Now no complete theory to explain supernaturals

Where did you hear this stuff? You really think this stuff is real, proven facts? Just because someone says they did something or saw something does mean it actually happened.

 

Hello yu wing sin,
We can't really consider such claims without supporting evidence. Please post a reliable supporting link, say at the least a newspaper article from a respectable source, for each claim made. Please note also that, for example, Pravda, India Daily, and Moscow News are not credible references.

 

#1 True, but they neglected to say he was standing so close to the fire that all his clothes caught fire too.

#2 True, In Siberia.

#3 Unproven, On account of one bean looking very much like another bean.

#4 True, That mercury was hot, you should have heard him scream.

Yoke.

 

I think that the girl who cries ice may be genuine. I have seen close up videos of her tear duct generating little crystaline nuggets. Obivously its not ice, and note that I have never seen a legitimate medical source for all of this, but the idea that some condition might allow a person to generate salt or calcium crystals seems remotely possible.

 

Well, I thought that I had a link to a BBC story but I'm not finding it. There is nothing on Google either so maybe it has been debunked.

 

http://http://www.crystalinks.com/crystaltears.html [Broken]
Could this be what you were looking for Ivan?

try this if the links does not work
http://www.crystalinks.com/crystaltears.html

 

I wonder if tests were done to determine what the crystals were made of. I've not been able to find anything that says so.

 

They might have studied her, if she had not confessed it to be a hoax.

 

I think Bohm's Implicate Order Theory might have an explanation to this (Maybe just maybe). Kind of like a Unification theory of the Universe and consciousness. Very hard to find credible sources though but I'm still optimistic that it's all possible

 

I am a little confused about Bohm and his implicate order. This was recommended reading in my physics department, but it seems to be treated as evil speak in many circles; esp on the internet.... And the idea of wholeness in time is a fascinating one, at the least.

 

Well of course Bohm has two strikes against him here. First, he's the brains behind a relativity and quantum denying theory which riles a lot of physicists, and then implicate order is interpreted by everybody as being supportive of mysticism, which ticks off lots more physicsts. And the chorus of online crank fans of Bohm doesn't calm them down either.