His buddy, Rountree, is booked for The Paracast his week, so feel free to post your questions.
Thanks.
Gene, good question about Fusco making up stuff versus science making up stuff.
It seems to me, that in one corner we have established science making up that dark matter/energy must be there, because there's a huge matrix of information that supports the theory that it must be there. In the other corner we have Fusco who says that what he makes up is as easily justified, based on a history of (supposed) para-normal events.
He seems to cherry-pick the bites he like, and call the rest establishment bias. (edit: Higgs doesn't prove the existence of gravitons, as pointed out by Elmo, sorry)
He seems to misrepresent, or misinterpret, the expansion of space. The expansion doesn't create more matter, or longer arms and legs and so forth, but the vacuum of space expands. Gravity makes stuff like galaxies stick together, so gravity indeed seems to be local. A surrounding vaccum could be pulling in our universe, so it might not be an internal force doing that.
I don't really get why a bend in the curvature of space would show the same apparition of an old lady walking the same stairs every night? It seems a bit too convenient that space would bend exactly enough to show that image, and nothing else, night after night (if such stories are real)..
Also, why and how does 'information' bleed into the physical sphere, from the 'Other' sphere? I didn't hear him explain that.
