Enlighten Me Free

Welcome.

Housekeeping: As is posted on the EMF Message Board page, this forum is for support, sharing opinions and experiences for those who have left RSE and have doubts and concerns about their tenure there. It is NOT a place for proselytizing for RSE, JZK Inc or Ramtha.  Play nicely or your post will be sent to cyberspace time-out for all eternity. The disclaimer for EMF is located on this page http://enlightenmefree.com/disclaimer.html and all posters agree to the terms of the disclaimer. Be sure you've read it before posting.

You may also want to visit a complementary forum at FACTNet http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/779.html

If you wish to use a Spell Checker, you may wish to use this free one: http://www.jacuba.com/

Want to contact the EMF moderators? Email messageboard@enlightenmefree.com
 

 

 

General Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: thinking

That was well known and well established in the 1960's. Recycled. Also, Scientific American is not the best place to find uncensored science. They have been discredited on numerous occassions for being the proponents of junk science. Which, (of course) they continue to deny to this day.

Re: thinking

that bit re scientif amer and the tube/palm experiment reminded me of when I was a young kid, maybe five or six. I used to think I could see through my finger when I held it up to my left eye. It was not as dramatic when I switched eyes.
Of course, I had both eyes open but that never occured to me.
An eye doctor diagnosed me with amblyopia of Rt eye when I was 7--"lazy eye" in street language and incurable by that age. Depth perception can suffer. Probably the reason I was not a good shooter on basketball teams or hitter in baseball, but I was number one tennis player on our high school team---go figure.

Scientific American may be more for public consumption but I liked reading it when I did, even with one eye...