[bct] Re: Response to aura response podcast

  • From: "Jeff Armstrong" <jeffarmstrong1380@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:54:25 -0600


Your cast did have the ring to it that anyone who did not believe in auras was to be dismissed and I believe you even called them less than complementary names. While I will go along with you that the inability to measure a phenomenon does not mean it doesn't exist. The burden of proof is on the claimant to prove his or her assertion. You can't prove that I am not from Mars - does not necessarily make me a Martian, or does it.
Jeff Armstrong
----- Original Message ----- From: "The Scarlet Wombat" <coconut@xxxxxxx>
To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:11 AM
Subject: [bct] Response to aura response podcast

Jerry, I feel that I must respond to this since the aura cast was mine.

You refer people to skepdic.com. To be honest with you, I have never
beheld a more sad example of disbelief in my life as one can find on that
site. The idea there is that if it cannot be put in a test tube and proven
with current scientific knowledge, it simply is bunk. This reminds me of
that so-called expert named the Amazing Randy. It is amazing all right,
amazing that he is not booed off stage wherever he appears.

True science investigates, but does not reject because of a lack of
evidence.  You will not find many reports of a scientific nature verifying
the Aura for two reasons:  First, our ability to measure this
insturmentally is still in its infancy, and secondly, the attitude of many
scients is akin to that expressed on skepdic.com, meaning they
automatically dismiss anything they believe is not true without a full

Skepticism is not a bad idea, it is healthy to be aware of huxters and to
understand that not all comers are honest.  That being said, to deny the
existence of something merely because established science cannot verify it
borders on the absurd.

Humans had the senses of sight and hearing long before they could be
measured with anything resembling scientific instrumentation.  The lack of
this ability to measure did not mean the senses did not exist.

In my opinion, too many people experience auras to dismiss them as merely
imagination or mass hypnosis. You are welcome to not believe in them, that
is your right and I would not try to dissuade you, but you could also
believe the sun will not rise tomorrow, and that belief will not alter the
earth's rotation.

Jerry, you begin your cast carefully saying that people have a right to say
as they choose in their casts, but the entire tenor is that what I said is
not to be believed nor taken seriously. I find this approach to be of less
value than a set of honest questions.

I never said that what I was presenting was the story, the whole story and
nothing but the story.  Obviously, all anyone can present is their own
story.  Even if it is a peer reviewed scientific experiment, it is stil
only the story of the researchers because constructing an objective
experiment is impossible.

Quantum physics has shown us for 80 years that the very act of observing
phenomena alters those same phenomena, hence, all we have are stories.

I would be most interested in what research you checked out to tell you
there was no ability to see auras.

If I and countless others are not seeing auras, then, I ask you point
blank, what are we seeing?

What facts did you look at to come to your conclusion about auras.  I am
not challenging you here, I am honestly curious what facts they may be.

Sadly, much of what passes for debunking pseudo science or so-called false
science is, in and of itself, pseudo-debunking.

There are so many things science, in its current state, cannot prove they
could fill an encyclopedia.  The problem is that a firm belief in any
system, science, religion, anything can turn into fundamentalism and tends
to cause narrowmindedness to ensue.

Nothing in the scientific literature can disprove the existence of an aura
or the validity of Kirilian photography. The insistance to the contrary is
a fundy adhereance to a belief that may well prove, in the future, to be

Never forget the aphorism of Sir Arthur C. Clarke, any sufficiently
advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.  Today's magic is
tomorrow's science.

At the end of your cast, Jerry, you change the music, saying that the one
you change to is more appropriate for the topic.  While you do it in a
lighthearted manner, the inescapable conclusion is that you are poking fun
at a serious topical discussion.  There is a lot of fun poking here and I
do a good deal of it, so am not opposed to it by any means.  However, I
believe that your comments at the end of your cast suggest that the
subject, which is pointedly my aura podcast, is not to be taken seriously.

You are free to say as you choose and I would not want to see that altered
in the least, but it saddens me that you used your cast more to poke fun at
the idea of auras than to engage in a serious discussion of the topic.

Take care,


Other related posts: