Sharing Their Demons on the Web By SARAH KERSHAW NY Times November 13, 2008
Interviewed in article
Vaughan Bell, a British psychologist - "I believe there are people who have been targeted by this. With this equipment, you have to test it on somebody to see if it works."
biography: I am a clinical and research psychologist interested in understanding brain injury, mental distress and psychological impairment. I'm currently at the Department of Psychiatry in the University of Antioquia and the Hospital Universitario San Vicente de Paúl, in Colombia, where I'm a visiting professor. I'm also a visiting research fellow at the Department of Clinical Neuroscience at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London.
Dr. Ralph Hoffman - Yale psychiatry professor - "The views of these belief systems are like a shark that has to be constantly fed," Dr. Hoffman said. "If you don't feed the delusion, sooner or later it will die out or diminish on its own accord. The key thing is that it needs to be repetitively reinforced."
Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University - "These people lead quietly desperate lives," "And if they are reinforcing each other and pulling people toward something, if they are using the Internet and getting reinforcement, that's good."
http://asp.cumc.columbia.edu/facdb/profile_list.asp?uni=jl2616&DepAffil=Psychiatry
Dr. Ken Duckworth, the medical director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness - "Some people may find it's healing, but these are really hard questions. The Internet isn't a cause of mental illness, it's a complicating new variable."
Dr. Ken Duckworth, the medical director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness - "Some people may find it's healing, but these are really hard questions. The Internet isn't a cause of mental illness, it's a complicating new variable."
http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=Bios1&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=36882
http://www.nami.org/template.cfm?section=Contact_Us
http://www.nami.org/template.cfm?section=Contact_Us
Sarah Kershaw - New York Times writer
Psychiatrists and researchers say it is too soon to say whether communication on the Internet among people who may be psychotic will negatively effect their illnesses.
Psychiatrists and researchers say it is too soon to say whether communication on the Internet among people who may be psychotic will negatively effect their illnesses.
Paul Walton, Canwest News Service November 12, 2008
Judge allows $2B lawsuit claiming mind control NANAIMO, B. C. - A judge has refused to dismiss a civil lawsuit brought by a B. C. man who is seeking $2-billion in damages from Microsoft, Telus, Wal-Mart, the RCMP and other defendants over alleged
brain-wave control, satanic rituals and witchcraft.
Are they out to get you? Paranoia on the rise Nov. 12, 2008
Irrational fears may be a lot more common than thought, surveys suggest
Irrational fears may be a lot more common than thought, surveys suggest
Objectivity (science) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An objective account is one which attempts to capture the nature of the object studied in a way that does not depend on any features of the particular subject who studies it. An objective account is, in this sense, impartial, one which could ideally be accepted by any subject, because it does not draw on any assumptions, prejudices, or values of particular subjects. Objectivity should not be mixed up with scientific consensus: Scientist may agree at one point in time but later discover that this consensus represented a subjective point of view.
TOO MUCH TO BE COINCIDENCE = STATICALLY RELEVANT
http://mcvictimsworld.ning.com/profile/Monika
www.fedame.org
www.mindcontrol-victims.eu
In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn argued that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions, also called "paradigm shifts" , in which the nature of scientific inquiry within a particular field is abruptly transformed. In general, science is broken up into three distinct stages. Prescience, which lacks a central paradigm, comes first. This is followed by "normal science", when scientists attempt to enlarge the central paradigm by "puzzle-solving". Thus, the failure of a result to conform to the paradigm is seen not as refuting the paradigm, but as the mistake of the researcher. As anomalous results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which point a new paradigm, which subsumes the old results along with the anomalous results into one framework, is accepted. This is termed revolutionary science.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten