Yup, that's the program that I saw, but I'm a little disappointed that the article does not discuss the other methodologies that they used to show that the Lochness monster does not exist (at least not in Lochness). They also did much research on the possible food sources of such a beast, and other interesting things as well (which I cannot remember at this time).
I can see how some would take issue with my use of the word "prove", however, as what they really did was present significant scientific evidence that such a beast was not in Lochness at that time, and that it is highly unlikely that such a beast would live in Lochness based on various other reasons.
Of course, those that want to believe can believe what they want and I won't hold it against them. Like I said, even though I am a non-believer, a part of me would love for such a thing to be true and it was a little sad when they presented their inevitable conclusion.
What I mean is, if you believe in a 'soul' (or ghost), then shouldn't it be understandable that this 'ghost-energy' was around before your birth? Or does the energy get created when you get created? Is it an extension of your mothers energy?...........
Ugh, never mind - too much brain pain to keep thinking about this.
From a spiritual stand point, yes. From a scientific stand point, no. Entertaining this residual energy business for a minute, it could be the result of every burger you've ever stuffed your face with.
Robertson Davies "Curiosity killed [Nessie]," said Hector, who was a little embarrassed by the turn the conversation had taken; nevertheless, he wanted to show himself a man's man, and something witty seemed called for. "I deny that," said Cobbler; "[Nessie] probably died a happy martyr to research."
I know how you feel Scott {brightens up} there could be a cavern, or slippery Ness shies from underwater pinging. The gates are all shut, locks rusted, keys lost and maps no longer edged with Hic sunt dracones on parchment borders. Orgasms at the discovery of a protein kinase shall never be as thrilling as the possibility of a confirmation of legend.
Just personaly I referenced planes of exisitance as in 'converted' energy which sad to say would include ingesting burgers. "What a cow" therefore takes on a whole new context.
The world's greatest scientists were playing hide and seek, and Einstein was it. All the other scientists ran to find a hiding place, all except for Newton. Instead of hiding, Newton drew a square on the ground in front of Einstein while Einstein counted with his eyes closed, and Newton stood in the center of the square. When Einstein finished counting and opened his eyes, he saw Newton immediately, and said, "I see Newton! Newton's out! Newton's out!"
Newton said, "I'm not out. How can I be out? I'm not even Newton."
Einstein said, "Of course you're Newton! I can see you!"
Newton said, "No I'm not. See this square I'm standing in? It's one meter on each side. Hence, I'm Pascal."
What? Too obscure?
If you think that's obscure, you should hear the version where Heisenberg is it.
James, here's one of my favorite highlight: Seriously. Yay. Being willing to be convinced one is wrong about something is the hallmark of that methodology I was contemplating earlier.
Here's what I consider a scientific mystery: what is the function of sleep?
Think about this one. This got brought up in a discussion I had with friends, and the idea is that rest is a subjective thing. I read some more about it, and evidently it's called the rest hypothesis. Almost everybody experiences it. But how exactly do you quantify rest? And further more, why do humans simply not utilize "plain" rest (e.g. non-sleeping rest)?
I think the main problem with testing the hypothesis was the methodology. I think one of the things that was performed was sleep deprivation. Unfortunately it was deemed that there were way too many variables and not a good control to test this hypothesis.