search results matching tag: Blackmore

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

  • 1
    Videos (17)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (0)     Comments (9)   

DEEP PURPLE-child in time (LIVE 1970) vintage purple

DEEP PURPLE-child in time (LIVE 1970) vintage purple

Sagemind says...

"...essentially simple composition, featuring an organ intro, three power chords, and a two minute long solo. Lyrically dark, vocalist Ian Gillan utilizes his full vocal range and goes from quiet singing to loud, high-pitched, banshee-esque screaming. Guitarist Ritchie Blackmore comes in with a slow solo, which builds up to a fast-pace playing and then ends abruptly, with the whole song cycle starting over again. Blackmore is normally associated with playing a Fender Stratocaster, however, he played a Gibson ES-335 on the studio version of the song."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_in_Time

James Randi debunks Maureen Flynn (1991)

8727 says...

that last psychologist, Sue Blackmore, did an excellent TEDtalk about Memes and Temes. I'm surprised at her saying she doesn't understand it, she must mean in a strictly scientific way and not what is obvious to skepticism.

TEDtalks - Memes and "temes"

fissionchips says...

From the TEDTalks site: Susan Blackmore studies memes: ideas that replicate themselves from brain to brain like a virus. She makes a bold new argument: Humanity has spawned a new kind of meme, the teme, which spreads itself via technology -- and invents ways to keep itself alive

The Science of Remote Viewers (9:59)

rembar says...

LOL at "well-respected parapsychologist", that phrase is an oxymoron and especially ironic considering the two professors you're talking about. Tart got a Pigasus Award in 1981 for being such a tool, and Targ was one of the ones who thought Uri Geller was an actual psychic before Randi debunked him. Targ was so far gone as to publish a book (Mind-Reach: Scientists Look at Psychic Abilities) saying as much with his Scientologist buddy Harold Puthoff.

Speaking of parapsychology, Susan Blackmore has a PhD in parapsychology and she has a few things to say about her experiences here and here. I particularly like this quote: "The way I really think is more like this: 'I am a scientist. I think the way to the truth is by investigation. I suspect that telepathy, clairvoyance, psychokinesis and life after death do not exist because I have been looking in vain for them for 25 years. I have been wrong lots of times before and am not afraid of it.'"

http://skepdic.com/parapsy.html
http://www.randi.org/encyclopedia/parapsychology.html

As to the Ganzfeld experiments, causation can't be established to any psychic phenomena. As Dgandhi said, yes, there is a statistically significant effect, but that effect is linked instead to severe experimental and analytical flaws, of which there are dozens if not hundreds, including amongst them interference in the procedure of the experiment by the researchers, outright cheating on the part of the researchers, allowing subjects to receive aural clues (as Dgandhi said above), and even basic failure to perform proper randomization.

http://www.skepticreport.com/psychicpowers/ganzfeld.htm

Then again, Mink, I couldn't care less about debunking every single experiment "proving" psychic phenomena, especially if the only thing you have to offer is mindless throw-away comments without any actual effort on your part, when you don't even read the report I cited that did, in fact, offer debunking and criticism galore. It's boring, it's already been done, and, most importantly, the onus is not on me to prove anything.

I am going to finish up by quoting Dghandi, because what he wrote so eloquently bears repeating:
"The question is have these organizations produced extraordinary evidence through replicable experiments to back up their extraordinary claims, and the answer is still no."

Eric Johnson - Cliffs of Dover

Fade says...

Seriously? Jimi has no soul? are you retarded?

I think Bill Hicks said it best

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCbVkX7jdAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkA6zugNMQ

Oh and considered by who exactly? Well lets take a look at the top 100 guitarists as voted for by the readers of rolling stone

The 100 Greatest Guitarists of All Time and the number one spot goes to...??? Jimi? oh no that can't be right. Now who is this eric johnson noob? Is he even on the list? oh yea that's right...he's not.

1Jimi Hendrix
2 Duane Allman of the Allman Brothers Band
3 B.B. King
4 Eric Clapton
5 Robert Johnson
6 Chuck Berry
7 Stevie Ray Vaughan
8 Ry Cooder
9 Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin
10 Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones
11Kirk Hammett of Metallica
12 Kurt Cobain of Nirvana
13 Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead
14 Jeff Beck
15 Carlos Santana
16 Johnny Ramone of the Ramones
17 Jack White of the White Stripes
18 John Frusciante of the Red Hot Chili Peppers
19 Richard Thompson
20 James Burton
21 George Harrison
22 Mike Bloomfield
23 Warren Haynes
24 The Edge of U2
25 Freddy King
26 Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine and Audioslave
27 Mark Knopfler of Dire Straits
28 Stephen Stills
29 Ron Asheton of the Stooges
30 Buddy Guy
31 Dick Dale
32 John Cipollina of Quicksilver Messenger Service
33 & 34 Lee Ranaldo, Thurston Moore of Sonic Youth
35 John Fahey
36 Steve Cropper of Booker T. and the MG's
37 Bo Diddley
38 Peter Green of Fleetwood Mac
39 Brian May of Queen
40 John Fogerty of Creedence Clearwater Revival
41 Clarence White of the Byrds
42 Robert Fripp of King Crimson
43 Eddie Hazel of Funkadelic
44 Scotty Moore
45 Frank Zappa
46 Les Paul
47 T-Bone Walker
48 Joe Perry of Aerosmith
49 John McLaughlin
50 Pete Townshend
51 Paul Kossoff of Free
52 Lou Reed
53 Mickey Baker
54 Jorma Kaukonen of Jefferson Airplane
55 Ritchie Blackmore of Deep Purple
56 Tom Verlaine of Television
57 Roy Buchanan
58 Dickey Betts
59 & 60 Jonny Greenwood, Ed O'Brien of Radiohead
61 Ike Turner
62 Zoot Horn Rollo of the Magic Band
63 Danny Gatton
64 Mick Ronson
65 Hubert Sumlin
66 Vernon Reid of Living Colour
67 Link Wray
68 Jerry Miller of Moby Grape
69 Steve Howe of Yes
70 Eddie Van Halen
71 Lightnin' Hopkins
72 Joni Mitchell
73 Trey Anastasio of Phish
74 Johnny Winter
75 Adam Jones of Tool
76 Ali Farka Toure
77 Henry Vestine of Canned Heat
78 Robbie Robertson of the Band
79 Cliff Gallup of the Blue Caps (1997)
80 Robert Quine of the Voidoids
81 Derek Trucks
82 David Gilmour of Pink Floyd
83 Neil Young
84 Eddie Cochran
85 Randy Rhoads
86 Tony Iommi of Black Sabbath
87 Joan Jett
88 Dave Davies of the Kinks
89 D. Boon of the Minutemen
90 Glen Buxton of Alice Cooper
91 Robby Krieger of the Doors
92 & 93 Fred "Sonic" Smith, Wayne Kramer of the MC5
94 Bert Jansch
95 Kevin Shields of My Bloody Valentine
96 Angus Young of AC/DC
97 Robert Randolph
98 Leigh Stephens of Blue Cheer
99 Greg Ginn of Black Flag
100 Kim Thayil of Soundgarden

Thylan (Member Profile)

djsunkid says...

Very well written. I'm sure you'll do very well here, and I'm happy to have you as a member of our community. Cheers.

In reply to this comment by Thylan:
^ djsunkid

TBH, i mostly agree with you. However, when I ran across it, saw that whoever had stitched it together had decided/accepted it was a piranha (which it clearly is not) and that the fish was weired, ugly, and scary, I was curious to know what it actually was. The sift, being what it is, namely a fair bit more informed than the avg YouTube/Metacafe poster and it looks like with "sometimes" link, Ive not been disappointed. Also, I personally find it interesting whenever viewing unusual fish photos (especially the extreamly deep sea, and never seen before by man types, living fossils and such like).

Also, i'm still learning the ways of the sift (its tastes) and had partly expected this to fail. Democracy in action, as it were. Let the sift voice itself by not voting if it wishes. (this is a great example of something im happy DID get discarded. it didn't deserve to be here. it had been rated elsewhere, and i was curious. Would it do well here? it did not. good.)

I haven't got the sifts tastes down pat yet (and im unlikely to exclusively feed it what it likes even when i do)

Ive mostly sifted according to a mood; notably had a prodigy one inspired by watching a vid on here. 2 made it, 1 didnt. went for the old ones people dont hear anymore and that i still like and find interesting. another was my medieval folk mood. I like Blackmore's Night and Mediæval Bæbes vids that i posted just reacently. Possibly too obscure though, as, -while i find them enchanting, very well done and generally beautifull- the Blackmore's Night got almost no views (but a good vote ratio from the views it did have). Cant say the same for the Mediæval Bæbes vids though, they've had their views and still not been liked. Cant please everyone, especially with music.

Anyway, back on topic. Knowing that this fish IS known makes it utterly and irredeemably redundant.

I appreciate the votes from everyone who did, however I can get to 10 with something better than this.

*discard

Large Scary Fish - (species unknown)

Thylan says...

^ djsunkid

TBH, i mostly agree with you. However, when I ran across it, saw that whoever had stitched it together had decided/accepted it was a piranha (which it clearly is not) and that the fish was weired, ugly, and scary, I was curious to know what it actually was. The sift, being what it is, namely a fair bit more informed than the avg YouTube/Metacafe poster and it looks like with "sometimes" link, Ive not been disappointed. Also, I personally find it interesting whenever viewing unusual fish photos (especially the extreamly deep sea, and never seen before by man types, living fossils and such like).

Also, i'm still learning the ways of the sift (its tastes) and had partly expected this to fail. Democracy in action, as it were. Let the sift voice itself by not voting if it wishes. (this is a great example of something im happy DID get discarded. it didn't deserve to be here. it had been rated elsewhere, and i was curious. Would it do well here? it did not. good.)

I haven't got the sifts tastes down pat yet (and im unlikely to exclusively feed it what it likes even when i do)

Ive mostly sifted according to a mood; notably had a prodigy one inspired by watching a vid on here. 2 made it, 1 didnt. went for the old ones people dont hear anymore and that i still like and find interesting. another was my medieval folk mood. I like Blackmore's Night and Mediæval Bæbes vids that i posted just reacently. Possibly too obscure though, as, -while i find them enchanting, very well done and generally beautifull- the Blackmore's Night got almost no views (but a good vote ratio from the views it did have). Cant say the same for the Mediæval Bæbes vids though, they've had their views and still not been liked. Cant please everyone, especially with music.

Anyway, back on topic. Knowing that this fish IS known makes it utterly and irredeemably redundant.

I appreciate the votes from everyone who did, however I can get to 10 with something better than this.

*discard

Blackmore's Night Shadow of The Moon

Thylan says...

And as my two Blackmores Night sifts sail into the discard, unwatched and unloved, I realize that you're all heathens that cant tell nice Folk when you see it

  • 1


Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists