Chopra has put up a third installment in his crusade against the ungodly, and my eyes glaze over. I can’t care any more. It’s just too stupid to inspire much concern.
His conclusion about sums it up.
Before proceeding with the next step in refuting the anti-God position, let’s pause to see what responders think. Do you think a random universe of concrete objects colliding by chance is the right model for creation?
At this point, he’s reduced to begging for crumbs of support from the people still reading his drivel, and to making up silly rebuttals to claims no one made. Hey, do you think the universe is a giant billiards table? If you don’t, can you tell me how smart I am? Please?
“A random universe of concrete objects colliding by chance is the right model for” Chopra’s brain.
Obviously, a much better story is that a being made of nothing made a universe out of nothing. Yeah, that makes a lot more sense than evolution!
further
In the face of convincing arguments to the contrary, how else can an invalid thesis attract attention and money? The panderers have to misrepresent the points made against them and lie about the merits of their own claims.
It’s simple economics.
“Before proceeding with the next step in refuting the anti-God position, let’s pause to see what responders think. Do you think a random universe of concrete objects colliding by chance is the right model for creation?”
Since when did the majority decide whether gravity or nuclear fission was “right”? The last time I looked, the universe followed certain laws regardless of what anybody thought about it.
“If the universe is self-aware, it would explain the formation of a self-replicating molecule like DNA far more elegantly than the clumsy, crude mechanism of random chance. As the astronomer Fred Hoyle declared (Hoyle was one of the first to seize on the notion of an expanding universe in the 1950s), the probability that random chance created life is roughly the same as the probability that a hurricane could blow through a junkyard and create a Boeing 707.”
It’s obvious the guy hasn’t even read the book. Dawkins thoroughly picks apart the chance/Fred Hoyle argument.
HE CALLED DAWKINS A DISGRACE
“What’s wrong with this argument is that if you trace DNA down to its individual atoms, each is more than 99.9999% empty space. If you take an individual electron, it has no fixed position in either time or space.”
~Deepak Chopra
God Delusion? Part 3
http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/11/the_god_delusio_2.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/the-god-delusion-part-3_b_34497.html
***
“What’s this universe?
What Dawkins says? asked
Potli Baba of Lamp Lighter guru,
his old friend of vedic ages.
“Dawkins, that random-head,
that purposeless creature,
blurts out all crap
when he reads my
writings divine, arising
out of my inner self
blessed with blessings of
1008 holy gods that almighty
destined in the Intelligent
Design of the creation of
the universe and the
intelligent human kind.”
Lamp Lighter’s flames flashed
intensely, wet beads of anger
dripping from his forehead and face
as if Shiva was all up in arms
hurling his trident with
mighty force into the heart
of the soul-less creature.
“look,” he said,
“DNA is almost empty
at its atomic base,
so is cosmos empty,
let’s face
but God has placed
spirits in all this space
so that every thing
stays in its place
and create that magnificence
of consciousness that
in the universe pervades,
making us aware of the
awareness that God wanted
us to feel in the first place.
that’s what the universe is,” he said,
“not randomness of that random-head —
bodies colliding hither and thither,
up and down without purpose in space,
unaware of the Intelligent Design of
their assignment in the proper place.”
Lamp Lighter guru rambled
on and on at such a rapid pace,
his voice trembled when
he called Dawkins a disgrace.
~white wings
http://whitewings.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/he-called-dawkins-a-disgrace.htm
V
I am assuming you intended your link to go to Chopra’s drivel, instead of linking back, Escher-like, to your own blog? If so could you correct it, just so those of us curious as the content of any pro-science dissenting positions Mr. Chopra decides to mischaracterize and mock?
Does the phrase “random chance” imply that there is something called “non-random chance”?
So if I want something to be true that automatically makes it true. BRILLIANT! I had no idea that by merely wanting the universe to conform to the cosmology of Warhammer 40K would make it so. Thanks Deepak, I had no idea that reality was consensual.
A GURU IN TROUBLED WATERS
“why do you look so down?” asked
Maharishi Bingo Ram
of Lamp Lighter Guru Mahan
whose lamps were getting
dimmer with every passing
phase of the moon.
“they call me a dingbat,
they call me a moon bat,
smarty pants, a money hat,
a holy cow and a rat,” he answered,
his hands clenching his head.
“what do I do now? he asked.
“go read 12th grade books,
understand some science,
carry on spiritual gobbledygook,
don’t debate Hawkins or Dawkins
you’re no way their match,” answered
Maharishi Bingo Ram, his old friend.
~white wings
http://whitewings.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/a-guru-in-troubled-waters.htm
Check this out!
What Happens After We Die? (Part 3) by Deepak Chopra his latest post.
http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/11/what_happens_af_2.html
“But if you break it down as a rational problem, the separate components aren’t totally mysterious:
Is there proof that people have seen the afterlife?
Is there proof of reincarnation?
Is there proof of communicating with the departed?
Can there be mind outside the brain?
Is this mind the source of the soul?
Can we find evidence that the universe itself is conscious, or that it is hospitable to consciousness as a field of information?”
Now I’m certain that Dr Chopra’s current incarnation is a punishment for horrific, inhuman deeds of great maleficence in a previous lifetime, probably for inventing Amway salesmen.
@Stanton
If Dr Chopra’s incarnation is the result of past sins, what sin did we commit that is so terrible it has Chopra as a punishment?
Wells,
I’d think Chopra would be on to something if it weren’t, at base, a tautology. We’re made of matter, so if we’re conscious, at least our portion of “the universe itself” is conscious. Suffused in Chopra’s meanderings is the very dualism he elsewhere decries: he’s insisting that there is a ghost in the machine, but despite all his hand-waving he’s not shown that the “machine” is incapable of consciousness just as it is.
A Vedic Guru Refutes Science, a poem
HE SLIDES FURTHER INTO MENTAL DELIQUENCY
he’s a kook,
too stupid to
inspire any concern.
I glaze over guru’s
new drivel on his
holy crusade against
science and wonder,
if he’s still living
in Vedic ages,
or thinks having
fooled his dimwit
followers now can
fool us, scientists.
he’s begging for
crumbs for support,
making silly rebuttals
to claims that no one
has made.
not able to comprehend
what Dawkins says,
he goes explaining
Vedic sciences that
he understands well:
up above is heaven
where lives God,
down below is hell
from where comes Devil,
and here on earth,
everything is unreal,
all illusion, all maya.
Note: PZ Myers’ text at
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/
is partially paraphrased here.
~whitewings
http://whitewings.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/he-slides-further-into-mental-deliquency.htm
time to peruse the scientific literature instead of watching the cow in Morris:
Title: External Qi of Yan Xin Qigong differentially regulates the Akt and extracellular signal-regulated kinase pathways and is cytotoxic to cancer cells but not to normal cells
Author(s): Yan X (Yan, Xin), Shen H (Shen, Hua), Jiang HJ (Jiang, Hongjian), Zhang CS (Zhang, Chengsheng), Hu D (Hu, Dan), Wang J (Wang, Jun), Wu XQ (Wu, Xinqi)
Source: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOCHEMISTRY & CELL BIOLOGY 38 (12): 2102-2113 2006
Document Type: Article
Language: English
Cited References: 63 Times Cited: 0
Abstract: Long-term clinical observations and ongoing studies have shown significant antitumor effect of external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong which originated from traditional Chinese medicine. In order to understand the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying the antitumor effect of external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong, we have examined its cytotoxic effect on BxPC3 pancreatic cancer cells and its effect on the Akt and extracellular signal-regulated kinase pathways. We found that external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong dramatically inhibited basal phosphorylation levels of Akt and extracellular signal-regulated kinases, epidermal growth factor-mediated phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases, and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase activity. External Qi of Yan Xin Qigong also inhibited constitutive and inducible activities of nuclear factor-kappa 13, a target of the Akt and epidermal growth factor receptor pathways. Furthermore, a single 5 min exposure of BxPC3 cells to external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong induced apoptosis, accompanied by a dramatic increase of the sub-G1 cell population, DNA fragmentation, and cleavage of caspases 3, 8 and 9, and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase. Prolonged treatment with external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong caused rapid lysis of BxPC3 cells. In contrast, treatment of fibroblasts with external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong induced transient activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases and Akt, and caused no cytotoxic effect. These findings suggest that external Qi of Yan Xin Qigong may differentially regulate these survival pathways in cancer versus normal cells and exert cytotoxic effects preferentially on cancer cells, and that it could potentially be a valuable approach for therapy of pancreatic carcinomas. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Author Keywords: Akt; ERK1/2; external Qi; Yan Xin Qigong; pancreatic cancer
KeyWords Plus: EPIDERMAL-GROWTH-FACTOR; NF-KAPPA-B; PANCREATIC-CARCINOMA CELLS; FACTOR RECEPTOR; IN-VITRO; PHOSPHATIDYLINOSITOL 3-KINASE; INDUCED APOPTOSIS; K-RAS; ULTRASOUND; INHIBITION
Addresses: Yan X (reprint author), Inst Chongqing Trad Chinese Med, Chongqing, Peoples R China
Inst Chongqing Trad Chinese Med, Chongqing, Peoples R China
New Med Sci Res Inst, New York, NY 10107 USA
Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Boston, MA 02114 USA
Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Dana Farber Canc Inst, Boston, MA 02115 USA
Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Childrens Hosp, Boston, MA 02115 USA
E-mail Addresses: [email protected]
Ithika, I’m thinking we may have been Gestapo, cannibals, or Avonladies in another life.
What Happens After We Die? (Part 3) by Deepak Chopra his latest post.
http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/11/what_happens_af_2.html
————–
Shocks, a poem
WHAT HAPPENS AFTER YOU DIE? Three Things
The first thing is, it will shock you
Buy my book and read it
The second thing is, it will shock you
Buy my book and read it
The third thing is, it will shock you
Buy my book and read it
If you don’t need so many shocks
You still buy my book but don’t read it
Click at the right hand top corner
On the home page of my site and
Keep your visa or master card ready.
Both are accepted. God bless you.
~white wings
http://whitewings.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/11/what-happens-after-you-die-three-things.htm
“Q. What may shock or surprise readers most about this book?
A. They may be shocked to find that the afterlife is a rational subject that is knowable to us before we die. Most people, even from educated backgrounds, accept the stories of heaven and hell they were told as children, and from that point on they assume that the afterlife is a matter of faith.” ~Deepak Chopra
What Happens After We Die? (Part 3) by Deepak Chopra his latest post.
http://www.intentblog.com/archives/2006/11/what_happens_af_2.html
PZ: I can’t blame you for running fast and far before reading the comments.
For, if you did, you would find that people read it to tell him he’s full of (A) himself, (B) ordinary human waste or (C) curry. The ratio is roughly 95% against his blathering.
I, myself, love to reads just the comments (the text of his posts hurts my head). And I like to leave my own comments, offering advice as to where to go (no, not to hell; to Xian blogs, where they already “believe” his shite) and wishing him “good luck selling them there books!”
What a tiresome little amphibian, is Deepak Chopra!
Naomi
I just don’t get this. I shall confess that my understanding of the natural sciences is inadequate compared to that of people working in the respective disciplines, many of whom are regular contributors to this blog. When it comes of clinical medicine and medical research, I am much closer to my turf, and the recent dollop of woo served by that Favorite Pharyngula Troll going by the name of Dwoo Hempel is beyond disbelief; it is downright disgusting, because unabashed promotion of this particular kind of alternative medicine preys upon the insecurities of the patients and undermines the efforts of medicine proper to treat them.
I am referring to the paper that Dwoo Hempel quoted and posted the abstract of. I am also certain that s/he did not go much beyond the wordings of the abstract. Therefore, I am not sure what exactly s/he is trying to prove, that too, by displaying examples of bad science and worse editorial decisions.
The quoted study is another example of mishmash of so-called Western medicine and traditional Chinese philosophy. As long as the paper discusses pancreatic carcinoma and signalling pathways involved, it sticks to the existent, proven facts. The methods employed for the study have that right amount of validity to offer the study some respectability. But the entire premises, hypotheses et alia, crumble with the mention of using hocus-pocus-gili-gili, a.k.a. external qi, as a valid method of treatment.
I pored over the introduction to find references for ‘external qi’ and guess what? Every time I came back to a few books – but not any peer-reviewed journal article – books that talk about ‘Qi Nutrition powder’ (!), ‘Qi information water’ (!!), and so forth.
The intro starts with a study from a Japanese group (in collaboration of the Chronobiology center of U Minnesota, of all places) that harps upon the tired old argument used by most alternative medical practices, that alternative medicine effects cannot be gaged appropriately by western scientific methods:
It is also of note that as long as they talk about proper science, cellular pathways and stuff, their references are proper peer-reviewed journal, but the moment they start talking about external Qi, the references cited become questionable.
It saddens me that this kind of unscientific, evidence-starved studies get published in Elsevior journals, whereas we have to struggle hard and test, re-test, re-retest our results to get through a peer review system to get published.
How is that even possible?
You wouldn’t think so, Sophist, but apparently it is. At the very least, he seems to be running on vapour.
“The panderers have to misrepresent the points made against them and lie about the merits of their own claims.”
Frankly, that’s an insult to panderers. A lot of them are actually good at what they do, unlike Guru Chopra.
I think the consensus is that he’s been *pantomines inhaling deeply from a pipe* “running on vapor” for quite some time now…
Shouldn’t that be slides “further” into irrelevancy? ‘Farther’ is more in distance; ‘further’ is more in degree.
Thanks for that, suirauqa :)
It always makes me laugh when someone says that their treatment isn’t suitable for scientific testing.
It truly is the most pathetic excuse in the world – if it has any positive effect beyond placebo then that is measurable by a suitable trial. If not, then your treatment is bollocks, so bugger off.
He makes millions of dollars at it. I think that qualifies as success by most standards.
Not true, DrFrank! Placebo effects are also measureable by a suitable trial.
Drew:
http://www.randi.org/research/index.html
It’s an interesting find, and I’m a little surprised that a peer reviewed journal with an impact factor of 3.871 would do this, but it just goes to show that even the peer review process is no substitute for critical thinking. If you can prove that Qi exists, I know of an easy way to make a million dollars:
You could use a million dollars, couldn’t you Drew? Even if you’re too other-worldly to spend it on yourself, surely you could find some deserving orphans or leppers or something. Yes, you’ll have to split it with ‘ol Xin Yan (i.e. the guy who is first author of the paper, who did all of the cool hand-waving magic tricks in it, and who’s namesake “foundation” also funded this “research” to validate that his magical powers are real), but surely, even half a million is worth your time. Come on, you know you want it — go get it, boy!
The chances that Chopra would end his spiel with a huge dollop of quantum woo weren’t exactly what I would call random. (Implying of course that probability distributions are far from “clumsy” and “crude” processes. Except when Chopra is concerned, of course.)
Ironic that the same theory that is so often used as a spring board for woo is the one that prompted the discovery that no local variables are hidden behind it, which happens to be one of the easy results to grasp. It is obvious that Woopra should know this much, but chooses to focus on entanglement and other nonintuitive aspects.
BTW, that muddlebrains like Chopra confuses matter and materialism is yet another reason to prefer the term naturalism, even though it is wider in scope.
Elsevier has been so much about the money that they ended up as Elsewhere publications.
As a recovered former practitioner of chinese medicine, I recoil in horror whenever I read anything written by Deepak Chopra. The man is either a self-serving charlatan or a complete and utter moron. As for the bogus study abstracted above, as soon as a study mentions qi as some sort of real force, its time to stop reading. Its like a study that refers to god–the authors begin with the a priori assumption that qi exists–the rest is just poisonous fruit, so to speak. There is actually a lot of good solid research being done in China on the pharmacological properties of herbs. Unfortunately, there is also a tremendous amount of fraud in the field as well. The inability to guarantee proper oversight of these studies plus the new age mentality of 99% of those who practice Chinese medicine in the west finally drove me screaming from the fold. Its hard enough to trust research from china even when the basic premise is reasonable–e.g., herbs have active constituents. When the basic premise is metaphysical, its better to just look away–you are in the realm of the unreasonable and will not be able to communicate rationally with the believers. For whatever it is worth, the average modern chinese practitioner of traditional chinese medicine is far less likely to believe in so-called qi than the gullible westerners who have bastardized the tradition. china is largely an atheist culture heavily steeped in pragmatic science. Luckily tripe such as the above abstract is by far in the minority amongst typical chinese research. While such research is often shoddily done, it does mostly hew to a western scientific perspective. Fear not. Chopra is indeed irrelevant and the new age simpletons who follow him are a dying breed.
idlemind: Elsewhere someone posted evidence that shows that Chopra is not really a dualist at all – he’s a monist, albeit an idealist, not a materialist.