Such as, maybe there's more to life than just chemical reactions.

Where is the indication that this light (which is barely visible to instruments, let alone humans) does not come from "just chemical reactions"?

This finding is certainly interesting, but it does not at all contribute to "spiritual thinking".

▲

I_Lorem 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Bioluminescence IS a natural chemical reaction, though.

▲

Antibabelic 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Are you implying the light discussed in the paper is supernatural?

▲

ochronus 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

More, how? Come on, be more exact.

▲

jodrellblank 3 days ago | parent [-]

You be more exact; I’ve spent plenty of time in internet woo-woo ideas and I don’t think I’ve heard of auras since the nineties, reading about Kirlian photographs from a hundred years before that.

Here you are saying that some unspecified group is deriving some unspecified ideas which are, you claim, life riskingly serious.

Just for the sake of making HN interesting to read, can you stop with the one sentence comments that vaguely imply you know something we don’t, and be more exact, explanatory and specific?

	▲	ochronus 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		no ;)