... was a top scientist at Bell Laboratories who performed some largely forgotten experiments on relativity and space-time a few decades ago. His experimental prowess and reputation were so good that his work on relativity was published in great detail in the Journal of the Optical Society of America. Ives would have had a more difficult time getting his results published today, for he showed quite clearly that Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity did not correspond to lab results. At the time, such results were not so shocking. Indeed, some philosophers had shown that Special Relativity led to undesirable paradoxes, and experiments by Sagnac and Michelson/Gale had cast additional doubt on this aspect of Relativity. Such experiments by Ives and other key scientists suggested that an ether actually did exist and that it could serve as ... absolute reference frame. Another implication was that time was an independent entity unaffected by motion and that the infamous Twin Paradox was a fiction. Ives himself believed his work proved that so-called relativistic effects could be easily explained by phenomena appealing more to the common sense, such as the change of a light source's frequency with motion (over and above the Doppler Effect), rather than revamping space-time concepts. In short, Ives thought he had proved Special Relativity untenable experimentally and an un-necessary distortion of science's worldview. (Barnes, Thomas G., and Ramirez, Francisco S.; "Velocity Effects on Atomic Clocks and the Time Question," Creation Research Society Quarterly, 18:198, 1982.) Comment. Why do the textbooks neglect ...

... of any kind could be closely related to humans and apes was quickly dismissed by most zoologists. Flying mammals -- the bats -- evolved only once according to mainstream theory; later the Order Chiroptera (" hand-wings") split into the small, mainly insect-eating microbats and the large, fruit-eating megabats. It was all pretty obvious; how could such complex, specialized animals have evolved twice? But in Science Frontiers, there is ever the "however": "Arnd Schreiber, Doris Erker and Klausdieter Bauer of the University of Heidelberg have looked at the proteins in the blood serum of megabats and primates and found enough in common to suggest a close taxonomic relationship between the two groups. (Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 51:359)" ... Sourcebook Subjects The urge to replicate: part ii In an earlier issue (SF#46), we related how the morphology of the megabats (the "flying foxes") displays primate overtones. The very idea that bats of any kind could be closely related to humans and apes was quickly dismissed by most zoologists. Flying mammals -- the bats -- evolved only once according to mainstream theory; later the Order Chiroptera (" hand-wings") split into the small, mainly insect-eating microbats and the large, fruit-eating megabats. It was all pretty obvious; how could such complex, specialized animals have evolved twice? But in Science Frontiers, there is ever the "however": "Arnd Schreiber, Doris Erker and Klausdieter Bauer of the University of ...

... ornithologists because it involves war between the parasites and their hosts. Since host species may eject parasite eggs or fail to nurture parasite chicks, brood parasites have evolved mimicry as a powerful weapon in these battles. Mimicked are host eggs, host nestlings, and host vocalizations. But the most insidious weapons of all involve the outright murder of host chicks. To this end, parasite chicks have evolved some special weapons and behaviors. Some cuckoo chicks evict host eggs or chicks by squirming under them and positioning them in a specially configured hollow on their backs. Then, pushing upward and outward to the rim of the nest, they dump their cargo over the edge. Other brood parasites are more direct and bloodthirsty. "Nestling African honeyguides have bill hooks to stab and kill their nestmates and the brood ... 377, 1998.) Comment. The hollow in the cuckoo's back and the deadly hook on the honeyguide bill disappear once their grisly work is done. Both strategies require bizarre, coordinated innovations in both weapons and behavior. These could, in principle at least, be the work of random mutation and natural selection -- but were they? Is there something we are missing in our theories? Euroasian cuckoo chicks maneuver under host eggs and chicks and dump them over the edge of the nest. Their backs have a neatly designed depression that just fits their potential competitor. (From: Biological Anomalies: Birds) From Science Frontiers #119, SEP-OCT 1998 . 1998-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... ? A proto-flamingo experimenting with inverted feeding sans the proper equipment -- huge tongue, fantastic bill, straining devices, etc. -- would not be very efficient and would probably get a snootful of water in the bargain! A half-flamingoized bill would-n 't be much better; and a perfect flamingo bill is pretty useless without the pumping and raking action of the special tongue. Can all these changes be orchestrated by random mutations? Finally, are there any fossils of transition stage flamingos? Antievolutionists have been using such arguments for years. The creationist literature is full of them. In reviewing the "answers" proclaimed by both evolutionists and creationists, it seems as if we really deserve some real explanations rather than superficial, philosophically shaped dogmas. Flamingo in feeding ... In this way, we end up with admirably adapted, inverted flamingos, jellyfish, and catfish. (Gould, Stephen Jay; "The Flamingo's Smile," Natural History, 94:7 , March 1 985.) Comment. If we were a bit flip above, it is because Gould and most biologists believe that such examples of "perfection" are nicely explained by evolutionary theory. We cannot be so sanguine, for we are still left with too many unanswered questions. Why would animals indulge in such bizarre behavior in the first place? A proto-flamingo experimenting with inverted feeding sans the proper equipment -- huge tongue, fantastic bill, straining devices, etc. -- would not be very efficient and would probably get a snootful of water in the bargain ...

... of 1017 erg. The event is established to be slightly above the surface of the Moon. An explanation is proposed involving outgassing and a subsequent electrical discharge caused by a piezoelectric effect." (Kolovos, G., et al; "Photographic Evidence of a Short Duration, Strong Flash from the Surface of the Moon," Icarus, 76:525, 1988.) Comments. Of special interest above is the suggestion that the flash was generated by the electrical ignition of expelled gases. It has been proposed that terrestrial earthquake lights are kindled in the same way (See GLD8 in our catalog: Lightning, Auroras .) Further, the presence of methane on the moon is compatible with T. Gold's theory that the earth retains huge amounts of primordial methane beneath its crust ... (See ESC16 in our catalog: Anomalies in Geology.) All of our catalogs are described here . From Science Frontiers #64, JUL-AUG 1989 . 1989-2000 William R. Corliss ...

... may recoil at the thought of 40,000 anomalies and curiosities. Surely nature cannot be that enigmatic and cryptic! Actually, I must stress that my search is stil far from complete. Anomalies -- those observations that do not yield to mainstream explanations -- are ubiquitous and proliferate. I have trawled through only a small fraction of the English-language scientific journals; thousands of volumes of specialized, less-known, publications gather dust untouched. Among them are unexamined books, monographs, informal papers, and popular publications. Foreign-language sources have only been sampled, and I can attest that the fishing there is good, too. And in today's electronic milieu, anomalies travel from computer screen to computer screen, by E-mail, and by fax. What ... Weather Review, the Geological Magazine, and like journals. There, anomalies and curiosities lurked in many an issue, hidden under layers of library dust. These tedious searches were hard on the eyes, but they opened them to a universe not taught by my college professors! And the end is not in sight. To wax Whitmanesque, when presently recognized anomalies are duly interred under an overburden of theory, more will arise. And this, dear reader, is as philosophical as I can afford to get. William R. Corliss December 1993 Glen Arm, Maryland. ...

... under hypnosis. There do not seem to be any theories that explain all these effects of hypnosis on memory. (Relinger, Helmut; "Hypnotic Hypernesia," American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 26:212, 1984.) Comment. Of course, memory shorn of hypnotic effects cannot really be explained either. The results of Relinger's survey make one wonder whether the human brain is specially "wired" or built to efficiently handle visual imagery that is "meaningful" in the context of human experience and theoretical expectations. This kind of construction is quite different from computer memories which process meaningless data as easily as meaningful data. UFOs, sea monsters, N-rays, etc. might just be eidetic images from human memories evoked by certain stimuli and encouraged by suggestion. From ... hypnosis seems to help recall even more. Finally, the recall of meaningful visual images and connected series of images is helped most of all by hypnosis. In fact, there is some evidence that eidetic imagery, that vivid, near-total recall of images, which is almost exclusively a talent of childhood, can be recovered by mature subjects under hypnosis. There do not seem to be any theories that explain all these effects of hypnosis on memory. (Relinger, Helmut; "Hypnotic Hypernesia," American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 26:212, 1984.) Comment. Of course, memory shorn of hypnotic effects cannot really be explained either. The results of Relinger's survey make one wonder whether the human brain is specially "wired" or built to efficiently handle visual ...