Are brains necessary?
silvano at iprolink.ch
Fri Apr 11 01:25:15 EST 1997
On 07 Apr 1997 11:41:50 -0400, Bill Skaggs <skaggs at bns.pitt.edu>
>drgg4 at aol.com (DrGG4) writes:
>> Regarding cognitive deficits that can only be detected with very sensitive
>> and sophisticated neurological tests - how significant can such deficits
>> Bill Skaggs is wrong in calling this a myth. Check out that video - it
>> will astound you. Some will argue that the data presented there are not
>> data, but anecdotes. See for your self.
>> Gary Greenberg
>For something as crucial as this I would not accept the evidence of a
>video, however astounding. I would either need to see it for myself,
>or else see a carefully presented case study in a reviewed journal.
>As far as I can tell there is no such thing. I would also not be very
>happy if the only evidence of pathology was based on CAT scans,
>because hydrocephaly is likely to change the fluid balance in the
>brain and thereby give rise to difficulties in interpretation (though
>I make no claim to be an expert on this topic). An MRI would be
>better, I think, but the most convincing thing would be a case that
>came to autopsy. Still, nobody has yet pointed me to a published case
>study that is even based on CAT scans.
> -- Bill Skaggs
There is other evidence than this video, which I did not see.
Measurments of reaction times of masters in martial arts show that the
brain would be far to slow to calculate a response and to proceed it.
At least there must be supplementary centres independent from the
brain which provide fast information processing in the humen
More information about the Neur-sci