News Briefs 26-03-2013

Follow the Daily Grail on Facebook, Twitter and Google+ to stay up to date with the latest posts here.

Quote of the Day:

Donnie: Why are you wearing that stupid bunny suit?
Frank: Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?

Donnie Darko

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
1 hour 26 min

I'd go for Dorcheeta myself :P

It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie
_______________
@red_pill_junkie

red pill junkie's picture
Member since:
12 April 2007
Last activity:
1 hour 26 min

[...]Amazingly, with no discussion of the recent controversy.

Actually, not that amazing, once you read the lengthy article. This article was written on a business magazine, and the author was clear in his intent of comparing TED --a non-profit organization-- to for-profit companies like Apple & McAfee in their approach to harnessing the power of crowds to further their goals.

But the main reason the author may have decided to avoid the recent controversy, it's because the way TED handled it completely invalidates his thesis:

Remember that TED’s initial response to the TEDxCharlotte fiasco was to call the presenter and ask him to defend his assertions. But as the December conflagration made clear, this private approach—which would have worked well for an internal employee—did little or nothing to get the crowd back on course before TEDxValenciaWomen. Instead, TED had to openly clarify to the TEDx crowd what TED isn’t in order to help sharpen what it is.

So, with the guy who gave the talk about 'Vortex-based Mathematics' in 2010, the TED dudes requested him to provide peer-reviewed material that sustained his thesis --which he failed to do so. But now the roles have reversed, and Hancock & Sheldrake have demanded TED to provide evidence that what they discussed on their separate discussions could be labeled as pseudoscience --which TED has failed to do.

Also, does anyone know if Emily McManus --the editor of TED.com who was mentioned in the article-- has been involved in this recent controversy, the way she was when the 'Vortex-based Mathematics' talk was being the subject of criticism in 2012?

It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!

Red Pill Junkie
_______________
@red_pill_junkie

Greg's picture
Member since:
30 April 2004
Last activity:
6 hours 10 min
red pill junkie wrote:

Also, does anyone know if Emily McManus --the editor of TED.com who was mentioned in the article-- has been involved in this recent controversy, the way she was when the 'Vortex-based Mathematics' talk was being the subject of criticism in 2012?

She's the one who posted the original Sheldrake ''conversation' page, and thanked Myers and Coyne.

Kind regards,
Greg
-------------------------------------------
You monkeys only think you're running things
@DailyGrail

Inannawhimsey's picture
Member since:
14 April 2009
Last activity:
51 weeks 3 days

oh, those Russians

See video

---------
All that lives is holy, life delights in life.

--William Blake

Aquila ka Hecate's picture
Member since:
21 October 2011
Last activity:
5 days 8 hours

..should perhaps read : "Scientists *other than* Sheldrake.."

:)