8 ms·
Most biological perspectives think that water behaves a certain way, which is like bulk water, when in fact at certain scales it behaves very differently, espec
by dluan 5y ago
Most biological perspectives think that water behaves a certain way, which is like bulk water, when in fact at certain scales it behaves very differently, especially at interfaces and surfaces. For example, it's possible to draw flow across a charged surface where you can use it to effectively purify or separate water from things floating in it. This is useful when trying to filter out baddies like viruses and bacteria.
I was working in a research lab that was trying to do work re-examining these fundamental assumptions in a bioengineering context, but it often was difficult to not get dismissed by the academic establishment and put in the looney bucket, especially when Luc Montagnier left such a sour taste in a lot of peoples minds. Oh well. Science moves forward one funeral at a time.
- ghostbrainalpha 5y agoI bet when you told people about your work, you had some actual loonies get reaaal excited to. There is something about water that tickles the imagination in a way conductive to spiritual/magical thinking. When I read in an Ian Banks novel that Water would form ice under sufficient pressure from gravity regardless of temperature, making hot ice possible....
- dennis_jeeves 5y ago>Science moves forward one funeral at a time. Sometime it also regresses one funeral at a time.
- anitil 5y agoBecause I had to look it up : > 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) > During the COVID-19 pandemic, Montagnier was a promoter of the conspiracy theory that SARS-CoV-2, the causative virus, was deliberately created in, and thereafter escaped from a laboratory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Montagnier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luc_Montagnier
- gsich 5y agoConsidering the Chinese response to that: Not unlikely.
- mensetmanusman 5y agoI like how framing a hypothesis against the norm was framed as a conspiracy. Ha. Now we know that there were GoF research proposals by the same scientists squashing these ‘conspiracies’. Wups conflict of interest.
- betenoire 5y agoIf it is man-made, and they are keeping that from us, then it is a conspiracy. Therefore, conspiracy theory. It's not because it us "against the norm", it is because the theory itself clearly involves a conspiracy.
- heurisko 5y ago> If it is man-made, and they are keeping that from us, then it is a conspiracy. Therefore, conspiracy theory. No, it's the theory that it is a conspiracy, or more likely, a cover-up. (As I doubt there was a conspiracy to release the virus). "Conspiracy theory" has a specific negative connotation, and has "specific characteristics ... such as an opposition [to those] who are qualified to evaluate its accuracy." [1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
- betenoire 5y agoLiterally the first line from wikipedia is: > A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy
- heurisko 5y agoYou've missed the rest of the sentence. > A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful groups, often political in motivation,[3][4] when other explanations are more probable.[5][6] And the distinction is clearly drawn. > A conspiracy theory is not the same as a conspiracy
- fouric 5y ago
- Eszik 5y agoI think GP was referring to Montagnier's support of the water memory theory (a fraudulent theory made up to support homeopathy), rather than his comments on covid 19.
- anitil 5y agoOh woops I'll admit I didn't read that far down the wikipedia entry.
- selcuka 5y agoExactly [1]: > In January 2009, Luc Montagnier, the Nobel Laureate virologist who led the team that discovered the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), claimed (in a paper published in a journal that he set up, which seems to have avoided conventional peer review as it was accepted three days after submission) that the DNA of pathogenic bacteria and viruses massively diluted in water emit radio waves that he can detect. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory#Other_scientists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory#Other_scientists
- vkou 5y agoThis makes me wonder if that team discovered HIV despite his contributions, not because of them.
- wruza 5y agoOr it is uncorrelated. I personally met a successful local technical innovation guy who believed in perpetual motion / free energy devices and told me stories about their “presentations”.
- selcuka 5y agoHighly likely. Very smart people can believe in very weird stuff without seeing any proof.
- shrikant 5y ago
- ramraj07 5y agoThe five things mentioned in the article are clearly observed unknowns about water. Water memory and other “out there” theories are exactly that - out there with minimal or no evidence (if not mainly evidence to the contrary), so most people don’t give it a serious thought. You’re free of course to still formulate the hypothesis and test it, but it’s not totally surprising you’re not able to convince more people to take it seriously until you show real data. Not that I appreciate the way academia works but we can’t blame them for our inability to prove our pet theories.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]