Scientists and Pseudo-Scientists

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Baile

No, not young. And maybe you're new age. Because there is in fact and at the very least a collective consciousness aspect to human reality. So there's much more that question than just everyone creating their own reality. But that's a whole other conversation.

You're didn't respond to what I wrote. I wasn't talking about new age ideas about creating our own reality. I was talking about truth versus lies. And being able to easily see when people are lying. I'm not new age but I am OLD school. I deal with questions practically and logically. And I was specifically addressing your "fake news" comment. I said, and repeat, that anyone with even the slightest bit of conscious awareness can easily spot liars and con artists. I can certainly tell when someone is passing off lies as the truth, or manipulating facts in a deceptive and untruthful way. You haven't been following politics the past two years I guess, it's particularly easy to tell these days.

I am exactly the same, my friend and I am having this very discussion with inavalan in another thread.

If I create my own reality, then it stands to reason that I can make everybody in the world give me all their money and worship me as a queen, no? How come that never happens?

If I create my own reality, then I would be able to stop all wars, feed all the starving people (with the money everybody else gives me)...or I can make a rogue asteroid hit the Earth and blow us all to kingdom come...and I am still waiting for armageddon, seriously.

What is it that makes me personally responsible for the actions of a murderer? thus condoning their actions by affording absolutely no liability, accountability or responsibility? but wait..they did not kill, because I did, creating the reality that I do...It is totally absurd.

As for this "we are all connected" thing... that is just saying we belong to the same species and that is it! However the variations of genetic expression within the species is what differentiates us..separating us, if you will.

We cannot live in the world of consciousness and hope to ever be able to express this on the 3D, physical plane because it just doesn't work that way...but many still try, but it is something which cannot be reproducible as for another to understand it in any way possible...yet this hasn't deterred those who belong to the new age movement from doing so.

[Armadodecadron]

Originally Posted by r6r6r

I lean toward the scientific methodology, truth, moral integrity, all for one and one for all, in all existence. Why?

The alternative is doomsday for humans.

You are the worst sort of pretentious. Putting mathematical and physical terminology in a bucket and then throwing the damned thing at a canvas isn't science. People like you are responsible for it being nearly impossible for actual scientists to express cautious curiosity towards spiritual possibilities.

[weareunity]

Hello all.

It seems to me Shivani Devi that the "all connected thing" you speak of in post 31 is very real, also realistic in what I understand as the complete interdependence of all processing through the inevitable and inescapable link of cause and consequence. This perspective could be easily ridiculed/dismissed by suggesting that the magnitude of input is, or is likely to be, so minute as to be of no consequence.
However, is the magnitude of effect of every input and consequence really the issue when considering the validity of this perspective scientifically ?

pete

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello all.

It seems to me Shivani Devi that the "all connected thing" you speak of in post 31 is very real, also realistic in what I understand as the complete interdependence of all processing through the inevitable and inescapable link of cause and consequence. This perspective could be easily ridiculed/dismissed by suggesting that the magnitude of input is, or is likely to be, so minute as to be of no consequence.
However, is the magnitude of effect of every input and consequence really the issue when considering the validity of this perspective scientifically ?

pete

Dear Pete,

My understanding is based upon a measurable amount of "connection" with regards to the initial cause, irrespective of effect.

For example, it has been said in spiritual circles that we each "create our own reality", so then, what did I do to create all the starvation in Somalia? What did the newborn Somalian baby do to create the environment where it would have no food or water?

What did I do to create the earthquake in Kalimantan? I must be a very powerful being to have the very forces of nature at my beck and call, no?

What if another's "created reality" is in total juxtaposition to my own on this physical plane? Who gets to create their reality then?...The one who says the most affirmations, or the one who has the most disposable income to "dispose of" in regards?

Even though we may all have the same spirit/soul, nobody ever operates at that level socially and when communicating with others, so wherefore is the connection? Or maybe, everybody else is connected, however, because I am not connected to anybody, I cannot see or recognise the connection, simply because it is something that I am unable to perceive...Just a thought...

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

As for this "we are all connected" thing... that is just saying we belong to the same species and that is it!

Incorrect Shivani, as it is so much more than than just species.

All mass of Universe is connected via;

1} gravity ( ) --aka mass-attraction SPACE-- and,

2} if not also dark energy )( { repulsive force SPACE }

[weareunity]

Dear Shivani--and all. Thanks for your reply Shivani, and especially for the way it begins. I am encouraged to do likewise by your example. I can see that doing so with sincerity shares a sense of significance between participants in discourse at the outset, thereby diminishing any need for any party to use such discourse merely as a vehicle to establish or enhance their own importance/significance.

Thinking aloud, wondering and pondering without certainty--might it be that as a species we feel, consciously or otherwise, that our ability to reason depends so much upon the supposition/premise that all questions have answers that we experience a discomforting level of uncertainty, insecurity, perhaps even insignificance, if we do not ourselves have answers to some fundamental questions concerning our existence?

If so, does this have the consequence of creating a powerful appetite for answers from others? And again if so, with what possible consequences both for ourselves and such "others"?

All the best. pete

[Avinash Suresh]

Scientists now mistake Pseudo-science for Science.

Few are scientists who are really searching for the truth with an open mind.

[Convolution]

Originally Posted by Avinash Suresh

Scientists now mistake Pseudo-science for Science.

Few are scientists who are really searching for the truth with an open mind.

That is true. But I think it's at least a somewhat reactionary claim juxtaposed by the countless so called spiritual gurus who spew forth information without a single shred of evidence or testable prediction.
And so both sides are at a stand off of sorts, each marginalizing the other, and in doing so maintaining this polarization.

Ultimately, I believe the spiritual person and the scientist should be one and the same. They are both looking for truth, after all, aren't they? And what distinguishes fact from fiction is often our ability to test and reproduce with convincing results. I'd love it if we got to a point where we just had no need to dintinguish between either side, and simply had people honestly searching for the truth, as opposed to just either personal or narrow truth disguised as objective truth.

Note that this isn't to say that if something has not been able to be empirically validated yet, that there isn't a chance it could be true. There is. But in general, I believe we should hold on making statements as to the veridical nature of ideas prior to the acquisition and validation of tangible evidence.

[Convolution]

Originally Posted by Explorer21

Errors have crept into science, but this is not because of bad faith on the scientists' part. They have devoted their lives to uncovering the truth about the nature of the universe.
The tragic thing is that the research efforts of thousands of good-hearted scientists, who are serving the good of all humanity, have been side-tracked by pseudo-scientists into pathways destructive to humanity and the world in general.
The perverters of science, devoted to destruction, no longer can describe themselves as scientists. It is an insult to great scientists , such as Nikola Tesla, Thomas Townsend-Brown, Newton, Fleming, Galileo and Kepler, to include among their number the bloodthirsty pseudo-scientist who made it possible for nuclear weapons to decimate Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

I agree with a lot here, but morality and science are two distinct, but hopefully co-existing, notions. Scientists who discovered the particle physics that led to the splitting of the atoms and ultimately the building of the atomic bomb are still great scientists themselves, because the very existance of the bomb and its ability to draw energy from "seemingly nothing" (as was once believed), shows they have reached an underlying truth. It is the evidence itself.
Science in the end is agnostic as to how humans choose to use it. The very same discoveries that led to the bomb also led to many other breakthroughs that continue to save lives today. These are both sides of the very same coin of science.
Science develops the concepts and understanding of the universe needed for new tools/technology to be "created". It is neither good nor bad. It is knowledge and discovery. Getting to deeper truth. In the end, we still must choose how to use all of it. We can split atoms to produce energy for, or on the same venue to kill, millions. That is a choice separate from science.

Still, I completely agree with the underlying sentiment, and I am very saddened by any technology or scientific discovery used with malicious intent.

[Convolution]

Originally Posted by Baile

I've studied advanced human civilizations for years, maybe my all-time favorite topic. That's one way I deal with the madness in the world these days. I read or watch a video on that, the stuff that actually counts.

I am intrigued and would like to know more. Is there any science with verifiable research to back this up?