Text Size
Facebook Twitter More...
Michael Towler snaps losing his cool makes false allegations about what really happened and what was really written by Jack Sarfatti. John Gill, editor of London Times Educational Supplement issues apology to Sarfattti

On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:44 AM, Gill, John wrote:

Dear Dr Sarfatti,


Thank you for your clarification. As a gesture of goodwill, and with no admission of liability, we would be prepared to run a clarification below the story as follows:


Jack Sarfatti has contacted Times Higher Education to clarify the content of his emails to Mike Towler.

He said that references to the possible involvement of “intelligence agencies” were not references to the CIA. THE is happy to clarify that Dr Sarfatti does not believe that Dr Towler was in the pay of the CIA.


Please indicate whether you would like to take us up on this offer.


John Gill

News Editor

Times Higher Education

26 Red Lion Square

London WC1R 4HQ

Tel: 0203 194 3364


Follow THE on Twitter: http://twitter.com/timeshighered

Brian Josephson 30 April, 2010

"Yes, I think we should focus on the wider issues now, rather than this affair which will soon be forgotten. One point is that many intelligent readers of this discussion will be very aware in one way or another that telepathy is something real, yet people in academia are afraid to say this out loud as they may suffer if they do (indeed, Towler has indicated that one factor behind these disinvitations was the idea that people might suffer e.g. in their job prospects were they to attend a meeting where subjects such as telepathy might be discussed).

It is said that science is a self-correcting process, but this episode makes it very clear that mechanisms exist that can obstruct such self-correction. What happens as a result is that we the scientific community separates into two groups, the elite caste who either dismiss ESP etc. outright or who pretend that they do for the sake of their careers; and the Untouchables who accept the reality and try to advance the science thereof.

You, the public, fund the scientific enterprise. Please try to do something about this ridiculous situation! Write to your MP!

I might add here that there is a similar problem in regard to complementary medicine, where the elite class bring up all sorts of doubtfully legimitate arguments to try to stop complementary medicine practices. For example, failure to prove is equated with proof of failure, or the elite can't see that a whole situation may have an influence that exceeds the sum of the influences of the parts. A colleague at Cambridge University has shown just this for a Traditional Chinese Medicine remedy, where it appears that one component can neutralise the harmful side-effects of the main ingredient. The influence of the Elite here , while it can do good in disclosing problems, may at the same time be having harmful effects on the health of our nation through blundering into things that they do not fully understand."

Donald McLean 30 April, 2010

"The institutionalized suppression of ANY information dealing with the outermost limits of human potential and its manifest traits is a common historical theme in Western society. David Bohm did not strike up a dialogue with the likes of Krishamurti on a whim. 

The cloistering and closeting of actual activities that directly attest to sub-rosa application of the so called "paranormal" among an elite and their interest in keeping such things well under wraps speaks volumes about Machiavellian intent. Politicized hypocrisy is written all over Towler and Valentini's arbitrary manipulation of Bohm's physics. Maladroit use of fair minded people as pin-cushions for their poison is as clumsy as it is irrational. Continual replication of academic practices that substitute the part for the whole is also apparent in Western medicine and the social sciences. 

So it is perfectly OK if the Queen of England herself is encouraged to deliver the "Royal Touch" - but punishable heresy if commoners duplicate her success to alleviate human suffering.

Just who do Towler and Valentini think they are fooling? Fewer and fewer open and honest individuals, methinks. Lux lucit in tenebris."

Finally I note that THE has closed off further discussion on this thread and removed Colin Bennett's comments.


To read the rest of the article, click here
Category: Science