Re: Electromagnetic Signals Influencing Human Thought?

In message 
<86a77c51-caed-44ec-a3cd-8713845fafdf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, 
Benj <bjacoby@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes
>On Aug 7, 12:01 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Keith P Walsh wrote:
>>
>> > For a long time now* it has been perfectly intelligent, rational and
>> > scientific to pose the question, "Would it be possible for the
thought
>> > processes of individuals to be influenced by electromagnetic signals
>> > engineered by others?"
>>
>> PROJECT HAARP
>
>Gosh Unc Al, it sounds like you know something the rest of us don't.
>Please elaborate...

This should be fun...
>
>> > It is my belief that any intelligent, rational and scientific answer
>> > to this question would have to be based on experimental evidence.
>>
>> Gee - an empiricist.  If you want the necessary answer, misinterpret a
>> bible.
>
>We take this as your intention to never recognize an "intelligent,
>rational, scientific" answer.  If you'd like to quote the bible to
>prove your points, feel free.
>
>
>> > Can anyone offer any intelligent, rational and scientific explanation
>> > as to why no such answer appears to have been established?
>
>Who says no such answer has ever been established? See Uncle Al's
>remarks on HAARP above.

10 points to Uncle Al. Fish in a barrel.

>The only problem is that whenever a scientific
>phenomena appears to have valuable applications in politics, all such
>data and references somehow never see the light of public scrutiny.
>The data is there, it's just restricted to those with the authority to
>view it. So what else is new?

You have evidence to sup****t this theory?

-- 
Richard Herring