lying or if you seriously still haven't read the article in your own first post beyond its title.

Let's get this straight.

Quote:

---

SCIENTISTS claim they have found a 'sixth sense' which can detect light without the use of sight

---

Quote:

---

They implanted detectors for invisible infrared light into the part of rats’ brains that control tactile feeling.

---

^ It doesn't make sense.

Their "sixth sense" is artificial. Without the mechanical detector, their sense WOULDN'T EXIST.
Even if that sixth sense was real, it has nothing to do with telepathy.

I'm lying?? on what? and i did read the article, it's about an existence of sixth sense which is on my post and it read and spoke about telepathy.
If you are here to ruin my thread then it's best to move on, i didn't post this to say that I have evidence, i posted this to say that a "scientist" proved something. If you want paper as poof go ask the scientist not me. Go and debate somewhere else that likes your kind of debate.
Yet AGAIN, i am not mad at people here i just said lastly that i am mad at this article and why scientist say they prove something and keep the evidence.
But if you think i am mad at people here, then you are out of it really.

Look, nobody has any idea what you're talking about. Scientists have electronically connected the brains of two mice, and shown that they can learn to communicate using the connection. What do you have such an issue with here? In what sense have these scientists "proved something and kept the evidence"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photolysis

The scientific paper actually remotely supporting the claim you made would be a good start.

---

What claim did i make?
I just posted the link and story. Go ask the scientist. Oh sorry they left you high and dry, making you doubt it, which that's what they want.
They aren't going to give you evidence when it's critical to their jobs and discoveries within their jobs. They want mula.

http://images.wikia.com/adventuretim...n-meme-why.jpg

Well despite this thread not having much merit, it does remind me of a monologue from a certain J. Cavil...

" I saw a star explode and send out the building blocks of the universe, other stars, other planets, and eventually other life, a supernova, creation itself. I was there. I wanted to see it, and be part of the moment. And you know how I perceived one of the most glorious events in the universe? With these ridiculous gelatinous orbs in my skull. With eyes designed to perceive only a tiny fraction of the EM spectrum, with ears designed only to hear vibrations in the air.

...

I don’t want to be human. I want to see gamma rays, I want to hear X-rays, and I want to smell dark matter. Do you see the absurdity of what I am? I can’t even express these things properly, because I have to — I have to conceptualize complex ideas in this stupid, limiting spoken language, but I know I want to reach out with something other than these prehensile paws, and feel the solar wind of a supernova flowing over me. I’m a machine, and I can know much more, I could experience so much more, but I’m trapped in this absurd body. And why? Because my five creators thought that God wanted it that way."

And for heaven's sake I'm not trying to make any kind of point at all, it's just a neat monologue.

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6071/6...44330d71_z.jpg

This whole experiment is actually really cool, I think it's pretty awesome what they've done. As long as they take it in the right direction, I can only imagine what else they might achieve from this.... Thanks for posting that.

That being said, yeah, this has absolutely nothing to do with telepathy. :T It's a great technological advancement, but it doesn't prove the existence of anything. I really hope that these views don't spread, because they're just going to drown out what it actually is, which is something pretty great in its own right.

I'm sorry, Hathor, but you simply misunderstood the article.

Have you heard about robotic prosthetic limbs? They can be controlled by the wearer, by surgically implanting transmitters into the brain, which power the limbs.



We also now have the technology to control drones and other radio-controlled machines using our brainwaves:


In the above cases, scientists have created the technology for humans to control machines with their minds. They haven't discovered an innate ability that humans have, to control machines with their minds.

The 'discovery' (or rather, 'breakthrough') you posted is the same thing, except they have implanted the technology that allows the rat brains to 'feel' light. That's all. They haven't discovered that rats have telepathy. They have engineered a way for them to have it.

It's still an awesome breakthrough, but please don't get your ideas crossed.

[Edit:]
By the way, it's really not your fault, as the article itself seemed to completely blow the idea out of proportion. This one is a little more informative:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/ne...l-for-infrared
[/Edit]

Quote:

---

Ya, you don't know how science works. It doesn't need to be a 'material phenomenon'. It just needs to be observable, which is an extremely reasonable request to make of a claim.

---

Oh I didn't know that you are claiming there is an immaterial reality that is observable by science. That is exciting!
Are you sure?

I don't know what a precise definition of 'immaterial' would be, and I doubt you could give one, either. Are wavefunctions 'material'? Is the relativity of physics 'material'? Are lucid dreams 'material'? Anyway, the fact is that science is simply about observation. Telepathy by any normal definition, if true, is observable. You can observe that two people have communicated telepathically. So yes, it's in the domain of science.

You tell me: are dreams material? Relativity is a relationship between material things. Can science observe awareness? Or only perception (which is material)? energy is material, waves of energy are material. Can anything immaterial be observed? Name ONE THING immaterial that can be observed. Can anything immaterial have an effect on the material world? I don't know what you guys are arguing with me for, I am basically saying the same thing you are. That science has not observed telepathy! Basically because for telepathy to be a material phenomenon it would have to be transmitted through some kind of field or vibration, and of course there has been no observation of a vibration traveling through a field from one brain to another, I am assuming. I think the electromagnetic field of the hearts interact though. But of course the heart doesn't think if thought is a material phenomena.

But basically that article was all full of shit. There are way more than 5 senses. We have the sense of balance, the sense of hunger, the sense of thirst, to name a few. These are actually considered separate senses. And so we have all these sense streams coming in to the brain, and the brain takes these sense stream data and converts it into an experience of a separate self living in the world based on what the brain 'thinks' is out there based on this data. This holographic experience in the brain should be a seamless whole, but for some reason it is split into a subject and an object for most people. This is an optical illusion of consciousness. This optical illusion is all centered around thoughts and conditioning. We are not born with this split. It is argued that we need this split to function in the world, but that is not true. Oh.. wait I am going off topic here...

Of course there is a lot of common subjective experiences that science probably has never observed. Like awareness! Like thoughts! Like feelings! Etc. Of course science has observed brainwaves, brain chemistry etc... and that is great. So we know that there is a connection between certain brainwave frequencies and amplitudes and certain states of mind. How interesting. And of course the brain chemistry and psychiatry is very interesting and useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

I am basically saying the same thing you are. That science has not observed telepathy!

---

No you weren't, you were saying that science couldn't observe telepathy.

How are you defining telepathy?

Quote:

---

Name ONE THING immaterial that can be observed.

---

If something can't be observed then by definition it's meaningless. If something existing has the same impact on your senses as it not existing, why would you ever think it's there? Your definition of immaterial appears to be the same thing as "non existent".

Quote:

---

Basically because for telepathy to be a material phenomenon it would have to be transmitted through some kind of field or vibration, and of course there has been no observation of a vibration traveling through a field from one brain to another, I am assuming. I think the electromagnetic field of the hearts interact though. But of course the heart doesn't think if thought is a material phenomena.

---

What does this have to do with anything? You don't need to observe the mechanism for telepathy to observe telepathy. Science does not require a 'material phenomenon' to establish something as scientific truth, we've just been through this. It just needs to observe two people engaged in telepathy.

Well, I would say something that is immaterial is something that is not made out of any material, including energy. Even a field has a material cause. So yes, it would be veritably 'non-existent' as far as science is concerned. Such as awareness or love or possibly a thought. But nobody can deny awareness, yet people do get it mixed up with perceptions. It is bound to be mixed up with perceptions though, since that is how we know that we are aware. Descartes said "I think, therefor I am" but I would say that "I perceive, therefor I am." But of course perceptions are material. So that is why science cannot observe it, because it is 'non-existent' as far as science is concerned. Just like the soul. Science cannot observe the soul, it never will.

Why would media and scientists even put the name telepathy in this article? And it's still deemed not part of telepathy at all from the experiment?
(i should keep reminding myself not to read media ever again of such things and other things as well) It's either bullcrap or something is being hidden from us.
ARRGGGG :horse::horse::horse::horse::horse: GGGGHHHHHH!!!!!

The media is bullcrap in this story. Everything is a story. There is no "true explanation". For this story, the true explanation is they could possibly simulate telepathy in the future by implanting sensors in our brains and controlling it via a central broadcaster and control all of our minds. It isn't about natural telepathy.

OZ, I must say that Brain Controlled UAV Was pretty amazing!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

Why would media and scientists even put the name telepathy in this article? And it's still deemed not part of telepathy at all from the experiment?
(i should keep reminding myself not to read media ever again of such things and other things as well) It's either bullcrap or something is being hidden from us.
:horse::horse::horse::horse::horse:

---

Headlines are usually extreme exaggeration and misleading to get people to click through and see the ads/popups on the article page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

Do you know that certain scientists (the ego ones) want certain evidences kept confidential when it comes to awesome things like telepathy?

---

Are you for real? "the ego ones?" Most brilliant scientists are ego ones, and that's precisely why they WILL reveal what they have. Nobel prize.

Quote:

---

Like come on, do you EVER think this? They don't want to reveal certain things because God knows what, it might be the most epic proof ever? But still kept things hidden, who knows if governments want these things to tested on us in various ways, like tv, internet, cell phones, mind chips.
Don't you people ever think such things and things like these can be bought out for $$$$?

---

So you make a ridiculous claim due partially to shoddy journalism, and partially to your own bad thinking, and when people point out the obvious problems with your claim, you respond with conspiracy theories. Classy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phased

OZ, I must say that Brain Controlled UAV Was pretty amazing!

---

Yes, it was! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

Why would media and scientists even put the name telepathy in this article? And it's still deemed not part of telepathy at all from the experiment?

---

Seriously, how much time do you spend formulating your opinions before you post them? You seriously think the scientists who performed the experiment co-wrote that article? You're living in a bizarre, paranoid world. The word 'telepathy' is in the article because the experiment was vaguely reminiscent of telepathy, and that's a buzzword which will attract viewers. It happens all the time in journalism; bending the truth to make something more interesting. It's not a bloody scientific conspiracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Replicon

Are you for real? "the ego ones?" Most brilliant scientists are ego ones, and that's precisely why they WILL reveal what they have. Nobel prize.
So you make a ridiculous claim due partially to shoddy journalism, and partially to your own bad thinking, and when people point out the obvious problems with your claim, you respond with conspiracy theories. Classy.

---

What else of an excuse you got for shoddy journalism? Gimme something better, other than conspiracy theories. :)
Not all scientists are egoistic. Please don't tell me it's because of shoddy journalists, that is a really lame answer because nowdays all journalists aren't doing good stories, and you know why, they are being controlled on what not to and how to make stories.
I think it's best for anyone who thinks i am dumb, better back off now, and accept my last post about the article with the dead horses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hathor28

What else of an excuse you got for shoddy journalism? Gimme something better, other than conspiracy theories. :)
Not all scientists are egoistic. Please don't tell me it's because of shoddy journalists, that is a really lame answer because nowdays all journalists aren't doing good stories, and you know why, they are being controlled on what not to and how to make stories.
I think it's best for anyone who thinks i am dumb, better back off now, and accept my last post about the article with the dead horses.

---

I apologize if I came off saying you're dumb. "Bad thinking" doesn't mean "stupid person" - it's just a bad process.

I'm not sure what you mean by the whole "what else of an excuse you got?" thing.

You specifically said earlier, "Why would media and scientists even put the name telepathy in this article?"

I don't recall a scientist putting the name "telepathy" into the article. That article was NOT written by a scientist. Very early in this thread, the "shoddy journalism" thing was covered, when Patrick pasted the abstract from the ACTUAL scientific paper, and explained how it had nothing to do with telepathy, and how scientists said nothing about telepathy in the paper.

So yes, taking a basic scientific paper about how the brain reacts to signals that are artificially sent in, by making new and useful neural pathways, and construing it as "proof of telepathy" is bad journalism. I don't necessarily blame the specific journalist, though. The news company needs to sell its product, and the editors are usually responsible for twisting everything around like that.

Quote:

---

Please don't tell me it's because of shoddy journalists, that is a really lame answer

---

Again, I have no idea what the question is. Is this the same question about an excuse for something? Excuse for what?

I really think this is a prime example of why you should try to validate your sources before posting new and astounding discoveries. It has happened to me before where I get really excited about something and forget to check how reliable what I have just read actually is and then I feel like an idiot for going along with it. Just forget the conspiracy theories for a moment and try to remove yourself from the situation and look at your posts from the perspective of another.

At first, you claim that "Scientists prove existence of sixth sense as form of telepathy" because of the article that you read. Other people have tried to explain to you that the actual research paper involved engineering an artificial sense rather than actually discovering a "sixth sense" that naturally belongs to the rats but you just dismiss it as a conspiracy theory and the scientists are just trying to keep the existence of telepathy from us. Thinking logically about this, why would the scientists try to hide such a ground breaking discovery that could put them in the history books forever? Something even stranger to think about would be to ask yourself how the journalist of this article somehow knows the truth of the results from this experiment despite the fact that the scientists are hiding it from us? If you claim that they are one of the scientists who did the experiments that gave the alleged positive results for the existence of telepathy, why would they risk exposing the truth without being assigned any credit for the discovery?

It's just important sometimes to remember that it is possible to be misinformed and "shoddy journalism" is definitely on the rise. Don't believe me?
This is a video from MSN news/ITN classed as breaking news that was posted in the last 30 minutes:
Ghosts haunt Japan's tsunami ravaged coast on MSN Video
This video does not prove the existence of ghosts or show that exorcisms is real or anything like that, it's just a video to attract views. It isn't even a major news story.