The Truth About Long Hair

This information about hair has been hidden from the public since the Viet Nam War .Our culture leads people to believe that hair style is a matter of personal preference, that hair style is a matter of fashion and/or convenience, and that how people wear their hair is simply a cosmetic issue. Back in the Vietnam war however, an entirely different picture emerged, one that has been carefully covered up and hidden from public view.

In the early nineties, Sally [name changed to protect privacy] was married to a licensed psychologist who worked at a VA Medical hospital. He worked with combat veterans with PTSD, post traumatic stress disorder. Most of them had served in Vietnam.

Sally said, “I remember clearly an evening when my husband came back to our apartment on Doctor’s Circle carrying a thick official looking folder in his hands. Inside were hundreds of pages of certain studies commissioned by the government. He was in shock from the contents. What he read in those documents completely changed his life. From that moment on my conservative middle of the road husband grew his hair and beard and never cut them again. What is more, the VA Medical center let him do it, and other very conservative men in the staff followed his example.

As I read the documents, I learned why. It seems that during the Vietnam War special forces in the war department had sent undercover experts to comb American Indian Reservations looking for talented scouts, for tough young men trained to move stealthily through rough terrain. They were especially looking for men with outstanding, almost supernatural, tracking abilities. Before being approached, these carefully selected men were extensively documented as experts in tracking and survival.

With the usual enticements, the well proven smooth phrases used to enroll new recruits, some of these Indian trackers were then enlisted. Once enlisted, an amazing thing happened. Whatever talents and skills they had possessed on the reservation seemed to mysteriously disappear, as recruit after recruit failed to perform as expected in the field.

Serious causalities and failures of performance led the government to contract expensive testing of these recruits, and this is what was found.

When questioned about their failure to perform as expected, the older recruits replied consistently that when they received their required military haircuts, they could no longer ‘sense’ the enemy, they could no longer access a ‘sixth sense’, their ‘intuition’ no longer was reliable, they couldn’t ‘read’ subtle signs as well or access subtle extrasensory information.

So the testing institute recruited more Indian trackers, let them keep their long hair, and tested them in multiple areas. Then they would pair two men together who had received the same scores on all the tests. They would let one man in the pair keep his hair long, and gave the other man a military haircut. Then the two men retook the tests.

Time after time the man with long hair kept making high scores. Time after time, the man with the short hair failed the tests in which he had previously scored high scores.

Here is a Typical Test:

The recruit is sleeping out in the woods. An armed ‘enemy’ approaches the sleeping man. The long haired man is awakened out of his sleep by a strong sense of danger and gets away long before the enemy is close, long before any sounds from the approaching enemy are audible.

In another version of this test the long haired man senses an approach and somehow intuits that the enemy will perform a physical attack. He follows his ‘sixth sense’ and stays still, pretending to be sleeping, but quickly grabs the attacker and ‘kills’ him as the attacker reaches down to strangle him.

This same man, after having passed these and other tests, then received a military haircut and consistently failed these tests, and many other tests that he had previously passed.

So the document recommended that all Indian trackers be exempt from military haircuts. In fact, it required that trackers keep their hair long.”

Please conceder making a donation to Worldwidehippies to help us bring you more articles like this one. Click the donation button on the right side of this page.

The mammalian body has evolved over millions of years. Survival skills of human and animal at times seem almost supernatural. Science is constantly coming up with more discoveries about the amazing abilities of man and animal to survive. Each part of the body has highly sensitive work to perform for the survival and well being of the body as a whole.The body has a reason for every part of itself.

Hair is an extension of the nervous system, it can be correctly seen as exteriorized nerves, a type of highly evolved ‘feelers’ or ‘antennae’ that transmit vast amounts of important information to the brain stem, the limbic system, and the neocortex.

Not only does hair in people, including facial hair in men, provide an information highway reaching the brain, hair also emits energy, the electromagnetic energy emitted by the brain into the outer environment. This has been seen in Kirlian photography when a person is photographed with long hair and then rephotographed after the hair is cut.

When hair is cut, receiving and sending transmissions to and from the environment are greatly hampered. This results in numbing-out .

Cutting of hair is a contributing factor to unawareness of environmental distress in local ecosystems. It is also a contributing factor to insensitivity in relationships of all kinds. It contributes to sexual frustration.

Conclusion:

In searching for solutions for the distress in our world, it may be time for us to consider that many of our most basic assumptions about reality are in error. It may be that a major part of the solution is looking at us in the face each morning when we see ourselves in the mirror.

The story of Sampson and Delilah in the Bible has a lot of encoded truth to tell us. When Delilah cut Sampson’s hair, the once undefeatable Sampson was defeated.

Reported by C. Young

Share/Bookmark

108 thoughts on “The Truth About Long Hair”

  1. We are each uniquely individual per our very own personal DNA. Time to stop with blanket statements regarding anything human. We all know this but due to consistent primitive beliefs and erroneous thought processes, we just can’t help ourselves from grouping people together – whether we or they want us to. As Raelians, we prefer our hair to be longish because of the fine tuning-in it provides, but we care more about individualism and the desires of preference. Now, to go on about the business of how to reverse haterism…

  2. I like having my hair long, it really does make me feel better. It’s more reflective of who I really am, I think. However I am skeptical of this claims in this article only because of the lack of sources. Is there any way the author can provide links to the original studies?

    Thanks!

  3. I grew long hair after leaving the controlled corporate world, because I wanted to express my creative side. I was a designer, and still a designer, but do it with my style now. I dislike the norm, and believe uniqueness sets us apart. Facial Hair on men is also a creative statement tailored individually as an artistic sensual masterpiece which evokes caricature, and individualism.
    As far as intuitiveness, I think that being comfortable with who you are, opens the door to a more open mind. The electricity thingy, well no one can see the electricity we consume, but we know it’s there, so why not believe we posses it and transfer it.

  4. Far to one side -> Self-centered.
    Far to the other side -> Empathetic…
    To practice empathy builds the ability to put yourself in the shoes of another and ‘feel’ what they feel in certain situations.
    Our body is a transmitter of electric frequencies, -> an EEG shows these frequencies…
    Since our body transmits electrical frequency at the ELF range, the longer the antennae the more apt to pick up these frequencies.
    If we transmit frequency doesn’t it seem likely that we receive frequency? What do you think is an appropriate antennae to receive these frequencies?
    If you have short hair and have never practiced empathy and have ‘lost’ this ability or it has atrophied then how can you even stand to post on this thread?
    To have long hair, one ‘can’ be more sensitive to others and be more empathetic but it still is a conscious choice that one must make to build and exercise this ability.
    Reading this story I wonder if the more hair one has, the more sensitive the person is to someone approaching through sound but I still believe, it’s my opinion, that hair acts like an antennae in picking up electromagnetic frequency and our bodies have an ability to translate these frequencies in a way that is yet unknown scientifically but right now we are working on a computer that is reading our minds and thoughts through frequency alone and through science, it’s only a matter of time that you might realize that the many frequencies we emit just might be able to be picked up through the total hair on our bodies but one must still exercise this ability other wise it will atrophy and you might as well keep your hair short because you will always be self-centered… Even the US army has put millions of $’s into telepathic research at a noted University and the first step in building telepathic abilities is to exercise your empathy for you start to move away from being self-centered into trying to understand “how the other person feels” in certain situations and once you build from there telepathy starts to come but one must have the antennae to receive these frequencies. Is there scientific evidence of such? You just have to ask yourself one question, how many senses would you have if ALL hair were removed from your body, inside and out. For one thing you would be deaf and could not excrete anything from your lungs, like mucus. You’d probably be blind and you would be very numb to your surroundings without the millions of hair that cover your body. You ever wonder why your sexual organs come with hair?

  5. The thing that the “skeptics” here in the comments section ‘ignore’ is the fact that there are many blind creatures out there that rely solely on hair to ‘see’ the world around them! Hair inside your ear IS what gives us the sense of sound and hair in many different forms give us another sense that many people baulk at as being almost non-scientific yet without “hair” in many of our senses such as the hairlike structures inside your eyes (Rods and cones). and if you still think that hair has no scientific value in our senses, try shaving the whiskers off of any animal for these feelers give the animal a better “sense” of their surroundings.

      1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereocilia_(inner_ear) Hair in the inner ear that gives us the amazing ability to “hear”…

        There are two different types of fluid that surround the hair cells of the inner ear. The endolymph is the fluid that surrounds the apical surfaces of hair cells. Potassium is the major cation in the endolymph and is thought to be responsible for carrying the receptor currents in the cochlea. Perilymph is found surrounding the sides and the bases of the hair cells. Perilymph is low in potassium and high in sodium. The different ionic makeups of the surrounding fluid in addition to the resting potential of the hair cell creates a potential difference across the apical membrane of the hair cell, so potassium enters when transduction channels open. An influx of potassium ions depolarizes the cell and causes the release of a neurotransmitter that can initiate nerve impulses in the sensory neurons that synapse on the base of the hair cell.

        Stereocilia (along with the entirety of the hair cell) in mammals can be damaged or destroyed by excessive loud noises, disease, and toxins and are not regeneratable. Environmental noise induced hearing impairment is probably the most prevalent noise health effect according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Abnormal structure/organization of a bundle of stereocilia can also cause deafness and in turn create balance problems for an individual. In other vertebrates, if the hair cell is harmed, supporting cells will divide and replace the damaged hair cells

  6. I’ve hair op to my lower back and I grew up in the Northern Swedish forests. I learned how to hunt and to ride horses just as everyone else. I have however no particular tracking skills, though not for lack of trying. There is no real difference between the long and shorthaired rangers/hunters here. The guy (Pelle) who is considered the best is practically bald. Here long hair and a beard simply keeps your face warm in winter. No more.

  7. Just reading the comments was interesting as well as funny; I lol’d while reading some of them. Some people actually make valid points, some are hilarious, others resort to personal attacks, while others are genuinely attracted to the hair-intuition correlation, almost wanting it to be true; but believing far to easily in an internet article with no sources.

    This made me think about how demonstrable, unbiased and repeated experiments can prove something to be true. The problem I see is that the really big questions usually don’t allow themselves to be proven with the scientific method.

  8. My opinion – To the comments made about the balding or bald or short haired for life, etc… I have just recently cut my hair, it did in fact give me a sense of assertiveness, tough to describe, but I changed.

    I think long hair does do all that was stated, not to say that if you have no hair or short hair you are desensitized or anything… maybe, just maybe it is like when you lose a sense all other senses become enhanced… perhaps, when you lose your hair some other sense becomes stronger.

  9. I have been a cosmetologist for 30+ yrs…. This is my personal experience… I have had long hair for most of my life but from time to time I would cut it off to different lengths. Each time I cut my hair short meaning from over the ears to my shoulders I did find my attitude had changed. I always regretted cutting it of after the fact. I definitely felt different for each and every short style. Over the ears made me feel tougher and rougher as well as less confident and unhappy even though the cut looked great. Having my hair long and right now it’s to my buttocks, gives me a better sense of well being and less stressful thought process…. I remember getting a short cut and then feeling less passionate about life. Regret was the first emotion even though my hair style looked great… My long hair I guess you could say is like a security blanket. It makes me feel more like a woman. More sensual, passionate and more together with the feminine side. In 30+ yrs I have noticed how people who are used to short hair get all out of sorts when it grows out and they act differently until it is cut short once again…. Many young people, women in general who have short hair seen to be short tempered or confident in a military type personality…. the female with long hair seems to be much more attentive and less possessive over life situ’s. For me it will be long hair until I leave this earth. Remember this is just my opinion for what I have seen and experienced… I can make my long hair look short by styling it and it does make me feel different then when I leave it styled in a longer look.

    1. I too have long hair. Incase you didn’t catch it, I’m also a guy. I have had my hair cut short three times in my 50 years. Each time I have had it cut short, I felt bad. A good way to say it is off-colored. When my hair was short, people around me totally changed their treatment of me, and their opinions as well. It was as though I was only respectable if I had short hair. As my hair grew back, I got my ‘status’ back as well. I know this is only because of social aesthetics. For myself, again, I wasn’t happy when my hair was short. It really changed my disposition and attitude, just like the two posters before me. My hair is long again, down to my waste, and curly. In order to get anything done, I have to keep it in a hair-knot. I have noticed that there is a change between having my hair down and free, and having it tied up. I am an artist and try to work intuitively. I’m going to try a little experiment and see if I can tell any difference between an image painted quickly with my hair tied-up and my hair unfettered. LOL….I know to some this article sounds like a long-haired man trying to justify his long hair. To me, it is another fascinating unanswered question to puzzle over, kinda like a Zen Buddhist koan…..’what is the sound of one hand? Whether this article is true or not, whether the phenomenon is true or not, how fun to ponder on it! When I think of the types of men who keep long hair, it makes one wonder………….?

    1. Native American and American Indian are the two “accepted” terms used to refer to the native population of the United States.

      1. We have many First Nations friends, our best friends, in fact. I myself am Cherokee. “Indian” is the Euro word for who we really are- the Americans who were here before the white man. Native American or First Nations is the preferred term of choice. Referring to one as an Indian is like referring to one as “Bud/Bubba” (depending on whether you are in the north or south-haha!)

  10. You all are arguing about a collection of personal anecdotes. Indians doing poorly at taking after getting a crew cut is not proof that long hair= intuition. Your story about being bald and “in-tune” likewise does not refute this non-fact

  11. Protest.

    On behalf of all bald sensitive women and men everywhere.
    And I’m indigenous.

    I mean aside from cultural sensitivities with the role in Indigenous society.
    I lost my hair and I assure that the people who know me know that I’m incredibly sensitive to the world around me.

    No hair and in tune.

    Just par for thought.
    Nothing is absolute and that in itself is glory infinite.

    Stop bashing.
    It’s showing your ugly and insensitivities.

    Peace.

    1. Thank you! I have had short hair for decades, and have no intention of growing it long. I work as a massage therapist, and often rely on sensitivity and intuition–which has increased over the years with practice. (Would it be greater if I had long hair? Guess we’ll never know!)

  12. Is it possible that the men who were less intuitive after a hair cut were actually experiencing some sort of inadequacy due to the loss of something they identified with? I’m just wondering.

      1. yes find men and women who were trained trackers that don’t have long hair… let them grow their hair out and see if they improve stay the same or no change at all. Honestly the idea that it could have been a social makes since and if the psycologist didn’t think of it he isn’t all that good at his job

  13. We have a world-wide population of laboratory subjects where most women have long hair and most men have short hair or no hair. It has been widely observed that women are more sensitive and have “women’s intuition.” So the theory is confirmed. Long hair is better for some things . . including being woodland scouts.

    But that’s not the whole story. There are some endeavors where it’s better to be focused and structured and not so darn intuitive and I suggest that may be why men generally do better in business, engineering, politics and war.

    This is a very interesting subject and I’m sorry it has deteriorated into insults and vulgarity.

    1. “contrary to common belief, it’s not just women who harbor this mysterious instinct. “Men can be powerfully intuitive — they have the same capabilities as women,” says Orloff. “But in our culture, we view intuition as something that’s warm and fuzzy, or not masculine, so men have often lost touch with those feelings.”

      American women, on the other hand, are encouraged to be receptive to their inner thoughts, so it appears that they have more intuition than men, says Orloff. “The reality is, girls are praised for being sensitive while boys are urged to be more linear in their thinking rather than listening to their feelings,” she says.”

      http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/power-of-female-intuition

      It’s not that women are naturally more intuitive, that’s just a cultural stereotype. Like men being unsuited to take care of children. Can we please keep the casual sexism to a minimum?

    2. As for why men do better in business, engineering, politics and war.

      Stuff like this should explain it pretty well. From wikipedia.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STEM_fields#Women_in_STEM

      “Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (United States) are often underrepresented in these fields, holding less than 25% of the jobs. Studies have been conducted to explain this pattern, such as mechanisms in recruitment and hiring processes.[20] On average, women in STEM fields earn 33% more than those in non-STEM professions. They also experience a smaller wage gap compared to men.However, women can be found as leaders in top professions around the country. These include the U.S. Department of Defense, NASA, and the National Science Foundation (NFS).”

      It’s not that they’re less good at being “focused and structured”, it’s sexist hiring policies and altercate stereotypes.

  14. Having worked with cancer patience am able to see their perception of the sensory world and there’s more than six! Extended awareness is soul deep! You either have it or you don’t. Multidimensional, Bi-Polar, such perceptions is the brain processing. Lables do not mean experience. Buddhist monks are highly adept at multisensory tasks and oh there’s so much more but we will leave you to your thoughts with this 😀

  15. My personal experience has been that when I cut my hair really short i.e. a crew cut, I become more physically aggressive and explosive. When I grow my hair out I find that I am mellow. That said, my hair is always short (above my ears.) and I am mostly always hot tempered. My brother has long hair and is gentle and kind. ~ Just my thoughts.

  16. This is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve ever read on the internet.

    We’re supposed to believe a claim based on at least TRIPLE hearsay? Seriously?

    Provide one name, one page of the study, ANYTHING. Without it, this is nothing but a traveling medicine show, and you dumb fucks are lapping up American snake oil.

    1. You might try to be a bit kinder about it. In my experience hostility only makes people double down on their beliefs. I’m trying to remember the case study about it. I think it was in “Influence: Science and Practice”, but I don’t have a copy at the moment.

    2. SigBab, I can see my reflection in your shiny shaved head from here. LOL. Just like many reports on the internet,,, we read it, process it and take from it what we will. But I personally believe there are some truths to this.

  17. I have long hair past my butt ..I have had long hair for many years and even when I cut just a few inches off it I just want to cry about it …its like my whole sensory perception gets all whacked out of control….so I for one will say YES …..long hair does have something to do with your preception of things around you ….also want to mention that I have had lots of compliments on my long hair …by the way its silvery /white color so color has nothing to do with your preception of things …just wanted to throw that in …but long hair is also Beautiful to look at rather it be on a woman or man ….

    1. Interesting for me just because on the occasions I let my hair grow long it would feel like listening to static on a radio, the noise/discomfort increasing with the length of my hair. As soon as I cut my hair on those occasions, I could think more clearly and solve problems easier. ( I was a computer /electronics technician for 40 + years.)

  18. What is it was true, but only for some people? All the scientific studies you could imagine would never tell you if it was worth it for an individual to grow their hair or not. Ultimately the only test that matters is the one you do yourself.

    1. Agreed. But this article isn’t saying “people should be able to decide to have long hair” which I think just about everyone would agree with.

      It’s saying “people with long hair are better able to sense things, due to a function of that long hair”. That’s not a personal choice. Either they are able to better sense things because of their hair or they are not able to better sense things because of their long hair.

      Imagine there are two worlds running parallel to each other.

      In one of these worlds people with long hair have better senses. In the other world, they don’t. How do we tell which world is which?

  19. This is folklore, and it serves a purpose. Our natural state would be to have long hair. There are reasons for everything in nature. Why should we question? Long hair is the most natural way to be.

    I have not cut my hair since 1972. It is down to my knees, and dreaded.

  20. Half of these people reacting negatively probably have no hair or look better with short hair, don’t listen to their biased opinions because they feel lesser of themselves. Science is science whether you like it or not.

    1. I’m one of the most vocal people questioning this, and I have long hair. Don’t stereotype. This isn’t “us vs them” and trying to set it up as a battle is going to make everybody even less likely to find the truth.

      I’m arguing against this because it’s bad science. It’s probably not true, although if their claims are true it wouldn’t be hard for them to provide supporting evidence. Hopefully they can find a copy of the study somewhere.

        1. No actually not well said at all. …. Here is why. Science in the lab is a very narrow and specifically focused precise machine. War is on the other hand a dynamic system which is very messy and more broadly focused. When you are in a life or death situation you simply choose what ever seems to work. Those that survive probably got more of the pieces right. If the only piece that is the same in cross matches of all of the survivors is longer hair then you go with it. You have to. Now it may be that its the act of combing, washing and protecting the hair from getting tangled that actually wakes people up to their surroundings and we could get to that fact or some other explanation much later and with great effort. However, for the general or the foot soldier all of that research is just going to take too long when the knowledge of what is working is here now!

  21. Double blind empirical studies are the only standard of proof? How in the world did we get to the point where case study became substandard?

    What I find a lot of fun, however, is the PROVEN, double blind empirical proof discovered in physics – that the observer changes the observed – if you are skeptical, it will skew results that way, and vice versa –

    It’s the only double-blind study worth knowing! Until then, I’ll take everything on a case by case basis and ignore short-haired fools who feel the need to prove their intellect by demanding proof –

    and for those who wish to engage: Prove it doesn’t give you an advantage! I think those baseball players who grew beards were onto something, myself. Perhaps they could sense the trajectory of the pitch better? The universe is more amazing than anything anyone can ‘prove’

    1. I don’t even know where to start with this. Reality is reality, whether you believe in it or not. The whole “the observer changes the observed” thing is a common misconception. They’re not using the word “observer” in the same way you are.

      Either it gives you an advantage or it doesn’t. Sure, you might get an advantage from thinking it does, being more confident, but that’s not actually it giving you an advantage. That’s why we test with placebos.

      Also, the experiments you’re referencing aren’t double blind. Double blind studies are only for when people are involved, so we can correct for the placebo effect and other things that could muddle up the data.

      There’s no way I could cover all of that here, but here’s a pretty decent laymens explanation of quantum physics. http://lesswrong.com/lw/r7/quantum_physics_revealed_as_nonmysterious/

      Understanding the universe doesn’t make it any less amazing.

      1. When I clicked through to read this article, I notice the name of the website is “worldwidehippies.com” It is not “scientificfactsabouthair.com”. I took the article as an interesting possibility, nothing more and nothing less. In other words, chill the fuck out, man.

  22. Should I laugh or should I cry? Shaolin-Monks got very short hair. The “Vietcong”Fighters were also not long haired. I have short hair too. Where is the sience?

  23. I don’t advise a haircut, man. All hairdressers are in the employment of the government. Hairs are your aerials. They pick up signals from the cosmos, and transmit them directly into the brain. This is the reason bald-headed men are uptight.

    1. Science is what let’s us figure out what’s true and what’s not. It’s a tool that has been used for great good and great evil. Knowing the actual truth about how the world works let’s you shape the world.

      So yeah, if you’re going to make claims like this we need to subject it to science. We need to figure out if it’s actually true or just propaganda.

      1. and why do long haired folks need to convince you? There are many ‘truths’ out there – for a color blind man, it’s true that red is green…and who is to argue this? We are limited in our sensory capacity to ascertain ‘truth’ and once again, it is subjective, always –

        Even the speed of light is not ‘proven’ – it is an averaged measurement – and recent studies suggest that sound can be faster –

        Truth is a funny word. It is not absolute – ever

        1. How do I put this. What if I ran around saying that men are better then women? I could cite studies that never actually show up, I could make appeals to “logic”, I could post about it on the internet and try and convince people.

          That’s obviously going to end pretty bad. It’s why actual truth is important. Sure, maybe we can’t ever prove anything 100%, but the last 100 years of technological advancement can be laid at the feet of people who care what’s actually true. How reality actually works.

          It’s important, because if we don’t hold people to a higher standard of evidence they can claim whatever they want.

          How do we tell the difference between a world where antibiotics work and a world where they don’t?

          How do we tell the difference between a world where long hair gives you extra perception and one where it doesn’t?

          How can we tell the difference between a world where women are inferior from a world where everyones equal?

          The answer is the same. Science. Keep in mind that science is whatever you can use to figure out what’s true. All the pomposity is lessons learned. Double blind studies are important because of mistakes we’ve made.

          ——-

          There was an old story passed down among scientists, a cautionary tale, the story of Blondlot and the N-Rays.

          Shortly after the discovery of X-Rays, an eminent French physicist named Prosper-Rene Blondlot – who had been first to measure the speed of radio waves and show that they propagated at the speed of light – had announced the discovery of an amazing new phenomenon, N-Rays, which would induce a faint brightening of a screen. You had to look hard to see it, but it was there. N-Rays had all sorts of interesting properties. They were bent by aluminium and could be focused by an aluminium prism into striking a treated thread of cadmium sulfide, which would then glow faintly in the dark…

          Soon dozens of other scientists had confirmed Blondlot’s results, especially in France.

          But there were still other scientists, in England and Germany, who said they weren’t quite sure they could see that faint glow.

          Blondlot had said they were probably setting up the machinery wrong.

          One day Blondlot had given a demonstration of N-Rays. The lights had turned out, and his assistant had called off the brightening and darkening as Blondlot performed his manipulations.

          It had been a normal demonstration, all the results going as expected.

          Even though an American scientist named Robert Wood had quietly stolen the aluminium prism from the center of Blondlot’s mechanism.

          And that had been the end of N-Rays.

          Reality, Philip K. Dick had once said, is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.

          Blondlot’s sin had been obvious in retrospect. He shouldn’t have told his assistant what he was doing. Blondlot should have made sure the assistant didn’t know what was being tried or when it was being tried, before asking him to describe the screen’s brightness. It could have been that simple.

          Nowadays it was called “blinding” and it was one of the things modern scientists took for granted. If you were doing a psychology experiment to see whether people got angrier when they were hit over the head with red truncheons than with green truncheons, you didn’t get to look at the subjects yourself and decide how “angry” they were. You would snap photos of them after they’d been hit with the truncheon, and send the photos off to a panel of raters, who would rate on a scale of 1 to 10 how angry each person looked, obviously without knowing what color of truncheon they’d been hit with. Indeed there was no good reason to tell the raters what the experiment was about, at all. You certainly wouldn’t tell the experimental subjects that you thought they ought to be angrier when hit by red truncheons. You’d just offer them 20 pounds, lure them into a test room, hit them with a truncheon, color randomly assigned of course, and snap the photo. In fact the truncheon-hitting and photo-snapping would be done by an assistant who hadn’t been told about the hypothesis, so he couldn’t look expectant, hit harder, or snap the photo at just the right time.

          Blondlot had destroyed his reputation with the sort of mistake that would get a failing grade and probably derisive laughter from the T.A. in a first-year undergraduate course on experimental design… in 1991.

          But this had been a bit longer ago, in 1904, and so it had taken months before Robert Wood had formulated the obvious alternative hypothesis and figured out how to test it, and dozens of other scientists had been sucked in.

          More than two centuries after science had gotten started. That late in scientific history, it still hadn’t been obvious.

          1. Red and green are an abstraction. The underlying truth is that green is wavelengths 495–570 nm wide and red is 620–750 nm. That’s true no matter what your perception is. Perception doesn’t effect the truth of reality, it only affects your perception of reality. Reality is the same no matter what you see.

      2. So, what your saying is that even though the government did a study on it, it doesn’t count because it doesn’t meet with your standards? That’s the way all of your comments so far have read and quite frankly I have to question whether or not you are open minded enough to actually consider the results of any study.

        1. Err, there is no study. There’s a random guy on the internet saying there’s a study, but so far it hasn’t materialized. Hopefully he’s tracking it down.

          In the event that one does materialize, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a well done study. There are a lot of ways you can fuck a study up. Experimental design is a big complicated thing. Just because it’s a scientific study doesn’t mean it’s correct.

  24. This comment is from someone who just cut 2 ft. of my hair and left over a foot on my head. I had been growing my hair for 3 years. It grew over 3 ft. in that time and it was very hard to part with. It will grow back quickly. I have kept my hair ear length or should length most of my life and decided after my mother died that I would just let it grow and it grew like crazy. I believe it is true that long hair makes you more intuitive. My husbands hair is at least to the middle of his back and he has a mustache and a goatee. Love long hair.

  25. i find it interesting how so many people are upset by the thought of having a 6th sense linked to long hair. i’ve never thought about it til now, but i know quite a few hunters and it seems the ones with longer hair seem to do better every year. just saying…

    1. Less upset and more concerned by the fact that it’s probably not true. If it was true it would be very interesting news, but I can’t take that on faith.

    1. Thank you! How can anyone think this has any validity to it? But hey, if superstitious people want to go ahead and make this style socially acceptable so that I don’t need to shave for interviews anymore I’m all for it.

    2. Interesting article, there is more to long hair and potential effects on brain function than we understand at present. Perhaps may one day explain why women are typically considered more ‘intuitive’ than men. Would be great to have a link to the military study though.

  26. jhimmi the dhimmi , what we want is a copy or an external link to the documents and tests which are mentioned in the article.
    This is the internet, claims without evidence are met with cynicism. As they should be.

      1. WTH? lol…. Dark arts? You must have short hair because you are a complete idiot and can’t even recognize that two is a number. You think this is awful two??? DUH… it’s too… TOO means also… stupid.

        1. Yeah, I noticed the mistake. There’s no edit button though. Seems this blog disabled some of the standard wordpress functionality for some reason :/

          Anyway, I’m sure you can forgive me for not proofreading random comments on the internet. It’s the internet, it doesn’t actually matter.

        2. Why so angry? And when traverseda mentioned “dark arts” he did so correctly, look it up. As much as I would love to believe that our hair are antenna, an article on the internet without sources does not convince me that it is true. Also I notice how you resort to name calling, this does nothing for your argument except turn people off.

    1. It’s some pretty extraordinary claims without any evidence backing it up. That’s just as much bullshit as me saying “ionizing radiation is a good treatment for laryngitis”. Unless there’s some reason beyond “someone on the internet said so” to believe it, it’s bullshit.

  27. What a load of garbage. pseudo-science with no empirical evidence provided to support dubious claims… just an excuse to justify long hair.

      1. Any citation? Can you scan the documents? Find me a list of who was involved?

        The problem is that there isn’t any empirical evidence, just your anecdotal evidence that empirical evidence exists. That means the study has the strength of “anonymous blogger” instead of the strength of “These scientists risking their reputation and the ability to reproduce the study if their claims are still unbelievable”.

        But that should be relatively easy to fix. Get us a copy of the study, or at least the name of the institution and scientists involved.

        If that’s unavailable, the name of the clinic that got access to this study would be at least a start on independently verifying this.

        As for “how it could be more empirical”, this is pretty much a textbook example of why we need double blind studies. It’s very possible this was a double blind though.

        To put it simply, we need more then your word to believe a claim like that. But if it’s true, it’s an incredibly important discovery, especially if it can be proven that it was kept hidden.

        I know my hair mostly just gets in my eyes though ;p

        1. someone may have done this study as stated and gotten the results stated. But this probably wouldn’t get a pass grade in a 7th grade science fair. Control group? Hmm well if they really wanted to test this out they would have used additional subjects not all American Indians. Also, has no one else ever come across the information that there are groups of people who believe their hair is a sign of their warrior status or manliness, holds their strength, connection with a high power of some type, etc. much like the stories of Sampson. I’m not refuting any possibilities just bringing up a few things.

      2. A control group is the bare minimum of scientific inquiry. Show me a double-blind randomized clinical trial, and then I might start taking you seriously. Until then, this is obviously ridiculous.

    1. Maybe that is why women are so much smarter than men…:) You obviously would have insisted that Jesus and all the apostles get a crew cut. What a dope!

  28. I Love seeing this kind of info come out of government studies, especially when it pertains to our ‘real world’! Very interesting that scriptures back up the idea of long hair being a good thing. Anything to do with raising our awareness of our environment and surroundings is usually ‘frowned on’ by government who want the ‘masses’ as Unaware as possible. Nice to see a simple thing like this able to help us along!

    1. I find it interesting that the Bible has more to say about long hair than it does about homosexuality. Look at how many people use that as a “creditable” defence against gay marriage.

    1. Trackers don’t have to ‘blend in’ with civilians. They aren’t spies. This was a scientific test undertaken with a control group. Don’t know what more you could want. But of course, Cartesian doubt will never be satisfied.

      1. What more could we want? Maybe the original documents so that we could see who conducted the “study”, what they were evaluating, and how it was designed. Just saying something on the internet dosnt make it true, just as believing something dosnt make it true.

        Exceptional claims call for exceptional evidence, and stating that hair is “an extention of the nervous system” despite the obvious flaws in that notion puts the onus on you to provide such evidence.

        I’ve had long hair and I’ve had short hair. I’ve had a beard and I’ve been clean shaven. I have never noticed any difference.

      2. You can bet all the skeptics have short hair or they are totally bald….LOL They don’t want to admit, they are not very intuitive

Leave a Reply