Bruce Lipton - The New Biology, Where Mind And Matter Meet (ConspiracyHub.Com)

This new perspective of human biology does not view the body as just a mechanical device, but rather incorporates the role of a mind and spirit. This breakthrough in biology is fundamental in all healing for it recognizes that when we change our perception or beliefs we send totally different messages to our cells and reprogram their expression. The new-biology reveals why people can have spontaneous remissions or recover from injuries deemed to be permanent disabilities. ____ _ _ _ _ / ___|___ _ __ ___ _ __ (_)_ __ __ _ ___ _ _| | | |_ _| |__ | | / _ \| '_ \/ __| '_ \| | '__/ _` |/ __| | | | |_| | | | | '_ \ | |__| (_) | | | \__ \ |_) | | | | (_| | (__| |_| | _ | |_| | |_) | \____\___/|_| |_|___/ .__/|_|_| \__,_|\___|\__, |_| |_|\__,_|_.__/ |_| |___/ ____ / ___|___ _ __ ___ | | / _ \| '_ ` _ \ | |__| (_) | | | | | | (_)____\___/|_| |_| |_| PLEASE KEEP SEEDED. PLEASE VISIT OUR SITE AND SHARE THE WORD! MAY BE SLOW BUT SURE! PLEASE ASSIST IN BANDWIDTH!

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80
udp://open.demonii.com:1337
udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969
udp://exodus.desync.com:6969

Blodhosta (2009-12-11)

I've always been suspicious of Lipton because he's so keen on dressing his opinions in a spiritualist/pseudo-scientific/outsider rhetoric. It's like he's trying to discredite science in general when he's saying things (directly or indirectly) like the conventional scientific view of humans is one of complete biological determinism. I couldn't believe what I was hearing when he said that, because it's just not true.
It's like he's trying to win people over who doesn't know anything about the "soft sciences", and in doing so he is really driving an emotional wedge between his own ideas and science. The only likely reason I find for that is that there is more money and fame in being a 'pop guru' than in peer-review science. I mean, why not just make a sincere contribution to the nature/nurture debate, if that's his ambition, in the way Matt Ridley did in his 2003 book, "Nature via Nurture", instead of just muddling the "path to understanding" with supernatural speculation dressed in scientific language? It's like saying God is what makes people recover - it can never be conclusively disproven, but that mindset does absolutely nothing towards an understanding of the world.
What he is talking about is after all the role of psychology in medicine, and if he actually has a genuine contribution to make in that field (and it's an important and exciting field!) there are perfectly nice conventions with educated audiences with the ambition of understanding and developing these ideas if they remain standing after examination... I believe his choice of a different audience is quite telling.
Making people believe is easier than making people understand, and usually a lot more profitable.

green12345 (2010-12-07)

absolutely fantastic! thankyou