So you're claiming that, since the cold war, the US, the USSR, and possibly other countries have been testing experimental aircraft that, for example, are about a mile long and cigar shaped, with no other distinguishing features, such as wings, etc., or can accelerate in a moment from 100s of miles per hour to 1000s of miles per hour, execute maneuvers such as 90 degree turns while going 1000s of miles per hour, or are even capable of "flight" in deep ocean water and able to emerge and fly in the sky?
All of these phenomena ( and more! ) have been reported by multiple credible witnesses, in multiple vessels and craft ( aircraft, boats, submarines ), and tracked on radar.
When I have seen these claims, the people are usually saying that the UFO did some odd aerobatic maneuver that is impossible for conventional aircraft. They really seem to believe this. To them, the only explanation is that the aircraft they see must not be man made.
The problem is when these objects ( or whatever they are ) are witnessed by multiple credible witnesses ( pilot and co-pilot, air force personnel and officers, ground crewm etc ) and also tracked on radar.
Check out the Disclosure Project. Their initial press conference had over two hours of pilots, Air Force personnel, and air traffic controllers talking about incidents of UFOs that were clearly not man-made ( size, speed, manueverability ), and either witnessed by multiple people, or both visually and on radar. No abductees or contactees or anything like that, just person after person saying "Pilots reported an object that we tracked on radar for 10 minutes, at which time it did an 90-degree turn sped away at more than 1,000 miles per hour..." .
Yeah, the guy who started the project is a Doctor gone of the deep end with Herbal cures, but I don't see how that hurts the credibility of any of the witnesses.
Well, there *is* a link between government conspiracy theories and X-Files *spin-off* shows. The pilot episode of Lone Gunman featured in its plot hijacking of a plane that was flown remotely into World Trade Center Towers.
Of course, this is a case where correlation is not causation. The pilot episode of Lone Gunman aired some 6 months before the 9/11 attacks! <weird X-file theme music/>
After actually reading over the review, it looks like they are adding a lot of role-playing elements to it. There are environments, such as the bar and the bridge, where you just kind of hang out and listen to people talk. This reminds me of the "WoW" preview they had in WCII with that alternate character -- what was his name, beastmaster? Anywho, are you unlocked him, you got to a gameplay model and map that was more like an MMORPG than a regular level with a mission. There was a village as a launching point out of which you adventured. It seemed like a kind of practice run for an MMORPG, to fleshout game-play issues. Seems like the same thing is going on in SCII.
And it looks like Blizzard has decided that the real money is in online gaming subscriptions. Sucks. Would really like to play SC:Ghost, though, and be a lonely little trooper causing trouble in a big ol' map.
The crux is that you really can't teach programming.
I was going to qualify this, but you know, you nailed it. In programming, beyond your basic loops and syntax, is a completely unique problem, and you are probably the only person in the universe who is ever going to encounter it. What you have to do is start figuring out how to solve problems.
Now, a teacher can help get you trained for solving problems, by giving practice problems and walking students through the frustration of solving them, but ultimately, a programmer has to be able to diagnose and creatively solve their own problems.
Like I said, the only people who were able to enjoy a modern sewage system and hot and cold water were the Roman Citizens who lived in Rome, and perhaps a few other larger cities. Everyone else, the 95% of the population, lived in conditions that were not that different from 10,000 years earlier.
That's just a few things. While I agree we need to make changes, things are much better than they were 500 years ago.
Yes, but things were also far better in the Roman emire than they were 500 years ago. They also had indoor plumbing, sewage, heating, roads (no electricity thought). They also had free education. Their only limitation was the level of scientific discovery at the time however the amount of invention created at that time was nothing short of incredible.
People often make the mistake of thinking that all those benefits were enjoyed by the common people. They weren't. They were enjoyed by the upper 5-10% of the population, the Roman Citizens, who lived in Rome. The average person was just a peasant farmer, or a slave. A Roman Citizen is not like an American Citizen. In the US, and much of the industrialized world, all the people are citizens. In Rome, it was the 5-10% of the people that were citizens.
All that happened during the fall of the Roman Empire is that the elites lost their city. The life for an average person in Italy changed not one iota.
It's like saying thing during the 1990s were good, because the average American got to fly around in corporate jets. They didn't; only CEOs did. Roman Citizens were the elite upper class of their time. All the indoor plumbing and education was for this upper 5-10%, the Citizens. The rest of the people were slaves or peasant farmers.
No, don't get me wrong. I believe that you met this guy. I just wonder if he's simplifying and exaggerating the story to it's common meta-myth. There's a lot of good story tellers out there.
He said they would laugh at feature requests by users, play foosball and drink beer all day...basically one big party while IE slowly and surely crushed them.
Isn't this kind of the meta-myth that we tell about the downfall of any corporate giant? The modern-day version of the fox and the hare?
I've heard the same thing about The Big Three, IBM, Sybase, etc. etc. Any industry leader that lost its place did so because of arrogance and ignoring or ridiculing customer desires.
I'm not saying you didn't meet this guy, but how hard of a story is this to pass off to a random stranger computer geek at the airport? We all buy into this story -- that's why it succeeds as a meta-myth. I bought it at first glance, before I stopped and thought about it.
And how is this is different from America where 5-10% are rich and get premium health care, everyone else gets crap and has to work at a shitty job their entire lives?
As much as I think things need to change, things really are better for the average american compared to the peasant of 500 years ago. First, we have an amazing health care system. 500 years ago, 50% of people died in their first year. Another 50% died before age 25. And then the rest died before 60. In the US, the average lifespan is 75-78? And infant mortality is nowhere near 50%.
Secondly, Americans, all Americans, have compulsory education up to the 12th grade. That was unheard of 100 years ago.
We also have incredible infrastructure as part of our daily lives. Most people have indoor plumbing, electricity, heating, sewage systems, and roads. The work we have to do is relatively safe and limited compared to working on a farm. We can retire before we are elderly.
That's just a few things. While I agree we need to make changes, things are much better than they were 500 years ago.
I can't see any difference between a belief being common, and being commonly believed. If it's commonly believed, it must be common, right? And if it's common, it must be commonly *believed*, right? A belief can't actually be common if very few people actually believe it, could it? "Well, very few people actually believe in the Hollow Earth, but it is a common belief". There is no difference.
As for the supposed incoherence, I'm not seeing it.
I don't know, it just seems sort or sloppy -- mixing a metaphor of philosophy-as-vampire-flick with some kind of memeology. I'm not sold on the hybridization of philosophical combat and virology. To the point, the conclusion makes no sense:
If Plato 'killed' it so long ago, why is it still freely running around today? If it were 'dead' by Plato's hand I would think we would only be reading about it as something ancient Greeks believed before Plato put a stop to it with his persuasive argument(s). It doesn't seem like Plato had much impact on how common the idea is, or even how commonly it's believed;)
Plato having more or less shoved a stake in their heart ages ago; but they are quite common and quite commonly believed...
So Plato killed them 1,000 years ago, yet their still "quite common and quite commonly believed"? That's some quite incoherent bullshit you've got there. What's the difference between being "common" and being "commonly believed"?
Roman Citizens *were* the elite. They were the 5-10% of their population that didn't work in the field. That's the way it was in every city, from the beginning of civilization ( about 5 - 10,000 years ago, depending on the part of the world ) up until the industrial revolution. The Roman citizen wasn't like what we think of today as American citizen or German citizen. The revolutions of the 1700s brought about a system where *common* people became citizens and enjoyed rights. Before that, they were all slaves, serfs, or subjects.
Actually most every Roman citizen had at least one slave to do the work for them.
This of what you're saying right there. That puts the population of Rome at *at least* 50% slave. That's great if you're not a slave, and if you are, well, you're a slave.
And then, you have all the people working in the fields in the hinterlands outside of Rome to feed the elite citizen class while they took baths, did gymnastics, went to school, held meetings, etc. etc. So yeah, life was great for the upper 5-10% of society who were the elite. Everybody else feed and clothed them.
Science during the Roman empire was very popular. The knowledge, inventions, progress, vast libraries etc were unparallelled.
Popular? As in 'popular' among the ruling class, the 5-10% of the population who didn't spend all of their time from age 10 on in the fields, who actually had enough free time and money to be educated?
Up until the industrial revolution, there wasn't anything 'popular' except working in the fields. Popular means "of the people". Although I admit, its meaning has kind of change since the average person who lives in an industrialized country lives like a king of yesteryear.
I don't know, call me old school, but "articles" with a dollar sign "S" in the title ( "DEM HEALTH RX A POI$ON PILL IN NY
TERRIFYING 57% TAX LOOMS FOR BIGGEST EARNERS" ) don't really strike me as honest brokers of information. R Worst thing that can happen is that we go back to the top marginal tax rate of 90% for top earners like we had in the fifties, a time of tremendous growth. People will be motivated to keep their wealth in the productive economy, and invest in the nation, rather than pull it out and hit that 90% income tax. We'd be a wealthy nation once again.
If Google hadn't come along when it did, someone else would have stepped up.
Doesn't change the fact that it *was* them, who was able to do it when nobody else had been able to. So I think that yes, they did contribute a lot to open source development. It's not enough to have a good idea, or believe that someone will eventually get around to it; someone actually has to sit down and *do* it. If google hadn't done it then, we would be that much further behind in internet search technology.
ALL current Social Security recipients have received more in benefits than they EVER paid into the system.
Although I agree with you that social security ( or "destitution insurance", as I think of it ) is a Good Thing, it's not correct to say that "ALL" current recipients have paid in less than they got out. If you've been paying in your whole working life, and just started receiving checks a few months ago, there's no way you've gotten out more than you put in. And if you die next month, you will have put in way more than you paid out, and it will stay that way forever.
They use the Linux platform to the absolute max, leveraging all the blood and sweat Linux developers poured into its development over the past 15 years, and yet, not contributing back any of their most significant enhancements.
Not contributing back!? Dude, they gave us *google*. Remember what it was like before google? When internet search was basically voo-doo crapshoots, that worked 25% of the time? They gave us a search engine that actually *worked*. Before that, you basically had to bookmark or memorize internet sites that you liked. Good luck actually finding what you were looking for without having an actual site in mind beforehand.
I think that alone has probably spurred the development of free software. Imagine being able to *find things* on the internet!
A simple thought experiment will show this. Imagine that you experienced the color red. Could you point to it and say 'look there is something red'? If you could, that motion of your arm and the words coming out of your mouth are certainly caused by neural firing, so your consciousness, whatever it is, MUST be able to control the action of neurons. Otherwise 'consciousness' would be an ephemeral by-product of being alive, and we would never be able to talk about it let alone post on slashdot.
Well, I agree with you. I think there is a will, a free-will, that motivates the human being to action. At least, that's what it feels like to me. I don't think the CEMI theory makes claims about free will any more than regular neurophysics.
Unless we're going to buy into an non-physical theory of consciousness, then we're starting from the point that the brain generates consciousness and will, somehow. Traditional neurophysics says that mind is like a program running on a microchip, and that EM radiation from the circuitry is a noisy side-effect, while CEMI theory says that the EM field generated is or at least is part of consciousness.
Call me a luddite, but this sounds bad, in a hybrid nanotech-grey-goo GM Crop mash-up kind of way.
If they're using these DNA orgami structures in cells, what are the chances that there will be harmful combinations of DNA peeling of and doing all kinds of whatever inside your cells?
If they are using these outside of organisms, what are the chances that random bacteria are just going to slurp up these bits of DNA and do all kinds of whatever with them? Actually, that sounds less bad than using them in humans.
Thanks for taking the time to look into this and proffer your expert opinion. I would like to correct or clarify a few things.
The CEMI theory seems to turn this on it's head and say that the global EM field is controlled by 'free will' and can also effect the firing of individual neurons.
I don't think CEMI theory says this ( please correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't encountered it ). The global EM field is said to be consciousness itself ( self-awareness, qualia, etc ), rather than the total state of synaptic connections between neurons.
The real nail in the coffin of CEMI though would have to be the first law of thermodynamics. Regardless of the spatial scale, modifying the global EM field requires energy, but there is no known source for this energy.
AFAIK, CEMI theory doesn't posit that there is any EM field or energy coming from anywhere other than neuron activity. Remember what you started out with: "The cannon of neuroscience is that the electrical activity of each individual neuron sums to form the global EM field." What CEMI theory is saying is that the global EM field is 'consciousness', the mind, not the state of neurons. It's not positing that something exists which has not been demonstrated. The brain's neurons 'modify' the global EM field all the time, if you want to look at it that way, because they are generating it with their electrical activity.
I think I can try to boil down CEMI theory a little bit:
Neuron activity creates an EM field
Changes in that EM field, as measure by EEGs, etc, correspond to changes in consciousness
Introducing outside EM stimulation ( electrical wires, electrode implants, giant magnet stimulations ) also cause changes in consciousness
Therefore, the EM field generated by neuron activity *is* consciousness, or the mind, itself.
Slashdot Mirror
So you're claiming that, since the cold war, the US, the USSR, and possibly other countries have been testing experimental aircraft that, for example, are about a mile long and cigar shaped, with no other distinguishing features, such as wings, etc., or can accelerate in a moment from 100s of miles per hour to 1000s of miles per hour, execute maneuvers such as 90 degree turns while going 1000s of miles per hour, or are even capable of "flight" in deep ocean water and able to emerge and fly in the sky?
All of these phenomena ( and more! ) have been reported by multiple credible witnesses, in multiple vessels and craft ( aircraft, boats, submarines ), and tracked on radar.
When I have seen these claims, the people are usually saying that the UFO did some odd aerobatic maneuver that is impossible for conventional aircraft. They really seem to believe this. To them, the only explanation is that the aircraft they see must not be man made.
The problem is when these objects ( or whatever they are ) are witnessed by multiple credible witnesses ( pilot and co-pilot, air force personnel and officers, ground crewm etc ) and also tracked on radar.
[citations desperately needed]
Check out the Disclosure Project. Their initial press conference had over two hours of pilots, Air Force personnel, and air traffic controllers talking about incidents of UFOs that were clearly not man-made ( size, speed, manueverability ), and either witnessed by multiple people, or both visually and on radar. No abductees or contactees or anything like that, just person after person saying "Pilots reported an object that we tracked on radar for 10 minutes, at which time it did an 90-degree turn sped away at more than 1,000 miles per hour..." .
Yeah, the guy who started the project is a Doctor gone of the deep end with Herbal cures, but I don't see how that hurts the credibility of any of the witnesses.
Well, there *is* a link between government conspiracy theories and X-Files *spin-off* shows. The pilot episode of Lone Gunman featured in its plot hijacking of a plane that was flown remotely into World Trade Center Towers.
/>
Of course, this is a case where correlation is not causation. The pilot episode of Lone Gunman aired some 6 months before the 9/11 attacks! <weird X-file theme music
After actually reading over the review, it looks like they are adding a lot of role-playing elements to it. There are environments, such as the bar and the bridge, where you just kind of hang out and listen to people talk. This reminds me of the "WoW" preview they had in WCII with that alternate character -- what was his name, beastmaster? Anywho, are you unlocked him, you got to a gameplay model and map that was more like an MMORPG than a regular level with a mission. There was a village as a launching point out of which you adventured. It seemed like a kind of practice run for an MMORPG, to fleshout game-play issues. Seems like the same thing is going on in SCII.
And it looks like Blizzard has decided that the real money is in online gaming subscriptions. Sucks. Would really like to play SC:Ghost, though, and be a lonely little trooper causing trouble in a big ol' map.
The crux is that you really can't teach programming.
I was going to qualify this, but you know, you nailed it. In programming, beyond your basic loops and syntax, is a completely unique problem, and you are probably the only person in the universe who is ever going to encounter it. What you have to do is start figuring out how to solve problems.
Now, a teacher can help get you trained for solving problems, by giving practice problems and walking students through the frustration of solving them, but ultimately, a programmer has to be able to diagnose and creatively solve their own problems.
Like I said, the only people who were able to enjoy a modern sewage system and hot and cold water were the Roman Citizens who lived in Rome, and perhaps a few other larger cities. Everyone else, the 95% of the population, lived in conditions that were not that different from 10,000 years earlier.
That's just a few things. While I agree we need to make changes, things are much better than they were 500 years ago.
Yes, but things were also far better in the Roman emire than they were 500 years ago. They also had indoor plumbing, sewage, heating, roads (no electricity thought). They also had free education. Their only limitation was the level of scientific discovery at the time however the amount of invention created at that time was nothing short of incredible.
People often make the mistake of thinking that all those benefits were enjoyed by the common people. They weren't. They were enjoyed by the upper 5-10% of the population, the Roman Citizens, who lived in Rome. The average person was just a peasant farmer, or a slave. A Roman Citizen is not like an American Citizen. In the US, and much of the industrialized world, all the people are citizens. In Rome, it was the 5-10% of the people that were citizens.
All that happened during the fall of the Roman Empire is that the elites lost their city. The life for an average person in Italy changed not one iota.
It's like saying thing during the 1990s were good, because the average American got to fly around in corporate jets. They didn't; only CEOs did. Roman Citizens were the elite upper class of their time. All the indoor plumbing and education was for this upper 5-10%, the Citizens. The rest of the people were slaves or peasant farmers.
No, don't get me wrong. I believe that you met this guy. I just wonder if he's simplifying and exaggerating the story to it's common meta-myth. There's a lot of good story tellers out there.
He said they would laugh at feature requests by users, play foosball and drink beer all day...basically one big party while IE slowly and surely crushed them.
Isn't this kind of the meta-myth that we tell about the downfall of any corporate giant? The modern-day version of the fox and the hare?
I've heard the same thing about The Big Three, IBM, Sybase, etc. etc. Any industry leader that lost its place did so because of arrogance and ignoring or ridiculing customer desires.
I'm not saying you didn't meet this guy, but how hard of a story is this to pass off to a random stranger computer geek at the airport? We all buy into this story -- that's why it succeeds as a meta-myth. I bought it at first glance, before I stopped and thought about it.
And how is this is different from America where 5-10% are rich and get premium health care, everyone else gets crap and has to work at a shitty job their entire lives?
As much as I think things need to change, things really are better for the average american compared to the peasant of 500 years ago. First, we have an amazing health care system. 500 years ago, 50% of people died in their first year. Another 50% died before age 25. And then the rest died before 60. In the US, the average lifespan is 75-78? And infant mortality is nowhere near 50%.
Secondly, Americans, all Americans, have compulsory education up to the 12th grade. That was unheard of 100 years ago.
We also have incredible infrastructure as part of our daily lives. Most people have indoor plumbing, electricity, heating, sewage systems, and roads. The work we have to do is relatively safe and limited compared to working on a farm. We can retire before we are elderly.
That's just a few things. While I agree we need to make changes, things are much better than they were 500 years ago.
As for the supposed incoherence, I'm not seeing it.
I don't know, it just seems sort or sloppy -- mixing a metaphor of philosophy-as-vampire-flick with some kind of memeology. I'm not sold on the hybridization of philosophical combat and virology. To the point, the conclusion makes no sense: If Plato 'killed' it so long ago, why is it still freely running around today? If it were 'dead' by Plato's hand I would think we would only be reading about it as something ancient Greeks believed before Plato put a stop to it with his persuasive argument(s). It doesn't seem like Plato had much impact on how common the idea is, or even how commonly it's believed ;)
Plato having more or less shoved a stake in their heart ages ago; but they are quite common and quite commonly believed...
So Plato killed them 1,000 years ago, yet their still "quite common and quite commonly believed"? That's some quite incoherent bullshit you've got there. What's the difference between being "common" and being "commonly believed"?
Actually most every Roman citizen had at least one slave to do the work for them.
This of what you're saying right there. That puts the population of Rome at *at least* 50% slave. That's great if you're not a slave, and if you are, well, you're a slave.
And then, you have all the people working in the fields in the hinterlands outside of Rome to feed the elite citizen class while they took baths, did gymnastics, went to school, held meetings, etc. etc. So yeah, life was great for the upper 5-10% of society who were the elite. Everybody else feed and clothed them.
this means verifying the Linux kernel would give an estimated cost of 60,000 man-years.
I take it you've never read _The Mythical Man Moth_, starring Richard Gere.
It might take 60,000 man-years, or it just might take 2 years of one talented, bright, but a bit stuck up and condescending hacker.
Science during the Roman empire was very popular. The knowledge, inventions, progress, vast libraries etc were unparallelled.
Popular? As in 'popular' among the ruling class, the 5-10% of the population who didn't spend all of their time from age 10 on in the fields, who actually had enough free time and money to be educated?
Up until the industrial revolution, there wasn't anything 'popular' except working in the fields. Popular means "of the people". Although I admit, its meaning has kind of change since the average person who lives in an industrialized country lives like a king of yesteryear.
I don't know, call me old school, but "articles" with a dollar sign "S" in the title ( "DEM HEALTH RX A POI$ON PILL IN NY TERRIFYING 57% TAX LOOMS FOR BIGGEST EARNERS" ) don't really strike me as honest brokers of information. R
Worst thing that can happen is that we go back to the top marginal tax rate of 90% for top earners like we had in the fifties, a time of tremendous growth. People will be motivated to keep their wealth in the productive economy, and invest in the nation, rather than pull it out and hit that 90% income tax. We'd be a wealthy nation once again.
the tax rate will be 60-70% in a few years
Who modded this informative? How about +1 Right-wing paranoid socialist revolution fantasy?
If Google hadn't come along when it did, someone else would have stepped up.
Doesn't change the fact that it *was* them, who was able to do it when nobody else had been able to. So I think that yes, they did contribute a lot to open source development. It's not enough to have a good idea, or believe that someone will eventually get around to it; someone actually has to sit down and *do* it. If google hadn't done it then, we would be that much further behind in internet search technology.
ALL current Social Security recipients have received more in benefits than they EVER paid into the system.
Although I agree with you that social security ( or "destitution insurance", as I think of it ) is a Good Thing, it's not correct to say that "ALL" current recipients have paid in less than they got out. If you've been paying in your whole working life, and just started receiving checks a few months ago, there's no way you've gotten out more than you put in. And if you die next month, you will have put in way more than you paid out, and it will stay that way forever.
They use the Linux platform to the absolute max, leveraging all the blood and sweat Linux developers poured into its development over the past 15 years, and yet, not contributing back any of their most significant enhancements.
Not contributing back!? Dude, they gave us *google*. Remember what it was like before google? When internet search was basically voo-doo crapshoots, that worked 25% of the time? They gave us a search engine that actually *worked*. Before that, you basically had to bookmark or memorize internet sites that you liked. Good luck actually finding what you were looking for without having an actual site in mind beforehand.
I think that alone has probably spurred the development of free software. Imagine being able to *find things* on the internet!
More dangerous still is the non-confrontational PC mentality that prevents those dopes from being called out and hung out to dry
I've seen plenty of Nerd head-butt wars to know that calling out anyone who "knows better" is a fast ticket to nowhere.
A simple thought experiment will show this. Imagine that you experienced the color red. Could you point to it and say 'look there is something red'? If you could, that motion of your arm and the words coming out of your mouth are certainly caused by neural firing, so your consciousness, whatever it is, MUST be able to control the action of neurons. Otherwise 'consciousness' would be an ephemeral by-product of being alive, and we would never be able to talk about it let alone post on slashdot.
Well, I agree with you. I think there is a will, a free-will, that motivates the human being to action. At least, that's what it feels like to me. I don't think the CEMI theory makes claims about free will any more than regular neurophysics.
Unless we're going to buy into an non-physical theory of consciousness, then we're starting from the point that the brain generates consciousness and will, somehow. Traditional neurophysics says that mind is like a program running on a microchip, and that EM radiation from the circuitry is a noisy side-effect, while CEMI theory says that the EM field generated is or at least is part of consciousness.
Call me a luddite, but this sounds bad, in a hybrid nanotech-grey-goo GM Crop mash-up kind of way.
If they're using these DNA orgami structures in cells, what are the chances that there will be harmful combinations of DNA peeling of and doing all kinds of whatever inside your cells?
If they are using these outside of organisms, what are the chances that random bacteria are just going to slurp up these bits of DNA and do all kinds of whatever with them? Actually, that sounds less bad than using them in humans.
The CEMI theory seems to turn this on it's head and say that the global EM field is controlled by 'free will' and can also effect the firing of individual neurons.
I don't think CEMI theory says this ( please correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't encountered it ). The global EM field is said to be consciousness itself ( self-awareness, qualia, etc ), rather than the total state of synaptic connections between neurons.
The real nail in the coffin of CEMI though would have to be the first law of thermodynamics. Regardless of the spatial scale, modifying the global EM field requires energy, but there is no known source for this energy.
AFAIK, CEMI theory doesn't posit that there is any EM field or energy coming from anywhere other than neuron activity. Remember what you started out with: "The cannon of neuroscience is that the electrical activity of each individual neuron sums to form the global EM field." What CEMI theory is saying is that the global EM field is 'consciousness', the mind, not the state of neurons. It's not positing that something exists which has not been demonstrated. The brain's neurons 'modify' the global EM field all the time, if you want to look at it that way, because they are generating it with their electrical activity.
I think I can try to boil down CEMI theory a little bit:
Therefore, the EM field generated by neuron activity *is* consciousness, or the mind, itself.