1 00:00:11,660 --> 00:00:09,650 on this episode of skeptic Oh Alex talks 2 00:00:14,839 --> 00:00:11,670 with dr. Rupert Sheldrake about being 3 00:00:17,390 --> 00:00:14,849 censored by the TED Conference the irony 4 00:00:20,150 --> 00:00:17,400 of this is if not hilarious it's 5 00:00:22,970 --> 00:00:20,160 certainly inescapable I mean a reputable 6 00:00:25,640 --> 00:00:22,980 scientist publishes a book claiming that 7 00:00:27,980 --> 00:00:25,650 science is dogmatic and then is censured 8 00:00:30,349 --> 00:00:27,990 by an anonymous scientific board what 9 00:00:32,990 --> 00:00:30,359 does this say how science can be 10 00:00:35,479 --> 00:00:33,000 dogmatic without even realizing its 11 00:00:37,280 --> 00:00:35,489 dogmatic well I think in a way there's 12 00:00:39,170 --> 00:00:37,290 this whole controversy and the people 13 00:00:42,619 --> 00:00:39,180 who've weighed in in favor of the Ted 14 00:00:44,630 --> 00:00:42,629 actions do indeed confirm what I'm 15 00:00:46,039 --> 00:00:44,640 saying that these dogmas and ones that 16 00:00:48,289 --> 00:00:46,049 most people within science don't 17 00:00:50,299 --> 00:00:48,299 actually realize the dogmas they just 18 00:00:52,520 --> 00:00:50,309 think they're the truth and the point 19 00:00:54,619 --> 00:00:52,530 about really dogmatic people is that 20 00:00:55,280 --> 00:00:54,629 they don't know they have dogmas dogmas 21 00:00:56,899 --> 00:00:55,290 or beliefs 22 00:00:58,969 --> 00:00:56,909 and people who have really strong 23 00:01:00,740 --> 00:00:58,979 beliefs think of their beliefs as the 24 00:01:02,450 --> 00:01:00,750 truth they don't actually see them as 25 00:01:04,460 --> 00:01:02,460 beliefs so I think this whole 26 00:01:06,950 --> 00:01:04,470 controversy has actually highlighted 27 00:01:08,539 --> 00:01:06,960 exactly that the other thing is 28 00:01:11,000 --> 00:01:08,549 highlighted is that there are a lot of 29 00:01:14,180 --> 00:01:11,010 people far more than I imagined actually 30 00:01:16,120 --> 00:01:14,190 who are not taken in bagans dogmas who 31 00:01:29,230 --> 00:01:16,130 do want to think about them critically 32 00:01:33,080 --> 00:01:31,490 welcome to skeptic Oh where we explore 33 00:01:35,630 --> 00:01:33,090 controversial science with leading 34 00:01:37,700 --> 00:01:35,640 researchers thinkers and their critics 35 00:01:40,060 --> 00:01:37,710 I'm your host Alex Karras and on this 36 00:01:43,010 --> 00:01:40,070 episode of skeptic oh well I'm kind of 37 00:01:45,440 --> 00:01:43,020 interrupting my usual interview flow 38 00:01:48,140 --> 00:01:45,450 that I have going on to kind of do 39 00:01:50,690 --> 00:01:48,150 something timely and newsworthy and that 40 00:01:53,060 --> 00:01:50,700 is I've asked dr. Rupert Sheldrake to 41 00:01:55,670 --> 00:01:53,070 come on and briefly talk about this 42 00:01:58,520 --> 00:01:55,680 recent controversy that's been stirred 43 00:02:01,310 --> 00:01:58,530 up about him being censored by the TED 44 00:02:03,800 --> 00:02:01,320 Conference so it's really caused quite a 45 00:02:05,900 --> 00:02:03,810 big stir and a lot of people are talking 46 00:02:08,090 --> 00:02:05,910 about it and I thought it was so 47 00:02:09,050 --> 00:02:08,100 relevant to the kind of topics that we 48 00:02:11,240 --> 00:02:09,060 have on here 49 00:02:13,340 --> 00:02:11,250 that I would interrupt the three or four 50 00:02:16,430 --> 00:02:13,350 interviews I have piled up to publish 51 00:02:18,860 --> 00:02:16,440 and ask dr. Sheldrick to come on so here 52 00:02:21,110 --> 00:02:18,870 is my interview with dr. Rupert 53 00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:21,120 Sheldrake regarding being censored by 54 00:02:27,680 --> 00:02:24,570 the TED Conference today we welcome dr. 55 00:02:29,360 --> 00:02:27,690 Rupert Sheldrake back to skeptic Oh many 56 00:02:32,000 --> 00:02:29,370 of you know the work of Cambridge 57 00:02:35,449 --> 00:02:32,010 biologist dr. Rupert Sheldrake including 58 00:02:38,060 --> 00:02:35,459 his latest book science set free but now 59 00:02:41,020 --> 00:02:38,070 you may have heard that this book has 60 00:02:43,310 --> 00:02:41,030 seemed of struck quite a nerve because 61 00:02:45,410 --> 00:02:43,320 dr. Sheldrick has found himself in the 62 00:02:48,320 --> 00:02:45,420 middle of a controversy surrounding the 63 00:02:50,960 --> 00:02:48,330 censorship of a video lecture that he 64 00:02:54,260 --> 00:02:50,970 presented and that was then posted on 65 00:02:57,620 --> 00:02:54,270 the very popular TEDx youtube channel 66 00:03:01,130 --> 00:02:57,630 and then removed after and get this by 67 00:03:04,670 --> 00:03:01,140 an anonymous scientific board that 68 00:03:07,160 --> 00:03:04,680 deemed it unscientific Rupert welcome 69 00:03:09,440 --> 00:03:07,170 back to sceptic oh thanks for joining us 70 00:03:11,509 --> 00:03:09,450 tell us what's happened here well you 71 00:03:15,920 --> 00:03:11,519 summarized it more or less I gave a talk 72 00:03:19,580 --> 00:03:15,930 at the TEDx series of talks in London in 73 00:03:22,040 --> 00:03:19,590 Whitechapel the organisers were young 74 00:03:24,650 --> 00:03:22,050 women students at London University who 75 00:03:28,070 --> 00:03:24,660 organised a very lively event and it was 76 00:03:30,080 --> 00:03:28,080 called challenging existing paradigms so 77 00:03:33,320 --> 00:03:30,090 they asked me to talk about challenging 78 00:03:35,390 --> 00:03:33,330 existing paradigms which seemed just the 79 00:03:38,540 --> 00:03:35,400 right theme for my book science set free 80 00:03:40,940 --> 00:03:38,550 so I did a TEDx talk for it it was 81 00:03:41,990 --> 00:03:40,950 extremely popular the event was sold out 82 00:03:44,150 --> 00:03:42,000 there was a 83 00:03:47,360 --> 00:03:44,160 lots of lively discussion it was really 84 00:03:50,810 --> 00:03:47,370 fun it went up on the TEDx website as 85 00:03:53,960 --> 00:03:50,820 these TEDx talks often do and it all was 86 00:03:57,890 --> 00:03:53,970 well until it was denounced by two of 87 00:04:02,090 --> 00:03:57,900 America's leading militant skeptics PZ 88 00:04:05,230 --> 00:04:02,100 Myers and Jerry Coyne who didn't like it 89 00:04:08,480 --> 00:04:05,240 because it upset they're rather dogmatic 90 00:04:11,060 --> 00:04:08,490 materialist worldview so they called for 91 00:04:13,610 --> 00:04:11,070 it to be turned taken down and they said 92 00:04:16,130 --> 00:04:13,620 tended discredited itself etc they put 93 00:04:20,120 --> 00:04:16,140 enormous pressure on Ted and then they 94 00:04:22,820 --> 00:04:20,130 got armies of their supporters to send 95 00:04:25,400 --> 00:04:22,830 emails to Ted and and put comments on 96 00:04:27,890 --> 00:04:25,410 websites so the dead people back down 97 00:04:29,960 --> 00:04:27,900 they removed it and then having removed 98 00:04:31,310 --> 00:04:29,970 it they had to justify removing it so 99 00:04:34,130 --> 00:04:31,320 they had this report from their 100 00:04:37,670 --> 00:04:34,140 so-called scientific board an anonymous 101 00:04:40,790 --> 00:04:37,680 board I don't know if it includes P and 102 00:04:42,110 --> 00:04:40,800 J and Myers or people like that we don't 103 00:04:46,400 --> 00:04:42,120 know who it includes they wouldn't 104 00:04:48,409 --> 00:04:46,410 reveal it and they took it down it's not 105 00:04:52,250 --> 00:04:48,419 exactly censorship because they insist 106 00:04:55,730 --> 00:04:52,260 on pointing out they put it with a kind 107 00:04:58,460 --> 00:04:55,740 of health warning right so that it was 108 00:05:01,070 --> 00:04:58,470 still there but it had been put in a 109 00:05:04,370 --> 00:05:01,080 kind of naughty corner of the internet 110 00:05:06,920 --> 00:05:04,380 not on the main tab ten site that stared 111 00:05:09,140 --> 00:05:06,930 out a very big controversy and I replied 112 00:05:11,630 --> 00:05:09,150 to the accusations of their science 113 00:05:15,260 --> 00:05:11,640 board one by one they won't be very easy 114 00:05:17,300 --> 00:05:15,270 to refute but then the thing spiraled 115 00:05:20,180 --> 00:05:17,310 out of control and a huge controversy 116 00:05:22,280 --> 00:05:20,190 blew up all over the internet with lots 117 00:05:25,280 --> 00:05:22,290 of people taking it up on Facebook and 118 00:05:28,270 --> 00:05:25,290 blogs and things were getting pretty 119 00:05:32,210 --> 00:05:28,280 badly for Ted and I then had a call 120 00:05:35,600 --> 00:05:32,220 about a week ago from Chris Anderson 121 00:05:37,640 --> 00:05:35,610 himself the head of Ted and he was 122 00:05:39,400 --> 00:05:37,650 obviously really worried about this and 123 00:05:43,240 --> 00:05:39,410 was trying to calm the situation down 124 00:05:48,260 --> 00:05:43,250 which they've now done by putting my 125 00:05:49,969 --> 00:05:48,270 talk on a separate blog separate from 126 00:05:52,169 --> 00:05:49,979 the other one we took and their gran 127 00:05:54,939 --> 00:05:52,179 Hancock and 128 00:05:57,729 --> 00:05:54,949 saying it's open for debate and having 129 00:06:00,369 --> 00:05:57,739 people put comments around online the 130 00:06:04,469 --> 00:06:00,379 great majority of which supporting my 131 00:06:08,499 --> 00:06:04,479 talk and not the actions of Ted all the 132 00:06:11,279 --> 00:06:08,509 very intemperate and emotional and I had 133 00:06:16,059 --> 00:06:11,289 to say rather unintelligent remarks of 134 00:06:18,219 --> 00:06:16,069 Jerry Cohen and he said Myers right so 135 00:06:21,519 --> 00:06:18,229 as you mentioned Chris Anderson is the 136 00:06:24,939 --> 00:06:21,529 founder and the head idea spreader if 137 00:06:26,499 --> 00:06:24,949 you will at Ted and it's nice to know 138 00:06:29,499 --> 00:06:26,509 that he's connected with you personally 139 00:06:32,350 --> 00:06:29,509 I would have loved to have had mr. 140 00:06:35,799 --> 00:06:32,360 Anderson on skeptic Oh or any of his 141 00:06:38,350 --> 00:06:35,809 scientific advisors on sceptical I think 142 00:06:40,480 --> 00:06:38,360 it would have been quite a debate really 143 00:06:43,980 --> 00:06:40,490 not much of one because as you alluded 144 00:06:46,809 --> 00:06:43,990 to anyone who reads your point by point 145 00:06:48,759 --> 00:06:46,819 counter to their claims it's pretty 146 00:06:51,790 --> 00:06:48,769 one-sided and I think most of the 147 00:06:53,739 --> 00:06:51,800 commenters on the Ted website would 148 00:06:56,739 --> 00:06:53,749 agree with that but what I thought we 149 00:06:59,619 --> 00:06:56,749 might do today to give folks a little 150 00:07:04,239 --> 00:06:59,629 sense for the spirit of this discussion 151 00:07:06,879 --> 00:07:04,249 and in a broader sense this controversy 152 00:07:09,100 --> 00:07:06,889 that you bring up in your book science 153 00:07:11,589 --> 00:07:09,110 at free about whether or not 154 00:07:14,259 --> 00:07:11,599 science is dogmatic whether or not 155 00:07:16,809 --> 00:07:14,269 science can get itself out of this rut 156 00:07:20,109 --> 00:07:16,819 it's in what I thought we might use as a 157 00:07:23,499 --> 00:07:20,119 vehicle for that is for me to kind of 158 00:07:26,980 --> 00:07:23,509 play the role of Chris Anderson and use 159 00:07:29,109 --> 00:07:26,990 some of the words and ideas that he 160 00:07:31,869 --> 00:07:29,119 spread on his blog about this 161 00:07:33,639 --> 00:07:31,879 controversy and get a response from you 162 00:07:37,719 --> 00:07:33,649 does that sound like something we might 163 00:07:40,779 --> 00:07:37,729 be able to do yes okay so let's start 164 00:07:43,269 --> 00:07:40,789 with this one first off dr. Sheldrick 165 00:07:45,909 --> 00:07:43,279 you got appreciate the position that Ted 166 00:07:49,329 --> 00:07:45,919 is in I mean the TED conference TEDx 167 00:07:52,269 --> 00:07:49,339 these are important worldwide brands 168 00:07:55,899 --> 00:07:52,279 were the ideas worth spreading people 169 00:07:58,480 --> 00:07:55,909 and we have to make sure that the ideas 170 00:08:01,689 --> 00:07:58,490 on our site are really worth spreading 171 00:08:03,519 --> 00:08:01,699 and to that end I'm gonna have a hard 172 00:08:04,970 --> 00:08:03,529 time keeping a straight face on this I'm 173 00:08:07,700 --> 00:08:04,980 gonna here we go what 174 00:08:09,920 --> 00:08:07,710 the hardest lines for us to draw is this 175 00:08:12,260 --> 00:08:09,930 line between science and pseudoscience 176 00:08:14,510 --> 00:08:12,270 and Ted let me tell you we're committed 177 00:08:17,480 --> 00:08:14,520 to science but we think of it as a 178 00:08:20,030 --> 00:08:17,490 process not as a locked-in body of truth 179 00:08:22,520 --> 00:08:20,040 want you to know that but some speakers 180 00:08:24,350 --> 00:08:22,530 as you know will use the language of 181 00:08:27,160 --> 00:08:24,360 science to promote views that are 182 00:08:29,930 --> 00:08:27,170 incompatible with all reasonable 183 00:08:33,440 --> 00:08:29,940 understanding of the world and giving 184 00:08:35,810 --> 00:08:33,450 them a platform is counterproductive so 185 00:08:38,000 --> 00:08:35,820 doctor Sheldrick you have to understand 186 00:08:40,520 --> 00:08:38,010 our position here I mean we do have to 187 00:08:43,940 --> 00:08:40,530 look into these ideas that are presented 188 00:08:46,550 --> 00:08:43,950 on our website well I mean that is in I 189 00:08:48,380 --> 00:08:46,560 do see where Chris Anderson's point of 190 00:08:50,180 --> 00:08:48,390 view and indeed I had a long 191 00:08:52,490 --> 00:08:50,190 conversation with Chris Anderson on the 192 00:08:55,670 --> 00:08:52,500 telephone and we got on perfectly well I 193 00:08:57,800 --> 00:08:55,680 mean I wasn't particularly angry or with 194 00:09:00,500 --> 00:08:57,810 him or anything like that I mean it was 195 00:09:02,090 --> 00:09:00,510 a reasonable conversation and you know 196 00:09:04,670 --> 00:09:02,100 they do have a point there's a lot of 197 00:09:07,580 --> 00:09:04,680 rubbish and there has to be some kind of 198 00:09:10,490 --> 00:09:07,590 filter so I'm not against the idea of a 199 00:09:13,250 --> 00:09:10,500 filter but what I am against is the idea 200 00:09:15,740 --> 00:09:13,260 of the time applying a filter in a very 201 00:09:18,200 --> 00:09:15,750 partial kind of way there are lots of 202 00:09:21,380 --> 00:09:18,210 things up on the TEDx website which were 203 00:09:25,160 --> 00:09:21,390 controversial for example there are a 204 00:09:28,460 --> 00:09:25,170 lot of talks by militant atheists which 205 00:09:30,080 --> 00:09:28,470 a lot of people find controversial a lot 206 00:09:32,750 --> 00:09:30,090 of people disagree with what they say 207 00:09:36,080 --> 00:09:32,760 and think that's actually wrong in a 208 00:09:37,730 --> 00:09:36,090 variety of ways and that those haven't 209 00:09:41,540 --> 00:09:37,740 been flagged up or put in the naughty 210 00:09:44,900 --> 00:09:41,550 corner those have been allowed 211 00:09:47,870 --> 00:09:44,910 absolutely free run on the internet they 212 00:09:51,130 --> 00:09:47,880 put up on the main website talks by 213 00:09:55,100 --> 00:09:51,140 people like Richard Dawkins for example 214 00:09:58,510 --> 00:09:55,110 and the difference here is that my talk 215 00:10:02,150 --> 00:09:58,520 was flagged up as being a 216 00:10:03,260 --> 00:10:02,160 pseudo-scientific because Jerry Coyne 217 00:10:05,150 --> 00:10:03,270 didn't like it 218 00:10:08,210 --> 00:10:05,160 well Jerry Coyne is a very bigoted man 219 00:10:11,210 --> 00:10:08,220 who writes very loud math things on his 220 00:10:13,880 --> 00:10:11,220 website and I couldn't take him very 221 00:10:16,620 --> 00:10:13,890 seriously I mean he's a polemicist of 222 00:10:18,600 --> 00:10:16,630 her kind of Dawkins type polemicist 223 00:10:22,590 --> 00:10:18,610 so they paid a lot of attention to what 224 00:10:27,120 --> 00:10:22,600 Gerry came and he said has patience a PZ 225 00:10:29,670 --> 00:10:27,130 Myers said on their websites that if 226 00:10:32,970 --> 00:10:29,680 they've been a similar attack by say 227 00:10:34,889 --> 00:10:32,980 Christian fundamentalists on Dawkins 228 00:10:37,019 --> 00:10:34,899 they would have ignored it but if it's 229 00:10:39,900 --> 00:10:37,029 best scientific fundamentalist and they 230 00:10:42,990 --> 00:10:39,910 pay attention and what's more don't just 231 00:10:44,670 --> 00:10:43,000 pay attention that getting to dig 232 00:10:47,610 --> 00:10:44,680 themselves into the hole trying to 233 00:10:52,230 --> 00:10:47,620 justify this so I think the problem here 234 00:10:55,019 --> 00:10:52,240 is that the this an attempt to filter 235 00:10:58,680 --> 00:10:55,029 out content was done extremely in an 236 00:11:00,740 --> 00:10:58,690 extremely biased way if every webs if 237 00:11:03,389 --> 00:11:00,750 every TED talk which is controversial 238 00:11:05,129 --> 00:11:03,399 was flagged up by somebody who didn't 239 00:11:07,470 --> 00:11:05,139 like it and put in the naughty corner 240 00:11:10,499 --> 00:11:07,480 all the most interesting talks would be 241 00:11:13,850 --> 00:11:10,509 in the naughty corner the only the 242 00:11:17,519 --> 00:11:13,860 dullest would be on the main website and 243 00:11:21,030 --> 00:11:17,529 what's more Ted in their instructions to 244 00:11:22,769 --> 00:11:21,040 the organizers of the TEDx events told 245 00:11:26,009 --> 00:11:22,779 them they wanted controversial talks 246 00:11:27,689 --> 00:11:26,019 they said controversy energizes but when 247 00:11:29,819 --> 00:11:27,699 it's in a particular area one that 248 00:11:32,819 --> 00:11:29,829 upsets the dogmatic materialist then 249 00:11:35,639 --> 00:11:32,829 they back down in saying that's not the 250 00:11:38,970 --> 00:11:35,649 right thing to have so I think that it's 251 00:11:41,189 --> 00:11:38,980 been inconsistent and they've paid far 252 00:11:45,290 --> 00:11:41,199 too much attention to these very biased 253 00:11:47,879 --> 00:11:45,300 and I think minority and strident voices 254 00:11:50,699 --> 00:11:47,889 yeah let's see dr. Sheldrick that's not 255 00:11:53,220 --> 00:11:50,709 the case because when they went to their 256 00:11:56,309 --> 00:11:53,230 scientific board the majority of them 257 00:11:58,110 --> 00:11:56,319 agreed that you're in Graham Hancock's 258 00:11:59,939 --> 00:11:58,120 videos should be removed from 259 00:12:01,350 --> 00:11:59,949 circulation didn't they do the right 260 00:12:04,679 --> 00:12:01,360 thing they went to theirs anonymous 261 00:12:06,480 --> 00:12:04,689 scientific board well we don't know who 262 00:12:09,210 --> 00:12:06,490 the scientific board are so we don't 263 00:12:11,550 --> 00:12:09,220 know if it's the right thing if we look 264 00:12:14,689 --> 00:12:11,560 at the Ted board of advisers the brain 265 00:12:16,889 --> 00:12:14,699 trust for Ted so called on the website 266 00:12:20,040 --> 00:12:16,899 the main people in the area of 267 00:12:23,040 --> 00:12:20,050 consciousness studies are Steven Pinker 268 00:12:25,889 --> 00:12:23,050 and Daniel Dennett both of whom are 269 00:12:29,939 --> 00:12:25,899 extreme militant atheists and 270 00:12:30,420 --> 00:12:29,949 materialists so we just don't know what 271 00:12:33,060 --> 00:12:30,430 kind of 272 00:12:35,460 --> 00:12:33,070 people are on the scientific board and 273 00:12:37,800 --> 00:12:35,470 so it's hard and we don't know how many 274 00:12:43,250 --> 00:12:37,810 be consulted there's the majority two 275 00:12:45,750 --> 00:12:43,260 out of two or is it sort of 20 out of 30 276 00:12:48,210 --> 00:12:45,760 or something day yeah I imagine it was 277 00:12:49,829 --> 00:12:48,220 just one or two phone calls you have to 278 00:12:51,540 --> 00:12:49,839 acknowledge that these folks have to 279 00:12:53,370 --> 00:12:51,550 remain anonymous right I mean there are 280 00:12:56,220 --> 00:12:53,380 a scientific board they have to be 281 00:12:57,900 --> 00:12:56,230 anonymous for obvious reasons well I 282 00:12:59,850 --> 00:12:57,910 took this up with Chris Anderson they 283 00:13:02,730 --> 00:12:59,860 said well why didn't he come out of the 284 00:13:06,030 --> 00:13:02,740 shadows and and tell us who they are 285 00:13:08,310 --> 00:13:06,040 it's hard to face anonymous accusers so 286 00:13:10,380 --> 00:13:08,320 he said well we can't ask the scientific 287 00:13:12,389 --> 00:13:10,390 board being named or to come out in 288 00:13:13,170 --> 00:13:12,399 public because if they did they might 289 00:13:16,139 --> 00:13:13,180 get attacked 290 00:13:19,050 --> 00:13:16,149 they might even get pilloried so I said 291 00:13:21,329 --> 00:13:19,060 to him well don't you think by making 292 00:13:23,910 --> 00:13:21,339 these unreasonable attacks on my talk 293 00:13:26,940 --> 00:13:23,920 accusing me and numerous factual errors 294 00:13:29,699 --> 00:13:26,950 of pseudoscience etc your pillar iing me 295 00:13:32,310 --> 00:13:29,709 and and he's there well that's different 296 00:13:35,940 --> 00:13:32,320 I said well why is it different he said 297 00:13:38,010 --> 00:13:35,950 well because you gave the talk I gave 298 00:13:42,030 --> 00:13:38,020 the talk at their invitation after I 299 00:13:43,890 --> 00:13:42,040 didn't get paid for it and I thought of 300 00:13:49,350 --> 00:13:43,900 all the criteria you know it was on 301 00:13:53,460 --> 00:13:49,360 imagining contradicting existing 302 00:13:59,030 --> 00:13:53,470 paradigms and so forth and anyway so 303 00:14:01,410 --> 00:13:59,040 this I think is a very unreasonable 304 00:14:04,470 --> 00:14:01,420 objection and I think that the science 305 00:14:07,140 --> 00:14:04,480 board should be named I mean after all 306 00:14:10,070 --> 00:14:07,150 he said the analogies with peer review 307 00:14:12,840 --> 00:14:10,080 in journals in peer review in journals 308 00:14:14,220 --> 00:14:12,850 the peer reviewers are anonymous but so 309 00:14:16,440 --> 00:14:14,230 are the people whose papers they're 310 00:14:18,240 --> 00:14:16,450 reviewing the authors are removed from 311 00:14:20,460 --> 00:14:18,250 the papers that are submitted to peer 312 00:14:22,710 --> 00:14:20,470 reviewers the whole thing is anonymous 313 00:14:25,170 --> 00:14:22,720 and the editor of the journal makes the 314 00:14:27,540 --> 00:14:25,180 decisions is not anonymous you can look 315 00:14:29,310 --> 00:14:27,550 at the editorial board of any scientific 316 00:14:31,280 --> 00:14:29,320 journal and their names are given them 317 00:14:35,160 --> 00:14:31,290 so you know who's ultimately responsible 318 00:14:36,840 --> 00:14:35,170 in this case you don't so it's very hard 319 00:14:40,920 --> 00:14:36,850 to know whether the scientific board 320 00:14:42,569 --> 00:14:40,930 even exists or how credible they are and 321 00:14:44,249 --> 00:14:42,579 if they have a criterion of scientific 322 00:14:46,439 --> 00:14:44,259 credibility then we do 323 00:14:50,129 --> 00:14:46,449 sneaking down they might just be shaky 324 00:14:51,869 --> 00:14:50,139 Chloe night okay so finally let me hit 325 00:14:54,749 --> 00:14:51,879 you with one more point that the Ted 326 00:14:57,629 --> 00:14:54,759 people make you know Ted and TEDx are 327 00:14:59,849 --> 00:14:57,639 brands that are trusted in schools and 328 00:15:02,400 --> 00:14:59,859 homes you know they don't want to hear 329 00:15:05,189 --> 00:15:02,410 from some parent whose kid went off to 330 00:15:08,489 --> 00:15:05,199 South America to drink ayahuasca because 331 00:15:10,469 --> 00:15:08,499 Ted said it was okay I mean dr. 332 00:15:13,229 --> 00:15:10,479 Sheldrick think of the children or for 333 00:15:15,359 --> 00:15:13,239 that matter some kid who winds up going 334 00:15:18,059 --> 00:15:15,369 to school thinking that telepathy is 335 00:15:20,009 --> 00:15:18,069 real or that consciousness extends 336 00:15:23,159 --> 00:15:20,019 beyond the brain I mean we don't want 337 00:15:26,249 --> 00:15:23,169 that I mean there's a limit to how far 338 00:15:27,689 --> 00:15:26,259 you can push an idea until it reaches 339 00:15:29,849 --> 00:15:27,699 the point where it's no longer worth 340 00:15:31,769 --> 00:15:29,859 spreading wouldn't you agree well I 341 00:15:35,159 --> 00:15:31,779 agree some ideas are not worth spreading 342 00:15:36,719 --> 00:15:35,169 I do agree with that that's exactly how 343 00:15:41,789 --> 00:15:36,729 you make the criterion there's another 344 00:15:45,569 --> 00:15:41,799 question and the the sudden concern for 345 00:15:47,489 --> 00:15:45,579 children seems to me rather misplaced 346 00:15:51,269 --> 00:15:47,499 already quite a few talks about 347 00:15:52,919 --> 00:15:51,279 psychedelics on the Ted website and the 348 00:15:54,919 --> 00:15:52,929 objection is no objection to those 349 00:15:57,029 --> 00:15:54,929 apparently alias of anti Graham Hancock 350 00:16:00,900 --> 00:15:57,039 so I don't think this is a consistent 351 00:16:04,429 --> 00:16:00,910 objection about children the other thing 352 00:16:07,229 --> 00:16:04,439 is that Ted recently sent around a 353 00:16:08,609 --> 00:16:07,239 guideline to TEDx organizers telling 354 00:16:10,769 --> 00:16:08,619 them how to tell science from 355 00:16:13,949 --> 00:16:10,779 pseudoscience it's rather an interesting 356 00:16:16,139 --> 00:16:13,959 document and what it says is genuine 357 00:16:18,359 --> 00:16:16,149 science how to tell genuine science 358 00:16:20,729 --> 00:16:18,369 basically genuine science is what's 359 00:16:23,999 --> 00:16:20,739 being done by quite a lot of people in 360 00:16:27,479 --> 00:16:24,009 universities approved and published in 361 00:16:29,789 --> 00:16:27,489 the leading peer-reviewed journals and 362 00:16:32,159 --> 00:16:29,799 if you're in doubt call up a professor 363 00:16:34,710 --> 00:16:32,169 at your local university and ask him 364 00:16:36,779 --> 00:16:34,720 about it and if it's pseudoscience or if 365 00:16:39,899 --> 00:16:36,789 it's not genuine CERN's who he'll tell 366 00:16:42,019 --> 00:16:39,909 you well that would be a perfect way of 367 00:16:44,399 --> 00:16:42,029 eliminating anything to do with 368 00:16:47,069 --> 00:16:44,409 parapsychology from the TED talks and 369 00:16:50,059 --> 00:16:47,079 also several people pointed out on their 370 00:16:53,460 --> 00:16:50,069 blogs they would also have eliminated 371 00:16:56,399 --> 00:16:53,470 Albert Einstein because only people who 372 00:16:57,610 --> 00:16:56,409 are holding academic posts should be 373 00:17:00,190 --> 00:16:57,620 considered for the 374 00:17:02,320 --> 00:17:00,200 be real scientists Einstein was a clerk 375 00:17:04,090 --> 00:17:02,330 in patents office in Zurich when his 376 00:17:08,699 --> 00:17:04,100 great papers on quantum theory and 377 00:17:11,230 --> 00:17:08,709 relativity were published in 1905 and 378 00:17:13,270 --> 00:17:11,240 Charles Darwin never had an academic 379 00:17:16,569 --> 00:17:13,280 post darling would have been classified 380 00:17:19,480 --> 00:17:16,579 as pseudoscience straight away on the 381 00:17:21,880 --> 00:17:19,490 10th criteria so I think they've got 382 00:17:24,220 --> 00:17:21,890 themselves you know they're trying they 383 00:17:26,949 --> 00:17:24,230 made a rash decision hardly and they're 384 00:17:29,410 --> 00:17:26,959 trying to justify it and the more they 385 00:17:33,100 --> 00:17:29,420 try to justify it the more difficult 386 00:17:35,370 --> 00:17:33,110 their position becomes and also you know 387 00:17:37,720 --> 00:17:35,380 if they want to protect children then 388 00:17:40,870 --> 00:17:37,730 why not protect them from some of these 389 00:17:42,640 --> 00:17:40,880 militant atheists who may have very 390 00:17:47,669 --> 00:17:42,650 disturbing effect on the children's 391 00:17:50,980 --> 00:17:47,679 thinking and so I think that the whole 392 00:17:53,280 --> 00:17:50,990 attempt is actually one weird head have 393 00:17:55,780 --> 00:17:53,290 done themselves quite a lot of harm by 394 00:17:58,600 --> 00:17:55,790 taking an irrational decision and then 395 00:18:01,780 --> 00:17:58,610 trying to justify it in the way that is 396 00:18:03,460 --> 00:18:01,790 pretty unconvincing I mean I sympathise 397 00:18:05,919 --> 00:18:03,470 with them and indeed when I told Chris 398 00:18:10,680 --> 00:18:05,929 Anderson I sympathize with them I mean I 399 00:18:13,090 --> 00:18:10,690 wouldn't like to be an editor of a 400 00:18:15,400 --> 00:18:13,100 series like that because there are 401 00:18:17,950 --> 00:18:15,410 people who are borderline cases you know 402 00:18:19,630 --> 00:18:17,960 what do you if there aren't you do have 403 00:18:21,400 --> 00:18:19,640 to draw a line somewhere and not against 404 00:18:27,400 --> 00:18:21,410 drawing lines I think they have to be 405 00:18:30,549 --> 00:18:27,410 drawn so I just think they've handled it 406 00:18:33,820 --> 00:18:30,559 pretty badly so let me switch out of the 407 00:18:36,160 --> 00:18:33,830 mode of trying to put forth the Ted 408 00:18:38,710 --> 00:18:36,170 ideas as much as I can glean them from 409 00:18:41,530 --> 00:18:38,720 their from their numerous blog posts and 410 00:18:43,570 --> 00:18:41,540 website comments and let me ask you a 411 00:18:46,540 --> 00:18:43,580 couple of questions in general about 412 00:18:49,930 --> 00:18:46,550 this because you know the irony of this 413 00:18:53,200 --> 00:18:49,940 is if not hilarious it's certainly 414 00:18:56,230 --> 00:18:53,210 inescapable I mean a reputable scientist 415 00:18:59,320 --> 00:18:56,240 like yourself publishes a book claiming 416 00:19:01,480 --> 00:18:59,330 that science is dogmatic and then is 417 00:19:03,580 --> 00:19:01,490 censored by an anonymous scientific 418 00:19:06,990 --> 00:19:03,590 board I mean it's like you can't script 419 00:19:09,880 --> 00:19:07,000 that any better what does this say about 420 00:19:11,200 --> 00:19:09,890 really the whole topic of your book and 421 00:19:13,570 --> 00:19:11,210 about 422 00:19:16,480 --> 00:19:13,580 science can be dogmatic without even 423 00:19:18,399 --> 00:19:16,490 realizing its dogmatic well I think in a 424 00:19:20,380 --> 00:19:18,409 way there's this whole controversy and 425 00:19:25,630 --> 00:19:20,390 the people who've weighed in in favor of 426 00:19:28,299 --> 00:19:25,640 the Ted actions do indeed confirm what 427 00:19:29,950 --> 00:19:28,309 I'm saying that there's these dogmas and 428 00:19:32,230 --> 00:19:29,960 ones that most people within science 429 00:19:34,269 --> 00:19:32,240 don't actually realize the dogmas they 430 00:19:36,460 --> 00:19:34,279 just think they're the truth and the 431 00:19:38,049 --> 00:19:36,470 point about really dogmatic people is 432 00:19:41,019 --> 00:19:38,059 that they don't know they have dogmas 433 00:19:42,970 --> 00:19:41,029 dogmas of beliefs and people that have 434 00:19:44,740 --> 00:19:42,980 really strong beliefs think of their 435 00:19:46,960 --> 00:19:44,750 beliefs as the truth they don't actually 436 00:19:48,519 --> 00:19:46,970 see them as beliefs so I think this 437 00:19:51,519 --> 00:19:48,529 whole controversy has actually 438 00:19:53,200 --> 00:19:51,529 highlighted exactly that the other thing 439 00:19:55,240 --> 00:19:53,210 is highlighted is that there are a lot 440 00:19:58,029 --> 00:19:55,250 of people far more than I imagined 441 00:20:00,190 --> 00:19:58,039 actually who are not taken in baboons 442 00:20:01,870 --> 00:20:00,200 dogmas who do want to think about them 443 00:20:05,230 --> 00:20:01,880 critically and one of the remarkable 444 00:20:08,320 --> 00:20:05,240 things about these discussions is lots 445 00:20:09,970 --> 00:20:08,330 and lots of people a really up for 446 00:20:12,190 --> 00:20:09,980 discussion with these partners they 447 00:20:14,919 --> 00:20:12,200 really wanted to happen far more than 448 00:20:17,350 --> 00:20:14,929 I'd imagine naturally and so I was very 449 00:20:20,799 --> 00:20:17,360 impressed by this and I think this TED 450 00:20:23,409 --> 00:20:20,809 debate has actually helped show that the 451 00:20:25,779 --> 00:20:23,419 paradigm is shifting that there's no 452 00:20:27,970 --> 00:20:25,789 longer a kind of automatic agreement by 453 00:20:32,080 --> 00:20:27,980 the great majority of people too 454 00:20:34,450 --> 00:20:32,090 dogmatic assertions by materialists yeah 455 00:20:37,630 --> 00:20:34,460 it's almost as if this is somewhat of a 456 00:20:40,090 --> 00:20:37,640 marker of the kind of events that would 457 00:20:44,560 --> 00:20:40,100 happen in the process of changing a 458 00:20:47,110 --> 00:20:44,570 paradigm yes this is actually for me an 459 00:20:49,360 --> 00:20:47,120 illustration of actually seeing a 460 00:20:51,070 --> 00:20:49,370 paradigm shift in action I think this 461 00:20:53,260 --> 00:20:51,080 controversy it wouldn't have been a 462 00:20:55,149 --> 00:20:53,270 controversy after all if a lot of people 463 00:20:57,669 --> 00:20:55,159 hadn't thought that Ted had made the 464 00:20:59,590 --> 00:20:57,679 wrong decision and they wouldn't have 465 00:21:01,810 --> 00:20:59,600 been large months of thousands of 466 00:21:03,669 --> 00:21:01,820 comments on blogs all over the internet 467 00:21:06,940 --> 00:21:03,679 that wouldn't have happened 468 00:21:08,649 --> 00:21:06,950 if the majority thought Ted had made the 469 00:21:10,840 --> 00:21:08,659 right decision and it was more or less a 470 00:21:14,019 --> 00:21:10,850 done deal that materialism was the only 471 00:21:16,510 --> 00:21:14,029 acceptable form of science now I think 472 00:21:18,430 --> 00:21:16,520 the fact that so many people feel 473 00:21:22,419 --> 00:21:18,440 strongly about it exactly why there's 474 00:21:24,560 --> 00:21:22,429 been a controversy and I do think we're 475 00:21:26,570 --> 00:21:24,570 actually seeing a shift 476 00:21:29,870 --> 00:21:26,580 also of course on these various blogs 477 00:21:33,200 --> 00:21:29,880 and discussion forums now and then one 478 00:21:35,000 --> 00:21:33,210 of the standard skeptic voices comes up 479 00:21:36,700 --> 00:21:35,010 with all the standard arguments that 480 00:21:39,170 --> 00:21:36,710 we've all had hundreds of times before 481 00:21:40,940 --> 00:21:39,180 but now they're being shot down by 482 00:21:43,850 --> 00:21:40,950 people you know that are saying okay 483 00:21:46,190 --> 00:21:43,860 where's your evidence and and calling 484 00:21:48,800 --> 00:21:46,200 them on things which normally they'd get 485 00:21:51,140 --> 00:21:48,810 away with that too is a change it's a 486 00:21:55,010 --> 00:21:51,150 kind of empowerment of people to 487 00:21:57,380 --> 00:21:55,020 challenge this dogmatic materialism and 488 00:22:00,830 --> 00:21:57,390 maybe in a way you know Chris Anderson 489 00:22:03,860 --> 00:22:00,840 has unwittingly done you a favor and 490 00:22:06,800 --> 00:22:03,870 done this cause if you will I hate to 491 00:22:08,330 --> 00:22:06,810 say it that way but has done certainly 492 00:22:10,970 --> 00:22:08,340 your book a favor and drawing attention 493 00:22:13,490 --> 00:22:10,980 to your ideas do you think that might be 494 00:22:15,560 --> 00:22:13,500 true well I think it is actually I I 495 00:22:17,570 --> 00:22:15,570 mean I don't think he done it on purpose 496 00:22:20,570 --> 00:22:17,580 and I don't have any personal grudge 497 00:22:22,100 --> 00:22:20,580 against Jason Chris Anderson he's a when 498 00:22:24,100 --> 00:22:22,110 I talked and I found a perfectly 499 00:22:26,840 --> 00:22:24,110 reasonable chap and I enjoyed 500 00:22:31,250 --> 00:22:26,850 conversation but Rupert he does seem 501 00:22:33,770 --> 00:22:31,260 incredibly unaware of the situation as 502 00:22:35,630 --> 00:22:33,780 it exists I mean even when he tries to 503 00:22:37,700 --> 00:22:35,640 recover and says okay I understand 504 00:22:41,000 --> 00:22:37,710 consciousness is controversial 505 00:22:43,880 --> 00:22:41,010 he has such a kindergarten appreciation 506 00:22:46,880 --> 00:22:43,890 for the issues that really are at hand 507 00:22:49,880 --> 00:22:46,890 and the controversy that really lies at 508 00:22:51,920 --> 00:22:49,890 the at the core of that issue of are we 509 00:22:54,290 --> 00:22:51,930 these biological robots that are purely 510 00:22:55,610 --> 00:22:54,300 a product of our brain or not I mean 511 00:22:57,890 --> 00:22:55,620 there's a guy that's gonna it's gonna 512 00:22:59,270 --> 00:22:57,900 take him a lot of Education to get to 513 00:23:01,430 --> 00:22:59,280 where he could have an intelligent 514 00:23:03,860 --> 00:23:01,440 discussion about these issues now well I 515 00:23:05,990 --> 00:23:03,870 think I think he's personally quite 516 00:23:07,880 --> 00:23:06,000 interesting he studied philosophy at 517 00:23:09,950 --> 00:23:07,890 Oxford and I think he told me and I 518 00:23:12,350 --> 00:23:09,960 think it's probably true that he's 519 00:23:14,480 --> 00:23:12,360 always been interested in the nature of 520 00:23:16,700 --> 00:23:14,490 consciousness I think he probably is I 521 00:23:19,670 --> 00:23:16,710 didn't he was making it up I thought he 522 00:23:22,790 --> 00:23:19,680 was sincere I think he is a bit behind I 523 00:23:25,070 --> 00:23:22,800 mean he surrounded himself with the kind 524 00:23:27,800 --> 00:23:25,080 of materialist establishment and if you 525 00:23:31,070 --> 00:23:27,810 look at his board of advisers many of 526 00:23:32,990 --> 00:23:31,080 them are people who do have this very 527 00:23:35,450 --> 00:23:33,000 limited mechanistic view of 528 00:23:37,820 --> 00:23:35,460 consciousness so I think he's living in 529 00:23:39,830 --> 00:23:37,830 a kind of mainstream world where 530 00:23:42,200 --> 00:23:39,840 he only gets to hear a rather limited 531 00:23:44,330 --> 00:23:42,210 range of opinions but I think this 532 00:23:46,580 --> 00:23:44,340 controversy has made him aware that 533 00:23:48,649 --> 00:23:46,590 there are not more voices out there and 534 00:23:51,019 --> 00:23:48,659 a lot of people who don't think in that 535 00:23:53,330 --> 00:23:51,029 way I think it's probably a steep 536 00:23:55,430 --> 00:23:53,340 learning curve he's on because he 537 00:23:58,490 --> 00:23:55,440 obviously was very naive to start with 538 00:23:59,930 --> 00:23:58,500 and he's realizing that actually a lot 539 00:24:02,180 --> 00:23:59,940 of people think differently 540 00:24:04,610 --> 00:24:02,190 great well dr. Sheldrick we'll keep an 541 00:24:07,250 --> 00:24:04,620 eye on this issue and report to people 542 00:24:09,440 --> 00:24:07,260 if anything new happens but other than 543 00:24:12,159 --> 00:24:09,450 that can you tell us briefly what's 544 00:24:14,720 --> 00:24:12,169 going on with you and upcoming 545 00:24:18,049 --> 00:24:14,730 presentations you might have or anything 546 00:24:22,159 --> 00:24:18,059 else that's in the works well I'm doing 547 00:24:25,009 --> 00:24:22,169 various presentations in Europe and and 548 00:24:27,649 --> 00:24:25,019 in Britain about my book the science 549 00:24:33,860 --> 00:24:27,659 Tunisian sunset free the details on my 550 00:24:37,490 --> 00:24:33,870 schedule I'm doing a program in Dublin 551 00:24:41,600 --> 00:24:37,500 Ireland on science and spirituality in 552 00:24:42,710 --> 00:24:41,610 April again that's on my schedule and 553 00:24:44,779 --> 00:24:42,720 that's happening at Christchurch 554 00:24:47,539 --> 00:24:44,789 Cathedral and doing it with the Dean of 555 00:24:49,700 --> 00:24:47,549 Christchurch I haven't met yet but I'm 556 00:24:53,350 --> 00:24:49,710 looking forward to that because I think 557 00:24:56,779 --> 00:24:53,360 that would be a chance for a dialog in 558 00:25:01,759 --> 00:24:56,789 you know a relatively Orthodox spiritual 559 00:25:04,549 --> 00:25:01,769 setting and to see how these new ideas 560 00:25:08,659 --> 00:25:04,559 and science play out in that kind of 561 00:25:12,080 --> 00:25:08,669 dialogue and also in the sun'll much 562 00:25:13,909 --> 00:25:12,090 further ahead I'm doing a program at 563 00:25:16,759 --> 00:25:13,919 hollyhock in British Columbia in Canada 564 00:25:20,120 --> 00:25:16,769 we're in August and end of July 565 00:25:22,159 --> 00:25:20,130 beginning of August and remote and 566 00:25:24,379 --> 00:25:22,169 beautiful island where I go every summer 567 00:25:26,299 --> 00:25:24,389 with my family this time for the first 568 00:25:29,539 --> 00:25:26,309 time I'm doing it with my two sons 569 00:25:31,820 --> 00:25:29,549 running and Cosmo Cosmo is an 570 00:25:34,659 --> 00:25:31,830 anthropologist and a musician and Merlin 571 00:25:39,169 --> 00:25:34,669 is a tropical ecologist he's doing a PhD 572 00:25:44,419 --> 00:25:39,179 on tropical ecology in Panama and he's a 573 00:25:45,830 --> 00:25:44,429 Smithsonian Research Fellow and is he's 574 00:25:48,740 --> 00:25:45,840 in England now that he's just about to 575 00:25:50,840 --> 00:25:48,750 go back to the jungle and so we're doing 576 00:25:51,770 --> 00:25:50,850 one on called plants minds and 577 00:25:54,920 --> 00:25:51,780 resonances 578 00:25:56,870 --> 00:25:54,930 and they're both musicians we have 579 00:25:58,310 --> 00:25:56,880 lively discussions at home it's the 580 00:25:58,910 --> 00:25:58,320 first time you've ever done something 581 00:26:02,450 --> 00:25:58,920 together 582 00:26:06,020 --> 00:26:02,460 so I know it's going to be fun for us I 583 00:26:08,030 --> 00:26:06,030 hope you found for others to sailing 584 00:26:10,010 --> 00:26:08,040 whose interests and going to something 585 00:26:12,770 --> 00:26:10,020 where no one knows where it's going to 586 00:26:15,260 --> 00:26:12,780 lead that way it's only silently fun 587 00:26:18,590 --> 00:26:15,270 that would be a good place to go and 588 00:26:21,050 --> 00:26:18,600 then I'm doing a workshop in September 589 00:26:24,110 --> 00:26:21,060 with Mark Andrews who's the Bishop of 590 00:26:26,210 --> 00:26:24,120 California at the Esalen Institute in 591 00:26:28,400 --> 00:26:26,220 Big Sur and again that would be 592 00:26:30,650 --> 00:26:28,410 something we'll go where these 593 00:26:34,340 --> 00:26:30,660 discussions don't normally go and be 594 00:26:37,970 --> 00:26:34,350 with remarkably open-minded Bishop that 595 00:26:42,380 --> 00:26:37,980 a bishop all the same in California is 596 00:26:44,120 --> 00:26:42,390 on his patch and again what we're going 597 00:26:46,880 --> 00:26:44,130 to be doing is looking at morphic 598 00:26:49,730 --> 00:26:46,890 resonance holistic thinking in relation 599 00:26:51,920 --> 00:26:49,740 to spiritual practices not spiritual 600 00:26:53,600 --> 00:26:51,930 dogmas but spiritual practices the 601 00:26:57,380 --> 00:26:53,610 things people actually do like 602 00:27:01,370 --> 00:26:57,390 pilgrimages and prayers and mantras and 603 00:27:03,140 --> 00:27:01,380 chanting and ceremonies and rituals and 604 00:27:06,890 --> 00:27:03,150 so those are some of the things coming 605 00:27:10,550 --> 00:27:06,900 up ahead and meanwhile my main activity 606 00:27:12,800 --> 00:27:10,560 as always is research and I've got 607 00:27:16,130 --> 00:27:12,810 various research projects afoot at the 608 00:27:20,570 --> 00:27:16,140 moment and particularly ones on morphic 609 00:27:22,250 --> 00:27:20,580 resonance which I am tanning in several 610 00:27:24,590 --> 00:27:22,260 laboratories in different parts of the 611 00:27:26,300 --> 00:27:24,600 world and engaged in discussing them 612 00:27:28,970 --> 00:27:26,310 with the scientists I've been 613 00:27:30,470 --> 00:27:28,980 collaborating with so more on that later 614 00:27:32,930 --> 00:27:30,480 I don't want to talk too much about 615 00:27:36,080 --> 00:27:32,940 there's no because they're in the 616 00:27:37,730 --> 00:27:36,090 planning stage still and we had to get 617 00:27:39,100 --> 00:27:37,740 them started within a matter of a few 618 00:27:41,150 --> 00:27:39,110 months or even weeks 619 00:27:43,010 --> 00:27:41,160 excellent excellent well we'll certainly 620 00:27:44,630 --> 00:27:43,020 look forward to hearing more about that 621 00:27:47,300 --> 00:27:44,640 as it unfolds and it sounds like you 622 00:27:50,150 --> 00:27:47,310 have some great forums in which people 623 00:27:53,330 --> 00:27:50,160 can can meet you and see these ideas 624 00:27:55,790 --> 00:27:53,340 kind of take life so anyone interested 625 00:27:58,010 --> 00:27:55,800 I'm sure they'll check out your website 626 00:27:59,930 --> 00:27:58,020 and find you there well dr. Sheldrick 627 00:28:02,660 --> 00:27:59,940 thanks for coming on and talking about 628 00:28:04,669 --> 00:28:02,670 this interesting little controversy that 629 00:28:05,420 --> 00:28:04,679 has brewed and thanks again for joining 630 00:28:07,670 --> 00:28:05,430 me 631 00:28:09,590 --> 00:28:07,680 always a pleasure endings thanks again 632 00:28:11,780 --> 00:28:09,600 to dr. Sheldrick for joining me today on 633 00:28:12,560 --> 00:28:11,790 skeptic Oh a couple of questions to tee 634 00:28:15,890 --> 00:28:12,570 up for you 635 00:28:19,070 --> 00:28:15,900 the first is have the folks at Ted in 636 00:28:22,100 --> 00:28:19,080 particular Chris Anderson done Rupert 637 00:28:24,740 --> 00:28:22,110 Sheldrake a favor by highlighting the 638 00:28:27,650 --> 00:28:24,750 dogmatism that is in materialistic 639 00:28:29,990 --> 00:28:27,660 science or of they merely stepped in and 640 00:28:33,080 --> 00:28:30,000 provided the appropriate controls that 641 00:28:35,570 --> 00:28:33,090 science needs to keep weird ideas from 642 00:28:38,600 --> 00:28:35,580 spreading around and the second question 643 00:28:41,560 --> 00:28:38,610 I'm gonna make not such a lob softball 644 00:28:44,660 --> 00:28:41,570 question and that's how do well-meaning 645 00:28:47,840 --> 00:28:44,670 science technology edgy whatever you 646 00:28:50,750 --> 00:28:47,850 want to call it news sites properly 647 00:28:52,520 --> 00:28:50,760 filter information so that on one hand 648 00:28:55,130 --> 00:28:52,530 we don't have to wade through a lot of 649 00:28:58,010 --> 00:28:55,140 nonsense but on the other hand we don't 650 00:29:00,140 --> 00:28:58,020 get a homogenized message or worse yet a 651 00:29:03,410 --> 00:29:00,150 message that has been intentionally 652 00:29:05,090 --> 00:29:03,420 shaped for a particular purpose so those 653 00:29:08,000 --> 00:29:05,100 are a couple of questions I'd throw out 654 00:29:11,600 --> 00:29:08,010 there the place to respond of course is 655 00:29:14,840 --> 00:29:11,610 through the sceptical website at sk EPT 656 00:29:17,420 --> 00:29:14,850 Iko comm you can leave a message in the 657 00:29:19,520 --> 00:29:17,430 comment section or click on over to the 658 00:29:21,770 --> 00:29:19,530 forum and join us for a discussion there 659 00:29:24,620 --> 00:29:21,780 as I mentioned at the beginning I have a 660 00:29:26,780 --> 00:29:24,630 number of shows stacked up in the hopper 661 00:29:28,490 --> 00:29:26,790 ready to get out so I'm going to try and 662 00:29:31,100 --> 00:29:28,500 get them out once a week here for awhile 663 00:29:33,380 --> 00:29:31,110 until I get caught up I hope you'll stay 664 00:29:35,930 --> 00:29:33,390 with me for all of that I hope you'll as 665 00:29:38,180 --> 00:29:35,940 usual tell your friends about skeptic 666 00:29:41,870 --> 00:29:38,190 Cove blog about skeptic Oh get as many 667 00:29:44,840 --> 00:29:41,880 folks as you feel you'd like to involved 668 00:29:47,060 --> 00:29:44,850 in this community of a little bit closer