|
Saturday Nights 10 pm to midnight 1-877-996-1420 |
|
Recent Articles |
|
For many years I have researched the unknown and as some call it, the paranormal. There is a common belief that all scientists are skeptics when it comes to these topics. People could not be further from the truth. I have found that most scientists I know are skeptical of the topic, not skeptics. That little distinction is a bigger thing then you may know. A scientist is REQUIRED to be OBJECTIVE, and not rule out ANYTHING until all avenues of testing on the topic itself have shown this to be the case. This means that just because something is shown to work on this model, that it does not mean that it applies to everything. To say something "can not be" because something else isn't is BAD SCIENCE. You must test that claim which you say why it can't be, on the ACTUAL topic, FULLY and DIRECTY. Case in point is the humble Bumblebee. Physics dictates that a lift surface must have an area of a particular size to enable an object of a certain mass to be able to get off the ground, and our rules on this are quite fixed in most scientific circles and is used on all the things we develop for flight. Yet Mr. Bumble, has wings far below what we calculate he should need to get off the ground, even if it was able to beat its wings faster than it does by nature. Is the bee wrong, or are we? By sciences rules, he should not fly but sure does one hell of an imitation. This similar to the argument that "aliens" can not get here to Earth because "we" do not know how to get there with what "we" know about travel through space. Well that thought itself right in its limited thinking, but so way wrong in actual application as the "aliens" are not getting here it would seem on what "we" know, but rather on what "they" know.( they must be related to those bees) This is like saying "I can not play a guitar, therefor NOBODY should be able to play one then as well because I can't". Science by rule can not make such sweeping claims yet some have insisted on doing so. You see, the common claim that science has proven things like ghosts, and UFOs are not real are with respect to scientifically proving it so is not actually true. ( a case of wishful thinking pure and simple ) These were topics that got tossed out of hand into that pile, WITHOUT DIRECT application of testing because it was easier to do that then to take the risk of actually having to except that some of the now patent theories "may be a little off", hence the unsubstantiated claim that these things are not real. ( its easier to LABEL something not true then to change the thoughts on what you think and others have been lead to BELIEVE is not) Anyone can look through the literature and periodicals and studies in all the works of science to be found out there, and you will not fine ONE actual OBJECTIVE and UNBIASED study done on anything in the paranormal, not one.( some smoke screen stuff and ones with hidden agendas to be sure, but no independent impartial ones) So, the claim that science has proved the paranormal is unfounded is a statement unfounded in itself. Some of you will ask why? The answer is as old as you may think, MONEY. There is no money to be made studying it. This is the main reason, and as it takes money to study something, any other topic that can compete for funds will be subject to assault and ridicule so that funds for further research could be redirected to other avenues, thus robbing any future that topic would have. Greed, in a word is why the topic of the paranormal is hounded by frightened malcontents. To hell with finding answers to questions that will not make a company money, I want more money to look into why "mouse farts don't smell like cheese". ( if you wonder why that would make money, rodent detection is a lucrative business) Such are these claims that are made by skeptics, who are people who CAN NOT accept even the mere thoughts of the topic of the paranormal being real, regardless of any actual and real and viable qualitative and quantitative data to the contrary as it displaces them from the center of their little work and world. ( And there is a mountain of data out there to show that there is something very real) You see, the skeptic shows that it is possible to have a mind even smaller and narrower than their reproductive organs. Yes I am skeptical as I should be as a scientist, and I do not except every story about the claims made by people on things in the paranormal nor do I outright and off hand dismiss it either. I test the paranormal claims firsthand and let the data make up my mind, not make up my mind and then make up the data like a skeptic does.( fact-more hoaxing, data fudging and fact changing goes on with those who try to prove the paranormal is unfounded then those who are trying to say its valid.... keep in mind your dealing with zealots who will do anything to protect their textbooks just as a religious zealot does what they can to protect their holy books) I am doing science right, as I am in the field in the actual places, and scientifically testing the real materials involved, not cooking up PHONY trumped up simulated lab experiments to disprove something. I will stick to getting my hands dirty looking for the truth, and none can say that doing so is wrong as that IS the TRUE scientific way. So if you do not WANT to believe that these things happen then that is your choice. I will continue to do the job you are apparently too afraid to do to get to the real answers. |
|
A scientist who is skeptical, not a skeptic By Matt Moniz |