"Except you were not replying to the nautilus article, you were replying to the one i posted by Grosz" Good point - there are so many cranks around I lose trac

"Except you were not replying to the nautilus article, you were replying to the one i posted by Grosz" Good point - there are so many cranks around I lose track. I had a look at the Grosz article. I have never seen such pure excrement in word form. Can I get a job at Duke if I publish used toilet paper? I think the following waffle in the article is beyond the Standard Model and therefore contradicted by the physicist's argument: "It will be my claim here that materiality, bare matter, matter not in its simplified form but before being animated by life, is nevertheless always involved in and invested by incorporeal forces, forces of potential sense, forces of virtual significance that living bodies, in elaborating their own ends or finality, affirm and develop"