-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
Thomas Fusco
- Thread starter DaveM
- Start date
Ezechiel
Paranormal Adept
Mr. Fusco is positioned beyond a ... consensus. In other words, he's on his own planet 
Is Dark Matter Made of Tiny Black Holes? | Space.com
Here's my own cool concept using a consensus... an inter-stellar craft using the event horizons of tiny black holes to circumvent the light-speed limitation as it vectors in towards our solar system
Is Dark Matter Made of Tiny Black Holes? | Space.com
Here's my own cool concept using a consensus... an inter-stellar craft using the event horizons of tiny black holes to circumvent the light-speed limitation as it vectors in towards our solar system
BlackDogGrimm
Skilled Investigator
I got a lot out of this episode, frankly.
I agree with many of the other viewpoints expressed here on the forum, too. But get past the first few segments, and there was a wealth of valuable theory and discourse that Mr. Fusco attempted to make as accessible as possible. This isn't easy stuff for the scientifically unversed, and if I hadn't been able to rewind and re-listen, I'd have struggled to follow many of the arguments and understand them fully. I can also see why it might have been incredibly frustrating to the scientifically well-versed, who would have found his approach patronizing, and lack of obvious credentials irritating. Regardless, if you get past that and keep an open mind, there was a lot there and I'm looking forward to hearing more.
One point that was personally frustrating was his apparent ignorance and subsequent dismissal of religions outside of the Judeo-Christian paradigm. While I happen to appreciate his interest in bringing the science and the bible into the same conversation, and the parallels he drew "felt" like they made good rational sense, I think if he were to look more closely at Buddhism he would find even more parallels than what exist in monotheistic Judeo-Christian religion. I was raised as a Christian, but I'm presently a Buddhist. The Heart Sutra seems to be saying the exact thing that he was trying to convey in speaking about Quantum Singularity and the old Testament of the Bible.
Buddhism doesn't address the existence or non-existence of a God-like figure, for one thing. There is a "force" in the Jedi sense, but it's not even named as such. The point of Buddhism is not to believe in something, it's to question everything and only to accept it if you are able to realize it and understand it for yourself, and you can and should change viewpoints as needed. There are many things that help to "point" the direction, but without telling you the outcome. You only really know that there's even been some kind of "outcome" because you have the realization for yourself and look back. It's not enough to engage intellectually -- you are asked to engage in embodied practice as well. To see beyond the intellect and the body, you have to go through them rather than to attempt to transcend them.
Frankly, the more I learn about physics (as a total lay-person), the more it would appear that the ideas contained within Buddhism are a realized, actualized human experience of the laws of physics -- as we presently understand them and are coming to theorize/understand more about them. Although I took physics and calculus in high school, I remember very little and have a greater desire to study them once again. Every time I hear something about the theory of Quantum Singularity, the more it reminds me of the Heart Sutra. I take a fair amount of crap from other Buddhists about my interests in the paranormal, too, but it doesn't stop me from remaining curiously investigative of it anyway. I find a lot of truth there, too.
Anyway -- if the recent advances made in neuro-science can validate the efficacy and impact of meditation practice on the body and brain (where it might otherwise have been easily dismissed in past), I'm doubly curious to learn more about physics and the nature of material reality and how it could possibly explain paranormal phenomenon.
I agree with many of the other viewpoints expressed here on the forum, too. But get past the first few segments, and there was a wealth of valuable theory and discourse that Mr. Fusco attempted to make as accessible as possible. This isn't easy stuff for the scientifically unversed, and if I hadn't been able to rewind and re-listen, I'd have struggled to follow many of the arguments and understand them fully. I can also see why it might have been incredibly frustrating to the scientifically well-versed, who would have found his approach patronizing, and lack of obvious credentials irritating. Regardless, if you get past that and keep an open mind, there was a lot there and I'm looking forward to hearing more.
One point that was personally frustrating was his apparent ignorance and subsequent dismissal of religions outside of the Judeo-Christian paradigm. While I happen to appreciate his interest in bringing the science and the bible into the same conversation, and the parallels he drew "felt" like they made good rational sense, I think if he were to look more closely at Buddhism he would find even more parallels than what exist in monotheistic Judeo-Christian religion. I was raised as a Christian, but I'm presently a Buddhist. The Heart Sutra seems to be saying the exact thing that he was trying to convey in speaking about Quantum Singularity and the old Testament of the Bible.
Buddhism doesn't address the existence or non-existence of a God-like figure, for one thing. There is a "force" in the Jedi sense, but it's not even named as such. The point of Buddhism is not to believe in something, it's to question everything and only to accept it if you are able to realize it and understand it for yourself, and you can and should change viewpoints as needed. There are many things that help to "point" the direction, but without telling you the outcome. You only really know that there's even been some kind of "outcome" because you have the realization for yourself and look back. It's not enough to engage intellectually -- you are asked to engage in embodied practice as well. To see beyond the intellect and the body, you have to go through them rather than to attempt to transcend them.
Frankly, the more I learn about physics (as a total lay-person), the more it would appear that the ideas contained within Buddhism are a realized, actualized human experience of the laws of physics -- as we presently understand them and are coming to theorize/understand more about them. Although I took physics and calculus in high school, I remember very little and have a greater desire to study them once again. Every time I hear something about the theory of Quantum Singularity, the more it reminds me of the Heart Sutra. I take a fair amount of crap from other Buddhists about my interests in the paranormal, too, but it doesn't stop me from remaining curiously investigative of it anyway. I find a lot of truth there, too.
Anyway -- if the recent advances made in neuro-science can validate the efficacy and impact of meditation practice on the body and brain (where it might otherwise have been easily dismissed in past), I'm doubly curious to learn more about physics and the nature of material reality and how it could possibly explain paranormal phenomenon.
BlackDogGrimm
Skilled Investigator
"Mr. Fusco is positioned beyond a ... consensus. In other words, he's on his own planet"
Okay -- but if we only ever stuck with a consensus, nothing would ever change or move forward. There would be (to make an obvious generalization) no Isaac Newton, no Galileo, no Einstein, no Tesla, and none of the benefits we have now that have come from their observations and theories. They were each pushed further by the dialogue and engagement of others willing to listen and challenge them in order to come to the conclusions that we have benefitted from. None of them had any so-called "credentials", either.
As a former member of the world of Academentia, I can attest to its tendency to stick only to consensus and do its utmost to ensure that nothing advances beyond the status-quo without great struggle. Whether or not you make it through that struggle and become one of the academics who moves things forward is a matter of timing; either the world is ready for a change in the consensus or it isn't yet.
Okay -- but if we only ever stuck with a consensus, nothing would ever change or move forward. There would be (to make an obvious generalization) no Isaac Newton, no Galileo, no Einstein, no Tesla, and none of the benefits we have now that have come from their observations and theories. They were each pushed further by the dialogue and engagement of others willing to listen and challenge them in order to come to the conclusions that we have benefitted from. None of them had any so-called "credentials", either.
As a former member of the world of Academentia, I can attest to its tendency to stick only to consensus and do its utmost to ensure that nothing advances beyond the status-quo without great struggle. Whether or not you make it through that struggle and become one of the academics who moves things forward is a matter of timing; either the world is ready for a change in the consensus or it isn't yet.
E
ElmoFUD
Guest
There is not a single experiment in the Physics realm that has proven the existence of dark matter. Moreover, accepting results as implying its existence would seem to fit hand in glove with Physicists validating certain types of paranormal manifestations straightaway. That is not going to happen in the Physics community yet, from "spooky action at a distance" to dark matter/energy we have Physicists accepting certain notions on faith.
TheJCBand
Skilled Investigator
There is not a single experiment in the Physics realm that has proven the existence of anything. No scientific theory can ever be proven, only disproven.
What you stated above doesn't contradict what Fusco actually said. There is no definitive proof that it exists. The experimentation I've heard about tells us two things.
1. There is an unknown energy causing the universe to expand.
2. There is unknown mass populating the universe.
That is not evidence of anything other than what we see happening is unknown because we can't see what's happening.
TrivialSublime
Skilled Investigator
Well I have to tell you, if you want to believe Mr. Fusco do so. Physicists and their theories can speak for themselves and years they have been devoting to the subject. I need to get back to working on my unified field theory using my etch a sketch..
ManitobaCanuk
Paranormal Maven
I just listened to the Fusco fiasco. I have a B.Sc in Physics from the University of Winnipeg. All my life I have kept up on the field as it is my muse. Mr. Fusco is in error, his theory is foolish and uneducated. It was painfully obvious that he is just shucking a book to the uneducated masses. I had to openly laugh at many places, was his intention to be a comedian? I do not know where to start as the whole thing is laughable. Reasoning by analogy is never a tenable position, that is all he does. Bringing the Bible into what is supposed to be a physics discussion almost made me swallow my tongue. Bringing the Bible into a conversation of what is real with what people wish to be real, is a huge disconnect. Its like trying to measure emotions in Pascals. God does not explain anything, it has NO place in science. By definition it can not. Anyway how does he know which God created the Universe, it could have been Zeus, Mithra, Zamiel, or hell even Scooby-Doo.
This episode is only good as diversionary laugh, not Chris or Genes fault, they were great as always.
Peace.
This episode is only good as diversionary laugh, not Chris or Genes fault, they were great as always.
Peace.
Last edited:
Dont misunderstand me here, I totally am not in any way religious and would not stick up for any religion over another but the way I heard Thomas was that he was saying the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) all referred to an actual creation moment, before which there was nothing, and after which there was everything. I believe he was contrasting this with other religions that do not have such a creation myth anywhere near as clear cut and black and white. It is my understanding that was the only point he was making in answer to your question, despite me also thinking he was very pro-christianity.
Did anyone else pick up on Thomas kinda claiming to have a new protocol and designed equipment that would REVOLUTIONISE paranormal investigations/evidence? Chris was getting interested to hear more about this, and so was I. Very much so actually. But unless I fell asleep, I didn't hear the payoff/punchline/explanation..... No examples, no explanation of the technology's theory of operation etc?
For me, you can pretty much discard most of what Thomas said, in that there is no way he could back up or prove many of his theories. BUT....claiming actual results that will change the field forever, using newly designed equipment and methods - well that can very much be shown to be real, or not real.
Chris - did you chat with Thomas post-recording? Did you get any details on the matter I've brought up?
I actually enjoyed the show, which of course is very different than saying I bought everything Mr Fusco was saying. I am intrigued at the least in this new 'tech' - perhaps we will get some answers when Mr Rountree appears on the show....
For me, you can pretty much discard most of what Thomas said, in that there is no way he could back up or prove many of his theories. BUT....claiming actual results that will change the field forever, using newly designed equipment and methods - well that can very much be shown to be real, or not real.
Chris - did you chat with Thomas post-recording? Did you get any details on the matter I've brought up?
I actually enjoyed the show, which of course is very different than saying I bought everything Mr Fusco was saying. I am intrigued at the least in this new 'tech' - perhaps we will get some answers when Mr Rountree appears on the show....
DaveM
Paranormal Adept
Sorry Goggs, I think you were reading something into what Fusco said. Yes, his outlook is quite pro-christianity. I felt he was trying to make light of other religions to boost his own. I am not trying to stick up for any religion either. The bottom line for me is...I just thought he was a rather lame guest, all in all.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
While I agree with the essentials of @ManitobaCanuk's assessment of the facts, I wouldn't call Fusco's work laughable. I wouldn't call it science either. I think someplace else I made the comment that pseudoscience is a more appropriate term.The problem is that it's hard merging science, the spiritual and the supernatural because the words "spiritual" and "supernatural" are so full of vagaries and inconsistencies that are by definition the antithesis of the science.
Yet I get the impression that Fusco is making a genuine effort to think outside the box and find some way of understanding the paranormal in terms of physical processes. It may not be accurate, but it's a step in the right direction, and I'm not about to judge him regarding his intent because I've never had a chance to sit down and discuss the details with him. For all I know he may be perfectly amenable to reconsidering and revising his theories when faced with conflicting evidence. In the meantime, I think his ideas could make for some interesting discussion and debate.
I particularly liked the question by @Christopher O'Brien that focused on the possible experiments that might be done in order to acquire evidence that Fusco's theories are valid. That is the kind of question that truly separates the signal from the noise.
Yet I get the impression that Fusco is making a genuine effort to think outside the box and find some way of understanding the paranormal in terms of physical processes. It may not be accurate, but it's a step in the right direction, and I'm not about to judge him regarding his intent because I've never had a chance to sit down and discuss the details with him. For all I know he may be perfectly amenable to reconsidering and revising his theories when faced with conflicting evidence. In the meantime, I think his ideas could make for some interesting discussion and debate.
I particularly liked the question by @Christopher O'Brien that focused on the possible experiments that might be done in order to acquire evidence that Fusco's theories are valid. That is the kind of question that truly separates the signal from the noise.
Last edited:
Evad
Paranormal Novice
I can recall as a younger man I would watch television shows, and listen to radio programs, or read about Aliens, UFO's and ghosts. I would believe what I saw and believe what I heard, or read because the information given was fed to me with a hint of realism... possibility... As I get older, and learn more about the science of an unaccepted field in the scientific community, I feel less and less intrigued by what I hear and read, because it feels as if the magic has gone away. Things are getting cold and sterile. That's how how I feel when I'm listening to Mr. Fusco. Is he trying to force his way into the sterile community of science? Why? To appease the non-accepting scientific community? To get someone to listen to him? No one has listened to any of us before so why start now? Is there money in it for some? Of course, but it's up to us to bring back the fantasy. If the magic is so unaccepted such as the lies that television lives on, then how are the youth supposed to find the magic themselves? Every one of us search for the truth through lies, or truth, who knows. Even the best of evidence doesn't mean anything in this field. Michio Kaku may be a cartoon character, but at least he is feeding the seeds of the future with interest. Listening to Thomas Fusco was like listening to your cousin at Christmas that did too much LSD.
boomerang
Paranormal Adept
What came across was mostly a set untestable propositions knitted together by analogy and draped over the framework of an established science Fusco seems to dislike. But to be fair, his prefacing the interview with the notion that the great Tesla was an under appreciated outlier, and he is also an under appreciated outlier so that he must therefore be some kind of yet to be vindicated genius as well, left me scratching my head so hard that I missed much of the rest of his spiel. Perhaps I missed the point.
At the beginning of the podcast he stated he had the same education as Nikola Tesla the last time i checked i didn't see that Mr Fusco had invented anything like .. Alternating current, the Radio and so on. He likes to say the word " SPACE TIME " allot.... cheesh why didn't the host's call him out on his lack of education just like the other fakes MIT Guy ? He is a joke to people that actually put in the time at a university to achieve a degree. "SPACE TIME "