I am highly intriqued by your possibility to bring their two views TOGETHER in some way.. And of course, this is precisely what new age mysticism tries to do with science and religion.. Clearly stan is a highly religious person.. Clearly, Grant is an Atheistic person.. I cannot say Atheist for certain, but his thougt process is known as Atheistic, just like any scientific way of approaching a subject – god is not included.. In a scientific inquiry you proceed assuming there is NO supernatural variables.. No “miracles” will take place and nothing supernatural will introduce itself..

Anyways, I am still highly intriqued by your suggestion.. I was wondering if you and I could work on one together..

I am trying to join the current theory of biological reproduction with the “stork” hypothesis (the idea that a stork delivers a baby and that it is not created by intercourse and gestation in the womb)..

Can we do it?

Have you ever noticed how Physicists and Biologists NEVER try to validate their scientific ideas by attaching religious jargon to them?? I mean they would NEVER want to add validity to the idea of atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons, etc by alling them “spirits” or “tiny ghosts” or “Avatars” or “Sprites”.. Well you get the point.. Scientists would never attempt to validate their claims by attaching religious terminology or religious ideas to them..

SO isn’t it FUNNY that religions try to validate their wacky ideas by using words like quantum, energy, matter, current, evolution, biology, etc..??

The explanation is simple.. Science is CREDIBLE.. religion is not..

It seems like Grant is not used to the Fruitcake’s way of obfuscating, dodging questions, relying on empty rhetoric, stepping outside the rational community, etc..

I have encountered so many fruitcakes like Stan, that I feel there is a VERY significant probability that all the following things apply to him, without him ever even disclosing them to us:

He thinks everything is “connected”.. Not in the physical way, by particle orbits just chaining particles together in a linear manner, but in a “deeper” way.. Can you say “Collective Unconscious” with a newly created sauce called “quantum”?

He thinks that life DOESN’T end with death.. Oh no.. Will he call it an “Afterlife”? Who knows that may be too much like his parents terminology. But the fact remains that his fruity beliefs rely on the same desire of his parents – that his life will not end with death..

paranormal things are REAL.. You know, ESP, past life experiences, maybe even telikenesis..

what else.. hmm.. He considers us “spiritual” beings..

He likes to use the following words: Energy (but not like Leibniz or Einstein.. Oh no.. He means it very much like his PARENTS use the word SOUL..),

Quantum, evolution, matter, universe, time, subatomic, bio, etc..

Well you may have noticed that those are all scientific terms.. Why do fruitcakes like to use scientific terms?

Because as stan HIMSELF said, “its obvious science has become mankinds greatest attribute”.. I think that says it all..

What else can we say about stan..

He believes in Karma, or something that functions pretty much the same way but may be called a different (possibly psuedo-scientific) term, in which an unseen hand of justice is at work in the universe/reality and therefore ‘you’ll get what’s coming to you’ (and of course in his case he’ll get something good so he believes)..

He’s attracted to themes like “Yin / Yang, Masculine / Feminine, etc..”

He believes the mind has strange powers but it’s not a physical thing.. The mind can go… “BEYOND”..

I’ll think of more things that I feel apply to him later, but that list should do for now..

Stan, am I RIGHT??

I am a molecular biologist at the University of Amsterdam and would like to share some ideas with dr. Laszlo, which were inspired by his latest books.

Should I send these to your email address mentioned above?

Kind regards, Martijn Rep