You trust wikipedia????
You trust wikipedia????
no, I trust my ability to read
from that link: "Beverly Rubik, in an article in the same journal,[39] justified her belief with references to biophysical systems theory, bioelectromagnetics, and chaos theory"
"Physicists and sceptics criticise these explanations as pseudophysics – a branch of pseudoscience which explains magical thinking by using irrelevant jargon from modern physics to exploit scientific illiteracy and to impress the unsophisticated.[13] Indeed, even enthusiastic supporters of energy healing say that "there are only very tenuous theoretical foundations underlying [spiritual] healing"
Okay, to be honest I didn't read past your first line referencing wikipedia, since I know it's a Deep State entity, but I read the rest of your comment now and I still see nothing wrong with biophysical systems theory, bioelectromagnetics, or chaos theory.
Who are the physicists and skeptics who criticize these as pseudoscience, and what's their excuse for writing her off based on their own opinions of those sciences? Your quote just gives their excuse to blow her off by calling them pseudoscience and defines what they mean by that word, and go on to talk about 'energy healing' as though to say that's what she's supporting.
Maybe do better by reading up on those 'pseudosciences', and who these people are they refer to.
As it is, many sciences rely on 'often tenuous theoretical foundations', including all those that are at the forefront of making new discoveries about our physical reality. It's really not a very strong argument to use against her, and typical of wikipedia to say things like this in order to try to destroy a person's credibility.
Wikipedia
yes it's jewed and often omits inconvenient truths, but it's still useful as a list of topics to look into
Who are the physicists and skeptics who criticize these as pseudoscience
well she wrote in her own article that it wasn't scientific
"However, none of the observations discussed here prove this linkage. Specifically, the evidence does not confirm causation. Clearly COVID-19 occurs in regions with little wireless communication. Furthermore, the relative morbidity caused by WCR exposure in COVID-19 is unknown"
This guff is basically self published and made to look like a recognised journal publication.
She's got a thing about 5G and bangs on about it everywhere, covid is just this weeks bogeyman that she wants to link it to. Next year it will be cancer or ingrowing toenails.
There is a tendency on the Right to become overally paranoid about everything, to the point where they ignore what is provable and cling solely to the unprovable so as to claim it as their own, and that Big Pharma doesn't want you to know about their 'forbidden knowledge'. Which then turns out to be drinking diluted Chlorine Dioxide to cure autism...
It's the same in Engineering with people ranting on about Tesla and his 'forbidden knowledge', which is basically nothing more than interesting than Apple's wireless phone charger. Or they will sit there winding copper wire around some magnets trying to create zero point energy, whilst babbling gobbledegook to an equally moronic bitchute audience.
It gets a bit tedious because it's never going to go anywhere, and it wastes everyone's time when there are real world problems to solve like jew media and niggers
Is there something it it? Very, very, tenuously. But it's pandering to an audience who still can't get their heads around that a vaccine is going to keep them vastly safer than wrapping their phone in tinfoil. But here we are.
(post is archived)