The book by Joseph Chilton Pearce called "Evolutions End" was a major revelation for me.
Oh man, be careful of that. Calling it pseudo-science woudl be a kindness... broad, sweeping claims for which he cannot possibly have adequate support. Note, I'm not saying that some of the things he points to are not issues; some of them almost certainly are. But his aim was clearly to create a sensational work in order to enrich himself.
...Science (and scientific method) thrives on empiricism. It is happily derivative. ...
Originally posted by ambaker:
....I suppose that technically there are only so many atoms in the universe, only so many musical notes, only so many letters in the alphabet, and only so many colors discernable to us. So theoretically, we all can only do what already exists in some way.
However the truely creative among us seem to manage to do it in ways that if we ever thought along those lines, we never seemed to be able to bring it to fruition; and never as wonderful and glorius as the truly creative can manage....
Imagine a mining operation which uses biological organisms to extract the metals, instead of dangerous chemicals. Imagine that the organisms consume harmful atmospheric carbon in the process, resulting in carbon-credits for the country hosting the mine.
It took some pretty creative geologists to put that together, and put it to work... Bioheapleaching
The book by Joseph Chilton Pearce called "Evolutions End" was a major revelation for me.
Oh man, be careful of that. Calling it pseudo-science woudl be a kindness... broad, sweeping claims for which he cannot possibly have adequate support. Note, I'm not saying that some of the things he points to are not issues; some of them almost certainly are. But his aim was clearly to create a sensational work in order to enrich himself.
Sounds like the book link I posted. Good valid points and serious food for thought which adds up to an essay or an editorial piece, at best but not an entire book.
