Paused at 0:00.
You even said, I think, in one of your newsletters that the engineering sort of genetic dogma school of science even thought that memory was a function of brain cells dying like holes being punched in an IBM computer card and that's how you, they were postulating that that's how you remember things. Yeah. If you look at the history of science from the wrong perspective it looks like a big comedy that's so farcical that it's hard to believe. But these are top notch mainline people with these stupid theories.
Well, I suppose if they're coming from a certain point of view, they've all been educated in universities and they've all done probably very well there and so they're probably trying to work within those parameters and come up with something. And I guess if you're looking at life from the perspective of as a machine that doesn't have any intelligence then I suppose an IBM punch card is a good model. Yeah. It all comes down to the culture that teaches us, it's been going on for 800 years or something
like that in philosophy, teaching us that matter is stupid and inanimate, has nothing to do with the guiding principle of spirit and life. It's an invention that came out of a particular culture sometime after the Renaissance. The doctrine of matter as some kind of a special devilish material that has nothing of the life properties or the spirit properties. It's just this mortal, essentially dead material. So the gene doctrine came in on top of things like Descartes' doctrine of the mind running an inanimate machine.
And the whole idea that matter has its own tendencies and principles was submerged under a doctrine that matter is essentially stupid and can only follow randomness, mathematical randomness has to be invoked when matter is treated. And so it applies to the idea of nuclear fission. There's some kind of a mathematical oversight that governs the half-life of each type of substance. And people who question that whole idea of matter have done some experiments showing that even nuclear decay is context-sensitive.
For example, I think it was 1971 when an experimenter used radioactive carbon in an oil form and found that the decay rate was non-random when it was made into a monolayer on a metal surface. And that violated the whole doctrine of inert matter following some kind of mathematical rules of randomness. And so no one paid attention to it. Lots of physical experiments violate the rules and so people ignore them. By the way, the genetics people ignored regeneration research, cancer cures. It was only the genetic engineers and the cloning researchers that finally opened up
some space in the culture. The genetic engineers didn't want it to happen but giving Barbara McClintock the recognition and finally accepting that Dolly really had been cloned even though for 50 years they had been denying the possibility of cloning when people were doing it with frogs, it wasn't acceptable. And finally the culture is being opened up by their own wrong thinking that has led them into a corner where they are forced to recognize that something like a field sometimes is involved in biology. (drone buzzing)