In ancient days, people had blindly believed in religious teachings and obeyed whatever the religious heads preached them. They didn’t question even when the teachings sounded absurd for two reasons: one was that they had blind belief in the religious authorities as already said, and whenever they felt something was weird, they preferred to put that down to their own ignorance. The other reason was that arguing against the established religious authorities was seen as an offense, and people who argued so had suffered humiliation, isolation as well as physical punishment. But over the time, many great philosophers and logicians stood against the weird and superstitious beliefs of the religious society. They had exposed the absurd nature of many religious notions utilizing logic and experimentation, and that slowly lead to the development of ‘science’ as a strong discipline in the society. And ever since, people have developed more and more faith in ‘science’ having witnessed the ‘success’ of science in explaining the Nature and its role in advancing human civilisation.
That brings us to the Era of Modern science: People now blindly believe in Science, they adorn scientists as the ultimate authorities of knowledge. Whenever some scientific teaching sounds absurd, not only lay people but even science students prefer to put that down to their ignorance in the belief that scientists can’t go wrong, a situation not different from how people behaved in the ancient religious society. Many a times people don’t even know what some scientists actually teach, but they chant their theories (e.g. special relativity, general relativity etc) and worship them as Gods. Intellectuals who try to raise their voice against the prevailing weird theories and scientific superstitions are at a similar risk of humiliation, isolation and deprivation just like how people suffered in the ancient religious society for arguing against the absurd religious teachings.
Thus science which started off as a ‘logical revolution’ in ancient times and stopped people from blindly embracing the weird religious teachings has ended up in a rather awkward situation – people now religiously believe in science despite all its weird teachings.
Just because some theory sounds weird or illogical, it doesn’t automatically mean that the same is really weird or illogical – that could well be due to one’s ignorance or inability to understand the same. Having said that, it doesn’t mean one has to curse one’s ignorance always and blindly believe in all the weird things espoused by the great scientists. When faced with some weird sounding statement or theory, I believe that a rationalist would take one of the following approaches:
Try to explore it in depth and see if there is any deeper logic to support the apparently weird sounding theory. If the theory remains illogical ‘throughout’ and doesn’t yield to logical deduction at any point but instead leads to more and more counterintuitive notions, rationalists rather than blindly accepting the weird theory (or labeling the Nature as weird), look for alternative logical explanations for the data that originally lead to the weird theory.
Or
Accept one’s ignorance and inability to logically explore the theory in depth. In this scenario, despite one’s feeling that a theory is weird, one may chose to believe in the weird theory and its absurd predictions because one has faith in ‘science’ and has high regards for scientists. But this makes one a religious follower of science and not a real rationalist. (Of course one can still claim oneself as a rationalist as long as one is conscious of the fact that one is going by faith and doesn’t confuse one’s faith in ‘science’ as the Truth!)
But scientists and ‘skeptics’ don’t seem to behave like rationalists. Neither they are able to explain their weird theories by a deeper logic nor do they accept their ignorance and religious behavior. Rather weirdly, they propose that Nature itself is weird and so are their scientific theories. Physicists claim that they have lot of experimental proof as well as mathematical support to believe that our Nature is weird. So we shouldn’t expect our logical sense to decide whether some theory is right or wrong, they preach.
Physicists argue that our commonsense and logic depends upon how we experience and see things in this world i.e. our picture of the world. And they preach that we can’t swear upon our picture of the world as completely true because apparently that could just be an illusion created by our brain. And apparently all that we see and experience (from sitting in our room, watching TV, brushing teeth to discussing about relativity etc) in this world could just be our ‘feelings’ created by our brains nervous activity and may not represent the actual reality, hence physicists preach that we can’t swear upon our commonsense and logic as ultimate. But then how come physicists swear upon their observations (airplanes flying, atomic clocks ticking, muons reaching the earth, mercury perihelion shift, bending of star light etc) as real and use them to support their weird theories? The ticking of atomic clocks and mercury perihelion etc could just be illusions created by the physicists’ brains! Also the mathematics which they swear upon could just be an illusion created by their distorted brains!
If we accept that our Nature is weird and believe that it does not yield to logical deduction, we can’t draw valid conclusions out of any observation in this world. We can draw valid conclusions only if our world obeys logic. So we must believe in a logical world before we go on to argue/discuss whether some theory is right or wrong.
If some observation is really weird and we are unable to explain it logically (e.g. double slit experiment), we must accept that as proof of our inability or limitation of our material knowledge, instead of accepting that as proof of weird Nature. Obviously material knowledge will never be able to explain Nature to the ultimate level. Scientists, rather than accepting their ignorance and inability to logically explain certain things, have resorted to blaming the Nature as weird. Ignorance is not something to be ashamed of but denial or ignorance of the possibility that we may be ignorant is definitely something to be ashamed. And Ignorance is itself not a hindrance to understand the Nature’s secrets but denying that surely comes in the way.
If one believes that our Nature is weird and counterintuitive, one may do so but one can never prove that because proving something involves logical interpretation of data and one can never interpret things logically in a weird Nature. So if someone claims that they have enough experimental evidence to believe that our Nature is weird, only two possibilities we can think of – there must either be logical misinterpretation of the experimental data driven by false scientific beliefs (relativist’s error) or denial of existence of things beyond their remit of understanding of Nature (quantumist’s error).
Go to Next Page
Go to Main Index
Comments
” only two possibilities we can think of – there must either be logical misinterpretation of the experimental data driven by false scientific beliefs (relativist’s error) or denial of existence of things beyond their remit of understanding of Nature (quantumists error).”
Or perhaps the third possibility, that the theories fit all the evidence, and you are just wrong?
Remember, intuition is a weird thing. It constantly needs to be revised and updated in the face of contradictory evidence. Take any optical illusion. Take the Monty Hall problem. Take the gambler whose “intuition” tells him he will eventually win. (But only after an infinite average waiting time. I bet his intuition didn’t tell him that!)
LikeLike
The whole point is – all that ‘evidence’ doesn’t need your stupid theory. All the observations can be explained without resorting to the stupid propositions (time dilation, one particle travelling in multiple directions simultaneously etc) of your religious theories. Why should we entertain a stupid theory based upon a stupid notion when all the observations can be explained without your stupid stuff? And let me tell you that ‘circular reasoning’ is not same as ‘evidence’. I have exposed your pastor’s circular reasoning several times but I am sure your mesmerised mind wouldn’t realise that.
Finally don’t mess up logic with intuition. No experiment or observation straight away tells you that it supports or refutes a theory. It needs logical interpretation and logical extrapolation to draw valid conclusions. If you don’t believe in logic, then you can claim any damn observation as proof of any stupid theory.
LikeLike
Interesting article but I think there is a third response: your 2 — Explore and look for logical consistency, and Belief, plus: we can look to see what the theory predicts and see if these predictions come to pass. Of course correct predictions don’t prove the weird theory true but incorrect predictions do supply strong evidence the theory is wrong.
LikeLike
Always try to have a ‘beginnersmind’, works miracles!
LikeLike
I am really astounded with your open-mindness and critical thinking. That is something rather rarely observed today. Have a look at my research on some contemporary scientific beliefs and their roots. Maybe you have heard of some of these informations. Even such figures as Copernicus and Newton were highly influenced with ancient and occult beliefs. And these beliefs are today pushed as scientific facts. Here’s the link to my playlist. I would be grateful for your comment and response. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLs2iUBFlEvfF235o5ZCpnWW-KD-mxU4zS
Regards.
LikeLike
skycentrism ,
Thanks!
ha ha ha even as I said “science is a religion” is in there!
btw ‘evolution’ is also a , hidden, (freemason) relgion!
Great!
Thanks!
LikeLike
Glad you like it. Of course, evolution is the same fairy tale. It derives from Greek philosophers 🙂 Darwin was just a puppet who was introduced to push old beliefs as science. His grandpa was a freemason and a member of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Society_of_Birmingham lol.
LikeLike
skycentrism
I know, however, the evolution shite is not from Greek philosphers, but from
people from India, way way way before the ‘greeks”..
The same with the bang bang.also from India!
I was aware of the origen from evolution shite in the west from the Lunar Society. Now..try convincing some ‘evolutiionists’ 😉
LikeLike
Right, the idea of evolution is much older, I even read about that some time ago I think..
Anyway, you probably already figured out why my nickname is ‘skycentrism’ 😀 What are your thoughts on this rather controversial topic I deal with ?
LikeLike
Galacar
Did not understand your comment-regarding India and the evolution.
Can you substantiate?
{According to my understanding,Indian thought respects the version of “eternal universe”- in which the universe undergoes continuous ‘cycles’ and outright rejects the question of the birth of the universe in a single event in single space-time characteristic, since it cannot be “known”!
Even the early Indian astronomy was built on this strong philosophy.
Even the concepts of evolution that is so popular today, is way to different from that of in(was) India, i.e Samkhya Philosophy. }
LikeLike
charan
I want to, but I have to look deep and search long in my own documents.
But when I find them I let you know.sorry for now.
I am convinced this is so and I am now researching for the reasons why.
It are all pieces of a ginat jigg saw puzzle, but, I must admit, is is fascinating if one finds out on what an enormous scale we are, and have, being lied too!
And for more then 6000 years mind you! Yes, it boggles the mind, well mine anyway. 😉
LikeLike
skycentrism,
You wrote:
“What are your thoughts on this rather controversial topic I deal with ?”
I am going to research it more. I have heard of it before. Love to look into this.
I have learned long ago not to dismiss something because it is contoversial or sounds crazy or whatever.
Maybe ware are all dreaming within a dream? who knows?
All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
-Edgar Allan Poe
LikeLike
This site is great: http://www.wildheretic.com/concave-earth-theory/
I also make videos concerning this topic: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLs2iUBFlEvfH_vdAxAP6geXhaDAMinBwq
Have a good time :p
LikeLike
Wow! You guys are arguing against evolution, but its clear you don’t even know what it really is!!
Origin of the universe and big bang theory have nothing to do with evolution! Please provide examples of how evolutionary theory fails, just names of topics so that I can research them myself! That’s if u can think of any of course!
I’m not attacking anybody here, but this is one time that I disagree with commenters on this site! And there is so much evidence for evolution as I c it, but if I’m wrong, I’m open to change my views, u just gotta give me some evidence 1st otherwise u doing exactly what u accuse modern scientists of doing, ie. appeal to authority!
By the way, evolutionary theory is more biology than it is physics, so it makes sense why you guys don’t understand it properly, if even at all!😝
LikeLike
My take on evolution is somewhat different. It is probably true that life on earth came into existence via some kind of ‘evolution’ (if not exactly how the biologists preach!) but that doesn’t per say argue against the existence of God. That is, Evolution doesn’t rule out the possibility of a designer. It could be just that Evolution represents the path chosen by God to create things in this universe. To put it differently, God could have programmed this world to evolve that way.
In fact, while evolution without any designer or God violates causation throughout or at every step of evolution, God’s hypothesis violates causation only once. Let me explain why. Biologists preach that tiny changes or events occur in Nature spontaneously i.e. without there being any force behind them, and they propose that accumulation of such tiny ‘favourable’ events over millions and millions of years could have lead to the emergence of life and intelligent species like humans on earth. So they believe that humans came into existence spontaneously by ‘evolution’ and ‘natural selection’ and not because of any God’s intervention. They rightly argue that if it was God who created this universe, then who created God in the first place? Obviously God poses a much more difficult puzzle to solve, so the biologists and their religious crowd have settled comfortably with their evolution delusion.
My first argument is that why would any change or event (whether small or big) occur in Nature spontaneously? It would be illogical to allow even one single tiny event to take place in nature spontaneously and without any cause, and allowing a chain of such events only exposes one’s highly illogical mind and ignorance. So evolution model is at least as bad as creation model. Even if God were to create life, why should we imagine that as an instantaneous event? Any creation is obviously a process and would happen over a time. By proposing Evolution as an alternative to God, biologists haven’t done any better; they have merely described the same creation process as occurring in small steps over a very long time. In fact, they have fallen prey to a false assumption and made the scenario worse- by making a process slow, they assume that they can dispense with the cause of it.
Atheists believe that if God exists at all, He would have to be as exactly described in Bible or Quran or Gita or as imagined by the believers. Just like how the ‘believers of science’ often don’t correctly understand science, many believers of God don’t really understand God. By disproving the believers’ beliefs (or that of the pastors or teachers), it doesn’t automatically disprove the existence of God or true science. It only exposes the ignorance of the believers and not the truth.
I have a lot more to talk about evolution and God. I think I am almost successful in solving the riddle of who created the creator. Will be back soon.
LikeLike
To Blue Heffnir
Wow!
You wrote:
“but its clear you don’t even know what it really is!!”
You don’t know that. I was avoiding the issue a bit, because it is not the topic here.
Anyway, what you are saying is that “Origin of the universe and big bang theory have nothing to do with evolution! ” Well, they used too! Just take a look in the textbooks! BUT, I see it all the time with the ‘scientist’ who cling forcefull to their dogma;s. When they don’t have an answer, they skip a subject and say it is no part of evolution. Lately I have found out that by using math (statistics) it is very easy to show that evolution can’t be done at all! Then those stupid religious people start saying that the proces of evolution is not random.
So, if we go on with this, one day they have to admit evolution has nothing to do with evolution!
But there is a simpler way. Evolution, as I have written here earlier, was created by the Lunar Society of which the father of Darwin was a member (Father of Darwin was more or less the originater of the evolution bullshite). The purpose was to let people in the dark of spiritual forces and all that jazz.
So, from the start, evolution, was used to misled the masses (you and I).
So, if there is no basis, then anything that follows from that basis is wrong or at least enormous skewed.
But I do understand how extremely deep. people are programmed and indoctrinated into this bullshit theory.
Some people are prone to defend this rubbish with their live!
It is not easy to admit you were being lied to for years!
my two cents. 😉
LikeLike
About ‘evolution’ and misleading conceptions about the age of the earth for example see this:
http://newgeology.us/presentation48.html
The realm of fraud is not just limited to physics and cosmology but also it extends to geology and biology and maybe some other branches of science that we don’t know yet…
LikeLike
Dr S,
Your first argument is stupid because it boils down to an argument from ignorance:
“My first argument is that why would any change or event (whether small or big) occur in Nature spontaneously?”
And therefore everything else you said is meaningless based on your faulty\skewed reasoning right from the beginning!
And just to inform you, amino acids have a Natural tendency to fold themselves into complex shapes and arrangements without any designer!
Similarly, if any designer had to create something as imperfectly as is evidenced by various examples in nature, such as men having nipples for no valid reason, then that would be a pretty stupid designer don’t u think?
—————————————-
My 2 cents 😉
LikeLike
The fact that you believe amino acids can fold upon themselves spontaneously (and without any external influence acting upon them) shows that you have failed to think deeper than what you have read in books.
BTW, let me tell you that there also people who believe that apples fall to the ground by themselves, radios speak and TVs play spontaneously and cars run without any cause. I am sure this will give you some comfort.
But the point I want to convey is that if one chooses to be ignorant of the deeper/ hidden things and refuses to think beyond the obvious, then any event could be argued as taking place spontaneously. Obviously if events could occur spontaneously in Nature, then there wouldn’t be any need to look for causes in Nature for any observation that we make (and there wouldn’t be ‘science’ for us to study and discuss).
So causality is the essence of scientific enquiry. If causality is not an issue, that would make the God’s hypothesis much stronger and simpler and the creationists’ job much easier: God could have come into existence by Himself without any cause, and He could have designed/ programmed our universe as we observe it now- whether you call it perfect or imperfect.
Denying the existence of a cause for an observed phenomenon is the most stupid statement to come from a scientific mind. I must admit that I have overestimated the genius in you. I am sorry but I blocked rest of your comments just to hide your ignorance and to save you from the embarrassment. I did say that I have a lot to talk about evolution and God. So don’t be in a haste to pose questions.
I would be answering all those questions that evolutionists pose to argue against the Designer: why there are birth defects, why there is unhappiness, why people die, who created the creator etc. Until then, you have time to thrive upon the wrong beliefs of the God believers and to pose yourself rational.
LikeLike
Mehrdad wrote.
“The realm of fraud is not just limited to physics and cosmology but also it extends to geology and biology and maybe some other branches of science that we don’t know yet…”
Oh for sure! what about all of them!? e.g. take ‘modern medicine’
There are some things ‘modern medicine ‘is good at.
But largely it is extremely corrupt and a lot of real good methods for
healing are kept away from us by this Farmaceutical Medical Mafia Cartel.
and know this, my reseach shows that the mind, or better, consciousness, is
the prime factor in all forms of healing! Do they touch that subject at universities
where people study medcine? Of course not! Way too dangerous.
People might heal! That is not the purpose!
And you can’t make bucks out of it.
Medicine is not about Health, it is about Wealth!
The ‘modern science’ is bathing in fraud and corruption!
But the time has come that we are awakening too that so a better time will follow.
Until now ‘science’ has been a tool for a small group to steer us away fro any real important truth.
See it as just a manipulation tool
Like a religion
I always say do your OWN research! Tesla Did!
Don’t trust any authorities. especially professor and other criminals! 😉
LikeLike
MERRY CHRISTMAS TO Y’ALL AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR.
Well, seen relatively 😉 , christmas is nothing more them a recycled pagan festival form the old babylonian days! What I want to say with this, is even this is just some old stuff twisted and skewed by some strange fellowmen!
It actually all has to do with the sun (winter-solstice)!
We are really lied to all the way from cradle to grave.
(Just to illustrate a point and want to say that ‘sience’ is no exception to this.}
But I do wish you all the best!
Namaste!
LikeLike
Hey guys,
Galacar, srinivas, skycentrism. You guys still there? Or did the satanists kill you all? No that’s not a joke it can seriously happen. You guys are doing such a big job I wonder if you all really realize that (I bet you do though, you smart species).
How about making a facebook group together or something where exchanging ideas is much less complicated? Your theories resonate with me really intensely.
I am more on the medical side and I know something is wrong with this ‘Pharmaseudical’ science we are following. Certainly there are healing systems that work much much better than this stupid western medicine.
LikeLike
Hi Rebel,
Thanks for your posting, Rebel.
Nice to here these things, This is where I am doing my work for,
There is a lot of ridicule out there.And I can take that, but now and then
one needs fresh air. So, thank you.
And hereby also thank to the other people here that read my postings and
take it seriously. To you people I say a big THANK YOU.
Yes, I am still here!
Doing a good job? Wel maybe, I considering it sowing seeds.
I can only put the information out. It is up to people what they do with it,
I like it here and I HATE facebook! Facebook IS CIA!
(if you are a member of facebook they can legally get into your computer now)
You wrote:
“I am more on the medical side and I know something is wrong with this ‘Pharmaseudical’ science we are following. Certainly there are healing systems that work much much better than this stupid western medicine.”
‘something’ wrong? lol. It is a complete sick system.
(For example bacterias don’t create illnes, Pasteur was
very very wrong!, But eh, it is a great pitch for sales! lol)
I have written here before that ‘western medicine” is here to kill us.
Slowly but surely. So, yes, I totally agree with you here.
I have once studied clinical psychology and I have NEVER seen one
being cured by it. Just some small adjustements,
I have studied the energy psychology system and I have seen people
with very heavy trauma’s cured in minutes! Isn’t that saying something?
I am talking here about EFT, TFT, TAT and all that sort of a thing.
So, yes, there are systems that works much better,
But again, because the purpose of ‘conventional medicine’ is NOT
curing but killing and making money is this the case.
Medicine is not about Health, it is about Wealth$
Furthermore I know of very fast cures and ‘strange things’ but if I put it here,
a lot of people will be put off.
But let’s just say now that the world as it is sold to us, in nothing like the real word is.
We are, on purpose and by design’ alineated from nature
INCLUDING OURSELVES!
This last thing is the most important thing and to come out of this mess together
we have to
REMEMBER WHO WE REALLY ARE.
*And, Rebel, if you remember yourself, you will KNOW ‘they’ can’t kill the REALYOU!
Now I want to stop here with an important warning, because we are all in this together:
“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”
Martin Niemöller
“Care about what other people think and you will always be their prisoner.”
― Lao Tzu
Galacar
LikeLike
Dear Drgsrinivas, as you want to prove something to be weird by resorting to logic, it is necessary that you also expound on your concept of logic, by bringing up the criteria supposedly from logic by which we can judge a teaching of weird scientists to be contrary to logic, and wherefore weird or not to be accepted blindly.
In that way also you get to define what is weird in your use of the word, weird.
I see you to be very enlightening in your insights into the pretenses of superstitious scientists, in particular physicists; still I feel that you owe it to your readers to explain what is logic and wherefore why some teaching if weird for being contrary to logic.
Allow me to commend you most warmly for your insights, as it is very rare to come to writers like you in the internet: everyone is singing hosannas to scientists who write about all kinds of counter logic ideas, supported by their weird math.
LikeLike