"Seven small greenhouses were set up on the M5 Industries roof. Four were set up with stereos playing endlessly looping recordings (as having the Mythbusters actually talk to the plants could contaminate the samples with their expelled carbon dioxide): Two of negative speech, two of positive speech (Kari and Scottie each made one positive and one negative soundtrack), a fifth with classical music and a sixth with intense death metal music. A seventh greenhouse, used as a control sample, had no stereo. The greenhouses with the recordings of speech grew better than the control, regardless of whether such talk was kind or angry. The plants in the greenhouse with the recording of classical music grew better, while the plants in the greenhouse with the recording of intense death metal grew best of all."

Now, what about this shows positive music? Nothing. What it shows instead is something more plausible: plants are effected by vibration. They, as plants, would have no idea between the different kinds of music - but if you can provide lots of vibration (death metal) you could increase their growth. In short, it has nothing to do with music, but has much more to do with vibration. This is how I'd LIKE people to think - Research it, find something plausible, and don't take a bad news article with no sources at its word. All in all, that doesn't show any sort of positive energy, or that prayer or good thoughts help crops grow - so you'd need to find another one for that claim.


In terms of animals, I honestly can't say for sure. I haven't done much research there, but I will gladly offer up my GUESSES on it. Animals that are treated 'well' tend to have less hormones and chemicals applied to them. Thus they come out less produced. Otherwise, I can see nothing about how you treat an animal (apart from possibly bruising the meat or some such) that would make 'treating it well' make it tastier.

The haunted deal I would say is more involved with the individual experiencing it, since there is no objective proof of any sort of haunting to date - Meaning it's all in the observer's mind, similar to what Vortex said about associative feelings and locations. That's what I lean towards.


Thanks again for sharing :->.


So I don't really buy into either of those - and I'm not (obbbbvviousssllyy) a fan of the supernatural. I think there is NOTHING beyond the natural. Everything has a natural cause, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is a result of all the crap I read, despite me reading way too many religious pieces, but I find it the most logical method of thinking - Proof is a good thing.






Carl sagan time?

Carl sagan time.





"I try not to think with my gut. If I'm serious about understanding the world, thinking with anything besides my brain, as tempting as that might be, is likely to get me into trouble. Really, it's okay to reserve judgment until the evidence is in. "

"Widespread intellectual and moral docility may be convenient for leaders in the short term, but it is suicidal for nations in the long term. One of the criteria for national leadership should therefore be a talent for understanding, encouraging, and making constructive use of vigorous criticism. "






Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/14/2012 03:57PM by Batman.