Update:

http://www.dipoleneurology.org.uk/

PSEUDOSCIENCE CLASSIFICATION BY PAUL ALMOND



The Artificial intelligence researcher Paul Almond has misrepresented the theory on Rational Scepticism forums with claims that it is based on nothing more than brain imaging and posted it as pseudoscience on that basis. The images he refers to were made for conference presentation. It would appear Mr Almond has not actually read the paper itself. Due to the damage he has caused it would be preferred that only neuroscientists review the work. It should be restated the hypothesis has undergone full peer review, conference presentation, expert independent review and is not based on neuro-imaging. Pauls reaction is typical of common snap judgements on the work. So I will make it clear here.

And this:

http://dipoleneurology.blogspot.com/201 ... ed-on.html

From here on in this thread, it provides an excellent display of the duplicitous nature of Bman's behaviour in this forum, and the real reason why he can't get along with people here:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/pseud ... ml#p902624

Read on through his comments on how he's going to look at this paper, how he's found holes and problems, then after a while he is suddenly convinced by it.

It's only funny because he wrote the damn paper in the first place.

http://dipoleneurology.blogspot.com/201 ... chive.html

(The date is incorrect there - probably intentionally)

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/feedb ... l#p1064909


If Bman is going to make a public issue of this, I think it's going to prove to be a tad embarrassing for him when fresh-readers see his behaviour in this community.

nonsense. Since this thing was setup to ridicule me i thought i would enjoy myself taking the P out my own work. Quite a liberating experience and something I recommend every scientist who gets caught up in his projects does.

Both you and Paul and others have known this was me all along, when i inadvertently revealed the personal details to trace this material on Harleys vaccine thread.

There is also a thread back then when you even lost control and called me by my IRL name. THIS..

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post919077.html?hilit=felix#p919077

So lets not pretend you have not known this is me all along thanks. You think having known how aware you are of my identity that I would write that on my blog and you would not find this and post it here ? What with the members ability to track stuff down here. Of course its all going to come out after me doing that. I was wondering what had taken so long.

As evidence for the intent of the thread being posted here by paul knowing it was me, I had all your IP addresses and personal details, names and addresses that are logged on my ISP server (The names and addresses were procured after ) from hours before this thread was posted all of you were crawling over my website. from Natselrox locations, yours in certain place beginning with a B.. and paul almonds webhosting company. Paul then PMd me after he started the thread to come and "review" it, knowing full well he thought it would wind me up, but not knowing I had tracked his IP and understood what was going on.

I can release the server logs and details on line if you want to give permission for that aspect to be made clear in case you are accusing me of bullshit.

I was considering for a while to have the thread removed for FUA breach, but then thought leave it and have a hoot. All i did was comply with Pauls, request to review it. I never said it was not my work. Just that it was a load of rubbish !! I enjoyed every minute of calling my work rubbish. It’s the mark of a good scientist to have satisfaction in thrashing (and so testing) his own work better than anybody else would.

That criticism on the blog still stands. Nobody here made a competent review, except myself that is. I basically posted excerpts of criticisms taken from peer reviewers of this work. That is why they actually say something valid and in depth. Paul asked me to review it, and now you have the criticism from experts in this field. Some actual competent review on ratskep. What next !! I have about 12 pages from all the peer review this work has had left, so if you want I can continue posting, and you can help me advertise this theory.

Neil Mackay was a contributor to the original project in that he provided physics lectures, but we had a little tiff in the summer and he decided to wind me up a little by posting the stuff on bifringement. No harm done and we have sorted our differences now.

it was a valid statement he made. I pointed out to him personal correspondence, that bifringement produces a dipole of sorts in the visual sense of us seeing a dipole, as the light is split in such a manner that some of the photons spin off polarized in the opposite direction. In a magnetic dipole, the virtual photons are also spinning in opposite directions at each pole, but they do not radiate and are bound within the atoms, which is what the magnetic force is.

Spearthrower wrote:
http://dipoleneurology.blogspot.com/201 ... chive.html

(The date is incorrect there - probably intentionally)

the date is incorrect because once you make a blog you cannot alter the date after you update the content. Im not creating a new blog post for every aspect of this debacle.

I ran into something on his website that caught my attention. Something about a pulsed weaker magnetic field being able to overcome a stronger static magnetic field,

I take it is isn't his area of study. That right there tells me he knows dick about field strengths.

Fuck, Brain Man or whatever your name is today, try it sometime. Wind a few feet of bell wire around a bolt. Pulse the current from an alkaline battery through that coil, while watching a compass needle across the room. Tell us how many batteries you run through before you ever reverse that needle.

A weaker field is always a weaker field. Pulsing it makes if even weaker still. Read up on duty cycle.

The_Metatron wrote:I ran into something on his website that caught my attention. Something about a pulsed weaker magnetic field being able to overcome a stronger static magnetic field,

I take it is isn't his area of study. That right there tells me he knows dick about field strengths.

Fuck, Brain Man or whatever your name is today, try it sometime. Wind a few feet of bell wire around a bolt. Pulse the current from an alkaline battery through that coil, while watching a compass needle across the room. Tell us how many batteries you run through before you ever reverse that needle.

A weaker field is always a weaker field. Pulsing it makes if even weaker still. Read up on duty cycle.

that applies to a linear pulse. The pulses here are non linear dynamics. That has always been the predictions for a an MHD dipole, as these pulses on either pole would be asymmetrical. The information on this was given to my peer reviewers. Well one reviewer raised the issue, and another provided the solution.

The recent lab work filming the pulses does indeed show they are non linear and "shunt" one side of the brain, stop, then the pulse on the opposite side builds up, then whack...it shunts the opposite side. In this way the structure develops its asymmetry through non linear MHD.

I just love peer review. Its a free lunch of experts that would cost 20 grand a whack in any other field (not dipole of course).

Bullshit. Try the same thing through an integrator.

If a field at full duty cycle isn't powerful enough to overcome a stronger field, anything less than that is a further waste of time.

Brain man wrote:
As evidence for the intent of the thread being posted here by paul knowing it was me, I had all your IP addresses and personal details, names and addresses that are logged on my ISP server (The names and addresses were procured after ) from hours before this thread was posted all of you were crawling over my website. from Natselrox locations, yours in certain place beginning with a B.. and paul almonds webhosting company. Paul then PMd me after he started the thread to come and "review" it, knowing full well he thought it would wind me up, but not knowing I had tracked his IP and understood what was going on.

The bolded is completely false in my case: I never once ventured to your website until this thread was posted. I didn't know at first, but I very quickly cottoned onto it Bman. I can also prove this with dated material, so your claims don't add up.

Once again, you build a shadowy conspiracy where none exists!

Further, you hardly need to be so coy about me being in Bangkok - it's not like I made it a secret - it's even written in my location here!

One day Bman, I hope you look back at this and realise what a load of nonsense you made up about a load of people you know nothing about.

Brain man wrote:So lets not pretend you have not known this is me all along thanks. You think having known how aware you are of my identity that I would write that on my blog and you would not find this and post it here ? What with the members ability to track stuff down here. Of course its all going to come out after me doing that. I was wondering what had taken so long.

Funny how badly you want to create these nefarious schemes. Actually, while I knew it was your website for a long time, I didn't make any comment, didn't 'track stuff down', didn't do these shady things you said - and apparently neither did anyone else. Wonder how you overlook that! In fact, I didn't make any mention of it until today when you made a post in the Feedback forum outlining your latest model of the Ratskep conspiracy, then posted the same thing on the dipole neurology site which Life linked to. Effectively, you had just made yourself public, I had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

I do believe we are actually having valid points.

Well it only took what six months or so. Go ahead. For years i have been inviting every expert i can find to kill the theory, looking for the most hostile reviewers possible, including Danko Georgiev who you may know destroyed certain fundamental parts of OrchOR. I also presented it at one of the toughest neuro conference there is. "integrative approaches to brain complexity" and in polite way said "bring it on".

I dont mind if i cant provide the answer. What i do if i cannot do that is take a note of the problem and then sent it around a lot of experts and ask their opinion. Almost every time it was something i couldn't solve or a problem in the critique itself, or an aspect of the theory needed modified and grew stronger. It is after all the most complex system there is. Its impossible to have all the answers right away.

I don't want to be too over-confident of course, but over 100 neuroscientists have given a review of this now, so its had a sound thrashing over the years.

The_Metatron wrote:Bullshit. Try the same thing through an integrator.

If a field at full duty cycle isn't powerful enough to overcome a stronger field, anything less than that is a further waste of time.

whats an integrator. Are you sure you are not referring to linear pulses here ?

Spearthrower wrote:[

The bolded is completely false in my case: I never once ventured to your website until this thread was posted. I didn't know at first, but I very quickly cottoned onto it Bman. I can also prove this with dated material, so your claims don't add up.

Once again, you build a shadowy conspiracy where none exists!

Further, you hardly need to be so coy about me being in Bangkok - it's not like I made it a secret - it's even written in my location here!

So i take it its ok to release the server logs then ? I will need permission from Paul almond and Natselrox also. As well as permission to release the PM sent to me. Otherwise its breach of FUA.

also maybe you can clear something up. I got a PM at about 12PM telling me thread had been posted and was being discussed, yet is says what about 3.25 PM that it was posted.

One day Bman, I hope you look back at this and realise what a load of nonsense you made up about a load of people you know nothing about.

well like all concerned, including your aspersions on me, we can only go by the information we have.

Funny how badly you want to create these nefarious schemes.

what scheme. I

Actually, while I knew it was your website for a long time, I didn't make any comment,

didn't 'track stuff down', didn't do these shady things you said -

I didnt say you particulary could track anything down. Just that the know how on this site is well capable, and that is what has occurred. I can prove that but all concerned would have to give permission for me to post the details.

and apparently neither did anyone else. Wonder how you overlook that! In fact, I didn't make any mention of it until today when you made a post in the Feedback forum outlining your latest model of the Ratskep conspiracy, then posted the same thing on the dipole neurology site which Life linked to. Effectively, you had just made yourself public, I had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Sure, but as posted you already called my by first name here in the summer. And with pauls posting I am aware my identity is known, so obviously it was myself that made it public. That if anything proves i have not tried to hide anything.

Brain man wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:Bullshit. Try the same thing through an integrator.

If a field at full duty cycle isn't powerful enough to overcome a stronger field, anything less than that is a further waste of time.

whats an integrator. Are you sure you are not referring to linear pulses here ?

A capacitor in series. It won't matter. Shape your pulses any way you want and the power is less than full duty cycle.

all i can find on integrators so far is they are sent steady ramp voltages, which again are linear.

Try it. You have access to an o'scope?

Unlike you, I'm not making this shit up.

Brain man wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

The bolded is completely false in my case: I never once ventured to your website until this thread was posted. I didn't know at first, but I very quickly cottoned onto it Bman. I can also prove this with dated material, so your claims don't add up.

Once again, you build a shadowy conspiracy where none exists!

Further, you hardly need to be so coy about me being in Bangkok - it's not like I made it a secret - it's even written in my location here!

So i take it its ok to release the server logs then ? I will need permission from Paul almond and Natselrox also. As well as permission to release the PM sent to me. Otherwise its breach of FUA.

What are you aiming to do? Prove to me that what I know to be true about my own actions is in fact wrong?

I've already told you what happened Bman. I never once visited your website until after the creation of this thread. That's the simple fact. Perhaps you should review your server logs, because you've clearly misread them, at least in my case - I can't speak for the others! I have no need to lie to you whatsoever.

Brain man wrote:also maybe you can clear something up. I got a PM at about 12PM telling me thread had been posted and was being discussed, yet is says what about 3.25 PM that it was posted.

I have absolutely no idea.

Brain man wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:One day Bman, I hope you look back at this and realise what a load of nonsense you made up about a load of people you know nothing about.

well like all concerned, including your aspersions on me, we can only go by the information we have.

Some of us form our opinions based on what we see. Others form their opinions in advance, then only see what they expect.

Brain man wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:Funny how badly you want to create these nefarious schemes.

what scheme. I

Well, earlier it was us coupled with LIFE and google hits, and damaging Oxbridge careers, now it's me and Paul and Natselrox acting in cahoots to mock you. It's not like this is the first such pronouncement you've made on our hidden agendas, and it's not the first where you've pulled it out of your arse.

Brain man wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:
Actually, while I knew it was your website for a long time, I didn't make any comment,

didn't 'track stuff down', didn't do these shady things you said -

I didnt say you particulary could track anything down. Just that the know how on this site is well capable, and that is what has occurred. I can prove that but all concerned would have to give permission for me to post the details.

Oh, I have the know-how, just not the interest.

Brain man wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:and apparently neither did anyone else. Wonder how you overlook that! In fact, I didn't make any mention of it until today when you made a post in the Feedback forum outlining your latest model of the Ratskep conspiracy, then posted the same thing on the dipole neurology site which Life linked to. Effectively, you had just made yourself public, I had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Sure, but as posted you already called my by first name here in the summer. And with pauls posting I am aware my identity is known, so obviously it was myself that made it public. That if anything proves i have not tried to hide anything.

Comedy, absolute comedy. You just threatened Thwoth with mod censure because he called you on deceit, and here you are admitting that yes, in fact you were deceitful, but that by admitting this, it means you have integrity?

This thread is just the product of an earlier situation - one of your own making: the EE thread. Your actions in there are public record and do not serve to show you in a very good light. Once you add in other threads like the Atheists are Murdering Sociopaths... which of course you didn't really mean.... (you were just testing, right? Except you've changed your tune on that numerous times too).... you start to see why you might, just possibly mind you, be somewhat interfering with your sample data, and effectively creating the hostile situation that you decry.

I am reading some papers on duty-cycle overpower events right now to verify if what you say is true from a pure electronics engineering perspective. I have several line saying it is not at least in the brain, and so it looks like simple electronics does not apply to the brain. The information i have from michael persinger is that a non linear pulse can overcome a weaker background static magnetic field. He has about 100 publications on this area and his team have a dedicated lab for 20 years in Canada which is part of Laurentian University that research this. Bear in mind the brains non linear pulse also have an underlying Gamma or alpha cycle phase in the signal.

there are other aspects to this problem that give magnetic field strength from another view. Lester ingber with Paul nunez (innovator in most of EEG) has recently released a series of complex papers on neocortical statistical mechanics of aggregated magnetic fields in cortex columns calculating these weak fields acting together can also overcome the earths static field.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.2352

Spearthrower wrote:

What are you aiming to do? Prove to me that what I know to be true about my own actions is in fact wrong?

just show a flurry of hits from

Bangock, India and Pauls hosting company between 2:17 am and 09:38 am. That was just after i had just revealed in a debate to yourself, paul and natselrox where my work could be found. Then after 09:38 am a thread on me is posted. (no other hits, and its a quiet site). so bit of a strange one that, if you are saying none of you had any idea that was a thread about me you were posting. And getting a PM to point me to it at the same time.

yeh right all three of your IP's in that very short space of time, then a thread and a PM asking me to review my own work.

mmmmm.

I've already told you what happened Bman. I never once visited your website until after the creation of this thread. That's the simple fact. Perhaps you should review your server logs, because you've clearly misread them, at least in my case - I can't speak for the others! I have no need to lie to you whatsoever.

well i dont know when the thread was created exactly. The time it says is 3.25pm, yet the PM i get saying its online and already in full swing was 12PM, so it must have been put up earlier, then taken down, then back up, presumably because the whole affair was breaching the FUA rule to not post personal details of other members and had to be modified. The thread might even have been created before your hit which the log says 06:48 from bang-cock (tries to keep a straight face at that city name)

Well, earlier it was us coupled with LIFE and google hits, and damaging Oxbridge careers, now it's me and Paul and Natselrox acting in cahoots to mock you. It's not like this is the first such pronouncement you've made on our hidden agendas, and it's not the first where you've pulled it out of your arse.

nothing compared to the amount of agendas posted on me. Do you want a list. Thats the anonymous internet for you. You have to form an idea and ask if its true.

Comedy, absolute comedy. You just threatened Thwoth with mod censure because he called you on deceit, and here you are admitting that yes, in fact you were deceitful, but that by admitting this, it means you have integrity?

Bit of a stretch. that is. He just reported me over nothing, so i said if you want to play that game i can do it to, but its not my style.

This thread is just the product of an earlier situation - one of your own making: the EE thread. Your actions in there are public record and do not serve to show you in a very good light. Once you add in other threads like the Atheists are Murdering Sociopaths... which of course you didn't really mean.... (you were just testing, right? Except you've changed your tune on that numerous times too).... you start to see why you might, just possibly mind you, be somewhat interfering with your sample data, and effectively creating the hostile situation that you decry.

At least i have no disagreement with that analysis.

Brain man wrote:I am reading some papers on duty-cycle overpower events right now to verify if what you say is true from a pure electronics engineering perspective. I have several line saying it is not at least in the brain, and so it looks like simple electronics does not apply to the brain. The information i have from michael persinger is that a non linear pulse can overcome a weaker background static magnetic field. He has about 100 publications on this area and his team have a dedicated lab for 20 years in Canada which is part of Laurentian University that research this. Bear in mind the brains non linear pulse also have an underlying Gamma or alpha cycle phase in the signal.

there are other aspects to this problem that give magnetic field strength from another view. Lester ingber with Paul nunez (innovator in most of EEG) has recently released a series of complex papers on neocortical statistical mechanics of aggregated magnetic fields in cortex columns calculating these weak fields acting together can also overcome the earths static field.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.2352

Ahh, we're expected to think that the laws of physics cease to apply inside brains. Convenient for your theory.

The behavior of electrical and magnetic fields has dick to do with electronics. High school physics. Electronics does little more than show us how to create these phenomena ourselves, in this case.

Brain man wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:I ran into something on his website that caught my attention. Something about a pulsed weaker magnetic field being able to overcome a stronger static magnetic field,

I take it is isn't his area of study. That right there tells me he knows dick about field strengths.

Fuck, Brain Man or whatever your name is today, try it sometime. Wind a few feet of bell wire around a bolt. Pulse the current from an alkaline battery through that coil, while watching a compass needle across the room. Tell us how many batteries you run through before you ever reverse that needle.

A weaker field is always a weaker field. Pulsing it makes if even weaker still. Read up on duty cycle.

that applies to a linear pulse. The pulses here are non linear dynamics. That has always been the predictions for a an MHD dipole, as these pulses on either pole would be asymmetrical. The information on this was given to my peer reviewers. Well one reviewer raised the issue, and another provided the solution.

The recent lab work filming the pulses does indeed show they are non linear and "shunt" one side of the brain, stop, then the pulse on the opposite side builds up, then whack...it shunts the opposite side. In this way the structure develops its asymmetry through non linear MHD.

I just love peer review. Its a free lunch of experts that would cost 20 grand a whack in any other field (not dipole of course).

Doesn't MHD apply to plasmas ? Like the stuff you get in, say, the sun. Do similar conditions apply in the brain ? Wouldn't this cause: