If you ever wish to explore resolving that,
this is a good post:
Academic arrogance is harmful not only to the individual who experiences it, but to the scientific discipline as a whole.
www.beyondphdcoaching.com
I skimmed it. I'm pretty sure I understand it's point without having to read the book. I could go talk to one of the Authors as she lives an hour away from me. Yet from looking at their publications, I don't believe we do the same type of science or and even in her book, she says different fields are more arrogant than others. In physical science we make a hypothesis, test it, and if we can't prove it we go back to the drawing board. There's less wiggle room than in social science which I think may be more difficult to prove hypothesis in a lot of cases. My opinion at least.
Both threads that you've implied my arrogance in were both concerning subjects/claims that have (yet) to be proven. If it's not proven, it's not fact yet. I'm way more open to the idea there is some mystery compound in Lamoana asiatica that we haven't found yet, then I am in Stahl's assertations.
fact
/fak(t)/
A
fact is an objective, verifiable truth or an actual occurrence that is supported by evidence and accepted as reality. It is distinct from opinions, beliefs, or fiction. [
1,
2,
3]
@Allylbenzene have you read the recentish paper on very simple base hydrolysis of raw ergot which converts the ergopeptides into lysergamides?
See they actually did it and proved proved something was possible without making unproven claims with zero evidence.
This study revisits the hypothesis that Claviceps purpurea (Fr.) Tul., a fungus infecting cereals and producing ergot alkaloids (EAs), was the psychedelic agent in kykeon, the sacred elixir of the Eleusinian Mysteries. Although archaeological evidence supports this link, experimental data...
www.nature.com
Another claim in the book is that Claviceps paspali lives in HBWR, when this has never been proven and it's been tested/looked for. AFAIK the entire Claviceps genus only infects grains as an endophyte. It's actually proven to be an entirely different species of fungus called Periglandula ipomoae which is an epiphyte apparently. If a book/paper/person is making such strong claims that have essentially been disproven, yeah that tends to make me "skeptical" and less likely to believe the claim and even less likely to believe future hypothesis based on that claim.
You seem to confuse skepticism with outright refusal btw.
Stahls book not that I've read it, doesn't seem to come with a caveat of being an exploration. It presents itself as fact. That is why I am skeptical.
I also stumbled onto this thread over at the nexus.. Just speculation and could not be true for all I know, but kinda interesting that they think Tregar and 69Ron are the same people.. to the point Tregar was banned from DMT-Nexus for being an Alt to 69ron. I don't know if you know who 69Ron is, but he was someone who was banned from the nexus for making bad claims, recommending vendors, and the vendors he recommended it turns out were him. Sound familiar? And IF that is true, that tregar is an alt of 69Ron... why would it be so out there that Tregar has alts also??
How fucked up would it be that a single person was responsible for decades of misinfo/myth that have been floating around so long that it is considered fact by people less informed?
That would wayyyyy dishonest, against the principles of harm reduction and IMO way worse than academic arrogance/skepticsim.
Btw, I have a friend who has physically met Tregar (We are all old school "Nookers" from +20 years ago. I just got off the phone with him and explained my theory including the 69Ron bit.
And my friend says with the most serious of tone "that would not surprise me for one second".
In the politest way he says that Tregar is prone to "flights of fancy" and that he continually reinforces a false narrative till other people either believe or ignore him outright.. Granted he never called Tregar a direct liar. He basically implied that Tregar is delusional.
