![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 62. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Susan on April 1, 2000, at 23:34:45
What is clicking the Amygdala? Don't ask me. Ask Neil Slade,
music teacher, psychic and internet instructor of such refined
subjects as curing depression, moving clouds, and fixing everything!About amygdala clicking, Slade says:
It seems to work very well for just about everyone,
and is completely in keeping with what is accepted
by neuroscientists and psychologists about
brain anatomy and behavior.Whew! Complete acceptance. I wish I had that!
http://discserver.snap.com/discussion.cgi?id=27155&article=931
Of course such a claim requires proof, and scientific documentation:
http://www.h2net.net/p/nslade/Papers/clicking.html
With that settled, we can get to the heart of the matter.
Clicking the amygdala can cure anything, sooner or later:http://discserver.snap.com/discussion.cgi?id=27155&article=853&date_query=948041490
And clicking is widely accepted as a technique for weather modification:
http://www.h2net.net/p/nslade/cloud.html
If you don't yet accept Slade's hypothesis, you probably have not studied enough of it!
Here is plenty more:http://www.h2net.net/p/nslade/Papers/Library.html
And of course, Neil welcomes all comments, pro or con.
Just remember, he says, you are what you write.
Don't be a reptile, he suggests!http://discserver.snap.com/Indices/27155.html
Posted by Cam W. on April 2, 2000, at 3:22:43
In reply to Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Susan on April 1, 2000, at 23:34:45
Susan - Neil Slade is one deluded puppy. Anyone who uses Art Bell references as scientific proof is not a scientist. Slade does not have complete acceptance of the scientific community for his ideas of the brain. He is not even trained in the sciences.His findings are not congruent with our scientists' ideas on the brain. In fact many of the articles he quotes are from journals in the 1950s and 1960s and are not the conclusions of the papers, but conjecture for further research suggested by the authors. The scientific documentation Slade provides is far, far from conclusive, and the matter of "amygdala clicking" is not settled.
"Clicking the amygdala cures everything, sooner or later." Now, that doesn't set off my bullshit detector at all (sarcasm). I particularily like the "sooner or later" part, as death also cures everything sooner or later.
Amygdala clicking is a widely accepted technique of weather modification. That will shut down all meteorological faculties. A technique that he has known for 20 years has been kept remarkable quiet from the public for a long time (I smell conspiracy) . Slade states that if you concentrate on clouds in the sky, you can make them dissipate with your mind. He has actually has a video of him doing this in his backyard. He says that no wind was blowing and he made a hole appear in the cloud. The atmosphere surrounding the Earth has many layers. There may have been no ground level winds, but this does not mean that winds in the stratosphere were not blowing.
Susan, Slade has shown no proof whatsoever of any of his claims. Unfortunately magic does not exist in this world (the only one we have). Granted, some phenomena are unknown, but we just have not elucidated their mechanisms' of action, yet. If Slade's claims were true and he has known them for 20 years, why has he not collected James Randi's one million dollar (U.S.) prize for proving a psychic phenomenon? This guy is a charleton and fraud (I will stand by this description) obtaining money from people who he cons with his fancy talk and pseudoscientific spiel.
Sorry that I do not share your enthusiasm about this guy, but frauds like him make life miserable for millions of people. I would bet that his "cures" for depression are based on the well known methods of biofeedback. Sincerely, - Cam W. (a reptile)
Posted by Susan on April 2, 2000, at 15:15:11
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Cam W. on April 2, 2000, at 3:22:43
Cam,
If your mistook my forked-tongued humor for sincere praise of this
deluded egomaniac, I am better than I thought!!!About the time Art Bell took a leave of absense to tend to his son,
who was the victim of a sex crime by a teacher (that fact is publicized now on
Daddy's web site...I've never actually dug up the court documents to
verify his claim) Slade was leading mass mind weather modification
experiments on Bells program.First the nationwide audience healed one of Bell's guests,
one of the many who allegedly had heart attacks after appearing on the
MOST SYNDICATED RADIO SHOW IN THE COUNTRY (?!?!??!) Bell conjectured that
these heart attacks were caused by government efforts to shut down the
Art Bell expose of the UFO coverup conspiracy.THEN, they made a giant UFO
appear over Pheonix (seen by hundreds, they claim) (of course, imaginary UFOs
will help thwart the government coverup!!!) Then they got into weather modification.
Art wised up, he was afraid of something or the other....
Posted by saint james on April 3, 2000, at 18:13:57
In reply to Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Susan on April 1, 2000, at 23:34:45
> Of course such a claim requires proof, and scientific documentation:
>
> http://www.h2net.net/p/nslade/Papers/clicking.html
>James here...
This is just anchedotal info. Proof needs to be in the form of double blind studies or other studies using est. protocals from well excepted orgs. Extraordinary claims need extrordinary proof, and not a few quotes on a web page.
james
Posted by SUSAN on April 3, 2000, at 21:31:07
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by saint james on April 3, 2000, at 18:13:57
I'm with you on the proof thing. Neil is not!
If Neil Slade managed to get a vanity press title in print, it must be true,
at least in Neil Slade's eyes.THIS JUST IN....
ART BELL PROMISES TO RETIRE!!!www.artbell.com
Art Bell announced April 1 (?) that he will retire,
due to personal and family problems.Neil announced that he will be among Art's final guests,
appearing on Coast to Coast with Art Bell Thursday night and
Friday morning, April 5 and 6I hope someone with some qualifications, training in the sciences, and
knowledge of this subject area will auto-dial their way onto the show
and provide some balance to Neil's bizarre claims to be "completely
in keeping with what is accepted by neurology..."Neil gets away with this by claiming that no one has ever said anything
but good things about his self-styled neuroscience. This week offers a
prime opportunity to catch this guy in a nationwide debate and stop him
from further spreading his delussions and his preference for anti-logical
dialogue.Art's show might be available live on the Web, for anyone who does not
live in one of his many broadcast markets.Have at it.....
> > Of course such a claim requires proof, and scientific documentation:
> >
> > http://www.h2net.net/p/nslade/Papers/clicking.html
> >
>
> James here...
>
> This is just anchedotal info. Proof needs to be in the form of double blind studies or other studies using est. protocals from well excepted orgs. Extraordinary claims need extrordinary proof, and not a few quotes on a web page.
>
> james
Posted by Neil Slade on December 3, 2003, at 0:19:36
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by saint james on April 3, 2000, at 18:13:57
There are two kinds of people who poo-poo the idea of
"clicking the amygdala".1) Permanent closed minded psuedo-intellectuals,
who actually have nothing in common with true
open minded intelligent thinkers and true scientific
minds.2) People who just haven't read through enough of
the web site (mine) and/or books to realize scientific
enquirely is at the crux of my writing."clicking" the amygdala is simply another easy way
of saying conscious control of basic limbic system
functions- the ability to have control over what
has previous been thought of as not consciously
under the control of the individual.There are many demonstrations of this to date that
adhere to scientific controls. For easy access,
take a look at the Scientific American online site,
and take a look at the TV clip- "Relax". This shows
an MRI scan showing increased amygdala activity
during a meditation- one of the recommended methods
from my site and books which allow one to "click"
the amygdala in a desired fashion.I would also suggest a good study of the references
page http://www.neilslade.com/Papers/Science.html
on my site which notes a good variety of
studies in the medical literature concerning
both frontal lobes function and amygdala function.This list actually needs to be updated, as we have seen
a very great increase in amygdala research in the past
decade.The idea of conscious control of autonomic
responses- including those involved in the amygdaloid body-
is certainly not a new idea,and in fact has been
well established by a large number of thoroughly
scientific investigators. Just do a little homework.As for me, I'm just an amygdala "clicking" promoter, who
has taught therapeutic workshops in every major psychiatric
hospital in Denver- a little bit of practical experience
relating to brain self-control.Thanks, Brain People
Neilwww.NeilSlade.com
Posted by Neil Slade on December 3, 2003, at 0:25:35
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Neil Slade on December 3, 2003, at 0:19:36
Oh yeah,
Amygdala "clickers" also know how to have fun-
"cloud busting" is one jolly example.Playing music,
telling jokes, laughing, not taking oneself so
100% of the time-- these are all qualitites of
truly advanced thinkers.Reptiles don't smile.
Have fun
Neil
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 5, 2003, at 3:48:56
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Neil Slade on December 3, 2003, at 0:19:36
> There are two kinds of people who poo-poo the idea of
> "clicking the amygdala".
>
> 1) Permanent closed minded psuedo-intellectuals,
> who actually have nothing in common with true
> open minded intelligent thinkers and true scientific
> minds.Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused or put down. Thanks,
Bob
PS: Follow-ups regarding posting policies, and complaints about posts, should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration; otherwise, they may be deleted.
Posted by Neil Slade on December 5, 2003, at 11:18:00
In reply to Re: please be civil » Neil Slade, posted by Dr. Bob on December 5, 2003, at 3:48:56
Good, I hope your advice applies to all. See previous messages to my own.
Thanks
Posted by stjames on December 5, 2003, at 21:41:13
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Neil Slade on December 3, 2003, at 0:19:36
I understand you can control the weather by
clicking your Amygdala. Tell me more.
Posted by AmyH on December 5, 2003, at 22:11:50
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by stjames on December 5, 2003, at 21:41:13
Yes. Alternative approaches all too often are shunned simply because they are different. I want to know more. But this Web site seems to have some guidelines for posting - maybe this should go to the alternative board (http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/alter/)or the psychological board (http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/). I'm not sure which, but could you respond there, because these posts might get deleted (see Dr. Bob's comments).
Posted by stjames on December 5, 2003, at 22:40:52
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by AmyH on December 5, 2003, at 22:11:50
> Yes. Alternative approaches all too often are shunned simply because they are different. I want to know more. But this Web site seems to have some guidelines for posting - maybe this should go to the alternative board (http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/alter/)or the psychological board (http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/). I'm not sure which, but could you respond there, because these posts might get deleted (see Dr. Bob's comments).
>Actually, Dr Bob does not delete these kind of posts, at least he has not in the 3 years I have been here.
Posted by Neil Slade on December 5, 2003, at 23:56:11
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by stjames on December 5, 2003, at 22:40:52
I appreciate all moderately phrased inquiries regarding
the topics at my site-- especially regarding the
more far-out stuff like "Cloudbusting".The details are all outlined beginning on
http://www.neilslade.com/cloud.html
and please also see
http://www.neilslade.com/skeptics.htmlI've tried to document this phenomenon as best I could with
a couple of short video excerpts posted on those
pages.I first heard about "Cloudbusting" when I was about 18 years old
in a book by skeptic journalist Jesse Stern, in
"Yoga, Youth, and Reincarnation", in which he follows around
a couple of yoga teachers making a number of
extraordinary claims. Among the "tricks" in the books,
besides the subject gaining weight drinking a liquid
diet below the accepted calorie intake- was one fellow
who claimed he and his students could cause selected
clouds to vaporize at will through sheer concentration.
I.e., cause a specific cloud in a group of clouds to
vanish, and leave surrounding clouds unaffected.Though Stern was a total skeptic, he had to admit,
it seemed to work as claimed in this instance.My own experience at age 18, alone, and with friends,
amazing to me, seemed to concure that this was something
one could actually do with remarkable repetition.I had forgotten all about this until about thirty
years later, and about a decade after beginning my
work with behaviorist T.D. Lingo at his research facility
in Colorado.In 1997, and this was about seventeen years after doing my tour
of duty teaching creative therapeutic workshops in Denver area
hospitals and schools, I had finally published my
first book outlining the basic principles- in layman's terms-
about brain self-control methods explored at Lingo's lab.
I had already done one national interview on the Coast to Coast radio
show, and I was looking for a "hook" that might
get me a second appearance.Suddenly I remembered the "Cloudbusting" experiments
as a much younger person, and knowing how much Art
Bell loved offbeat stories, I thought this might be
the hook. So, I headed to my backyard, camcorder in
tow, I tried to "bust" a couple of selected clouds
as described on the web pages above.It worked perfectly as it had in the past-- and I have to admit-
as much to my surprise as anyone.After I described the procedure on the air, both
Art and I were flooded with emails from people having similar success
on their own. Of course we got some emails saying
we were out of our minds as well, but the percentage
of these were certainly under 1/2 of 1% of the total
responses we received. Literally, thousands of
positive responses to "Cloudbusting" came in.There are three posible explanations to observation
of selected clouds vanishing under the deliberate
concentration of an individual or individuals.1) Such people truly are deluded, and it is only
a coincidence that a chosen cloud- and not others
nearby- will vanish within minutes during the
exercise. Of course this is possible, but the phenomenon
seems to be a repeatable event, given the parameters
I outline in the instructions. It should be noted
that people reporting success include college
graduates, and people in the sciences, as well as
people who start out thinking this idea is totally
nuts to begin with.2) Focusing one's mental activity actually can cause
a cloud to trip over into gas from vapor. This seems
extremely improbable, but hey, there's a lot we don't
understand in this universe. I've merely reported
that this phenomenon seems to be real, and I'm not the only
one. And I am not an idiot, thank you. I too have
a college degree (like that guarantees sanity!) a verifiable
high IQ (like that means anything either).3) It may be that the phenomenon is instead just the
ability to subconsciously figure out what cloud in
a sky full of clouds is likely to evaporate before
others. Although this is certainly not the same
thing as CAUSING a cloud to disappear, hey, it's still
an impressive mental feat.I don't know that you could actually do a double blind
experiment to PROVE this thing or not, since I believe
that the consciousness of a skeptical observer would
have an impact on the results. Its the quantum physics
thing- I believe called "The Baxter Effect". I.e., if
you think the idea is a bunch of baloney- you will
prove via your observations that it is. This may
be unavoidable in this. There is also the notion that
the pressure to "perform" this feat under the
watchful eye of an official observer may also
negatively affect the results. "Prove it!" can
adversely affect the outcome of something rather
delicate, perhaps in the same manner as playing
your piano piece perfectly when your teacher is
sitting next to you-- you always play worse for your
techer. I don't know about
you, but there are just SOME THINGS I can not do
when someone is watching, if you know what I mean.
If someone wants to carry on such an experiment however,
and can do it honestly- more power to them. The
"Amazing Randy" claims to have done this in the past,
but I went overthe details of his "experiment" and it had more
holes in it than a pound of swiss cheese.In any case, "Cloudbusting" is a fun thing to try,
and quite fun to observe and consider. Something
is going on here that defies explanation, and from
all the reports it goes beyond mere coincidence or
deluded nut cases making impossible claims.The phenomenon is not simply the matter that clouds dissappear on
their own whether you focus your concentration on
them or not, since the idea is specifically that
you consciously SELECT a cloud among many to vaporize
alone- and very often, and what seems to defy the odds-
your chosen cloud does exactly this.How this happens, beats me, it just seems to work often
enough to make you think about what may be possible to
accomplish with mental faculties.As to the relative importance in the grand scheme
of brain self-control, increasing one's creativity,
intelligence, and gaining control over one's emotions-
well, its not that important. But a lot of things
in life that are just plain fun to mess around with-
music, art, games, playing, relaxing-- to scientists
and researchers who know about brain function, these
kinds of activities are proving to be more essential
to health than one might first suspect.Thanks for your consideration
Neil Slade
Posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 0:04:42
In reply to Re: Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by stjames on December 5, 2003, at 21:41:13
Actually, I got off on Cloudbusting in the previous post, but as to
weather control via brain and amygdala "clicking"
-- we simply did a couple of on the
air experiments to see if 20 million people could
cause it to rain in a target area.Again, this is outlined on the web site.
http://www.neilslade.com/details.htmlI had NO IDEA if this would work or not, but delightfully
it did, and exactly as we had hoped on at least
one documented occassion on the site using
satellite weather maps to track the progress.It's not something I think an individual could
do on one's own, and I can think of a lot better and more fun things
to do than rain-making. But, I would not dismiss
the power of 20 million minds concentrating on
an idea (our audience during the "experiment".)Perhaps it would be more productive for people to
concentrate on things like global hunger, protecting
the environment, elimination of war, alternative
fuel development, and education. This is something
that is well within the accepted uses and
application of brain and intelligence, and
which I most strongly advise as good use of
one's intellect.
Posted by AmyH on December 6, 2003, at 1:23:44
In reply to Weather Control, posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 0:04:42
> -- we simply did a couple of on the
> air experiments to see if 20 million people could
> cause it to rain in a target area.
Fascinating. By the way, how did you get 20 million people to participate?Is that the average estimated audience for the time you were on the air or is that the cumalative weekly reach of all the Clear Channel Communications radio stations on which the nightlong program was syndicated?
Posted by stjames on December 6, 2003, at 1:39:10
In reply to Weather Control, posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 0:04:42
the military has been trying to control the weather
for decades with no real progress.
Posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 10:53:34
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by stjames on December 6, 2003, at 1:39:10
Concerning the Coast to Coast audience- for any given four hour broadcast it has been estimated by Premiere that between 8-20 million tune in during the show. My interviews last from between three to four hours. There are something like 450 affiliate stations across North America, and the program is heard as far "east" as Japan and the MArshall Islands, down to Venezuela, and then over to Greenland and Iceland- guess it has to do with the bouncing nature of AM radio waves off the atmosphere. The program is also broadcast on the web across the globe.
Even if it were just a million people listening and focusing on "rain rain today" that would still be a pretty impressive number, and I doubt that any government project ever had anywhere near that number of people agreeing on anything whatsoever.
Posted by AmyH on December 6, 2003, at 12:23:13
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 10:53:34
> Even if it were just a million people listening and focusing on "rain rain today" that would still be a pretty impressive number, and I doubt that any government project ever had anywhere near that number of people agreeing on anything whatsoever.That's impressive. Premiere Radio Networks also syndicates the Rush Limbaugh show, which only attracts 20 million listeners all week. Premiere's Web site does not seem to include audience information except that they say Coast to Coast is a night program with daytime ratings. It seems if the show had more than five times the audience (20 million individual listeners five nights a week) as Premiere's most popular daytime show, they would say that instead.
It seems unlikely that on any given night, one in 11 US adults would listen to the same radio show. It seems unlikely that many more than one in 11 US adults would be up all night at all, much less listening to the radio. Arbitron might be a better source for audience estimates, though, since in the radio industry audience ratings are related to revenue. Premiere has a vested interest in representing a strong audience because it would increase revenue. Most people I know have heard of Rush Limbaugh, but few have heard of Art Bell, or have listened to Coast to Coast AM.
I hope this isn't too tedious, but I took some statistics courses in college, and these things fascinate me.
Even if a program claimed an average 15 minute audience of 1 million people, standard rating methods identify listeners within earshot of the spoken word of that radio station. How do you know everyone who could hear the radio was interested, or agreed to participate in what you were doing? It seems if you claim to have enlisted 20 million people in an experiment and after a quick check the number turns out to be less than a million, we need to consider that when we assess the provenance of your claims. If a researcher claims estimated radio listeners as active participants, that also seems relevant to the provenance of experimental findings. You probably agree that truly intellectual scientific thinkers make efforts to consider the provenance of information.
The same Clear Channel radio stations were somewhat successful earlier this year in enlisting reasonably large numbers of people to support pro-war rallies in several cities. In that case, we know how many people participated because they showed up at rallies. Estimates nationwide counted about 20,000 people at the Clear Channel funded war rallies. New York Times reported that Clear Channel was the only active organizer of pro-war demonstrations nationwide. I guess that could be considered a military effort since the military (or more precisely an intelligence agency) hired a public relations firm to work with Clear Channel to organize the demonstrations. During your experiments, did anyone consider using group mind control to get Saddam Hussein? Do you still accept invitations to appear on Clear Channel programs?
Posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 12:50:26
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by AmyH on December 6, 2003, at 12:23:13
I've gotten lots of requests to do brain focus experiments
on all kinds of things, personal, politcal and war included.
I would suggest people first focus on voting out
republicans from the US Government.As for regularly leading massive mind control experiments-
I leave that up to television programmers and Madison Avenue
advertising executives.As to numbers of people listening to Coast to Coast, unlike
my references to the medical literature and experts in brain
research of which I regularly cite sources, its an informal
estimate straight from the mouths of the broadcast
company itself, and nothing more. You probably have a point.
Why don't you write to the company and ask them the source
of their numbers.
Posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 13:01:36
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by Neil Slade on December 6, 2003, at 12:50:26
BTW,
I accept most large audience invitations to speak on my
subject matter, including Clear Channel. The hosts of
Coast to Coast, Art Bell and George Noory, are both
rather anti-establishment, quite the opposite of Rush L.
And even if Rush invitied me to talk, I would be
happy to let him know how much of his brain I believed
might be dormant.But, I think this is a medical bulletin board, not
a political one, eh.... so, I think I've said enough
about that.
Posted by maxx44 on December 7, 2003, at 0:11:15
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by AmyH on December 6, 2003, at 1:23:44
may surprise you both. want rain? ask Zeus--before you call me nuts, consider---the 'multi-verse' has heft. some noteable quantum and life-science guys are saying ancient or future events reflect not only the 'quantum participator' hypothesis of dr. john wheeler, et.al., sort of you 'interpret' the 'meaningless sea of quanta' as 'it rains'---while others would say, as the greeks used zuse for rain for thousands of years, that creates a 'chreode of possibility'---like a valley you drop a marble into---it will follow the smoothest path, the one more established in time. how? seems there are no laws of nature, rather habits. so some 'multi-verse' advocates point-out---the universe of the classic greeks may bear inluence on the present. some say it still exists, another part of the multi-verse, now in our past. time separates us. like we're hopping from universe to universe every 'whatever' unit of time. that would explain 'positive thinking', etc. interesting?
Posted by Neil Slade on December 7, 2003, at 2:47:15
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by maxx44 on December 7, 2003, at 0:11:15
Yeah, well I think I get what Maxx is saying, and I dig it.
We are like projectors-- you see what you expect to see, and in this way travel from universe to universe.
It's the Baxter Effect I mentioned previously.I haven't done a web search for The Baxter Effect, might be worth while....
thanks Maxx
Posted by maxx44 on December 7, 2003, at 15:58:21
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by Neil Slade on December 7, 2003, at 2:47:15
and thank you, sir. i truly suspect invoking Zeus, 'Cloud-Gatherer, Lightning Hurler' to be the ancient 'trick' of known 'rainmakers'. i am not a delusional bipolar---the get rich, go broke, rich, broke, etc. type. some have dxd me a 'cyclothyme' with its unfortunate periods of refractory depression. this goes to the times, as a joke, sort of, i would make an apparent fool of myself during florida's last great drought. i just went outside and invoked Zeus---and boy did it rain, flood even---to spite 'weather-man' predictions. of course tampa bay is the lightning capital of the usa---still, that drought was hurting fla., big-time. many years ago, san diego hired a 'rainmaker'---when san diego became flooded they refused to pay the man. funny old world, isn't it? is 'time' simply 'multi-verse' travel? i don't know, but i do know when i submitted much poetry in a russian/american competition, my poem concerning Zeus won---surprised me. but it made the front page of 'the russian journal of culture'. in large headlines.
their interpreter made the title, 'there still be power in starry gods yet'---perhaps the judges chose this one as russia seems 'starved' for religion, etc. best wishes---open-mind
Posted by Dr. Bob on December 9, 2003, at 0:39:20
In reply to Re: Weather Control, posted by maxx44 on December 7, 2003, at 15:58:21
> and thank you, sir. i truly suspect invoking Zeus, 'Cloud-Gatherer, Lightning Hurler' to be the ancient 'trick' of known 'rainmakers'.
I'd like to redirect follow-ups not about medication to Psycho-Social-Babble. Here's a link:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20031207/msgs/287901.html
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Neil Slade on August 21, 2007, at 23:51:21
In reply to Clicking the Amygdala?!?!?, posted by Susan on April 1, 2000, at 23:34:45
I love these critical kinds of posts that say absolutely NOTHING.
And almost always, by people who have both no clue about brain physiology, anatomy, behavior- much less the function of the amygdala, frontal lobes, or other important brain structure
nor, have even bothered to THINK and read with comprehension the materials I've posted as articles, stories, and scientific references.
The world is full of skeptics without a shred of original or analytical capacity.
So be it.
Have a nice day.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.