Simply the fact that a person is standing in opposition to a large system doesn’t give their ideas any more or less credibility.
That's not the argument he's making. He's saying there's foundational tenants to modern science that are untestable but believed to be true just like a religion.
You’re right, saw this argument in the YT comments. It often applies to fringe people in general. Just a random though about this talk. Dont think it should have been banned btw.
I mean the fact that it was banned tells me that the holy arbiters of truth consider this to be blasphemy. Banned Ted talks are the best Ted talks.
I dont agree but ehh, whatever.
Sheldrake was banned for talking about what the materialist/naturalist/determinist religion call "pseudoscience". But he's using the exact same scientific method that they are.
& people who have been banned who really were crazy (eg alchemists)
But just the fact he is banned is not evidence he is correct. There have been people who have been banned & been correct (eg galileo)
It's not weather he's "correct" or not(technically there is no such thing in science, only evidence). He was banned for questioning authority and asking forbidden questions.
