09:5809:58, 31 May 2006diffhist−4
Morphic field
actually is better to say 'tunes into' (implies also 'tuned into') 'Is tuning into' suggests that it is doing that over and over again which is inacurrate -since it's a continuous uninterupted process
09:4709:47, 31 May 2006diffhist−3
Morphic field
but Cedders, the term form does not equal 'tuning into', but the form itself tunes into.... that is what is described. It is not the description of the form, but the forms tuning
23:0023:00, 30 May 2006diffhist−35
Morphic field
it is not said in talk that you put back 'pseudoscience' in text! .. And it is refered to HYPOTHESIS of Formative Causation (and not some 'notion')
22:2422:24, 30 May 2006diffhist−24
Morphic field
then just make it short, there is no need to yell pseudoscience on the very beginning... tag at the bottom is more than enough
21:5721:57, 30 May 2006diffhist+12
Morphic field
leave out 'considered' (by who or who not) and 'pseudoscience' ... ALTERNATIVE must stay as only valid.... the tag 'pseudoscience' is enough to point to the controversial nature
20:2220:22, 30 May 2006diffhist+88
Morphic field
the 'pseudoscience' categorization is subjective (personal or group interests involved), and what is subjective can change in time, objective fact is that it is ALTERNATIVE science
09:5809:58, 31 May 2006diffhist−4
Morphic field
actually is better to say 'tunes into' (implies also 'tuned into') 'Is tuning into' suggests that it is doing that over and over again which is inacurrate -since it's a continuous uninterupted process
09:4709:47, 31 May 2006diffhist−3
Morphic field
but Cedders, the term form does not equal 'tuning into', but the form itself tunes into.... that is what is described. It is not the description of the form, but the forms tuning
23:0023:00, 30 May 2006diffhist−35
Morphic field
it is not said in talk that you put back 'pseudoscience' in text! .. And it is refered to HYPOTHESIS of Formative Causation (and not some 'notion')
22:2422:24, 30 May 2006diffhist−24
Morphic field
then just make it short, there is no need to yell pseudoscience on the very beginning... tag at the bottom is more than enough
21:5721:57, 30 May 2006diffhist+12
Morphic field
leave out 'considered' (by who or who not) and 'pseudoscience' ... ALTERNATIVE must stay as only valid.... the tag 'pseudoscience' is enough to point to the controversial nature
20:2220:22, 30 May 2006diffhist+88
Morphic field
the 'pseudoscience' categorization is subjective (personal or group interests involved), and what is subjective can change in time, objective fact is that it is ALTERNATIVE science