The Issue with Modern Day Science

[A Vestigial Mote]

Engineer: "We've figured out flying!"
Person: "Really?"
Engineer: "Well, no, it turns out the Navier-Stokes equations that govern flying haven't been solved yet."
Person: "What?!?"
Engineer: "Yeah, basically, we just make a really, really good guess... and it just sort of works. We've been doing it this way for years now. It's close enough, so who cares?"
News: "One in every 1.2 million flights crashes."
Person: "So... it's not completely safe?"
Engineer: "Well... no."
Person: "I think I'll take the bus..."
News: "About 63,000 buses are involved in an accident each year..."

There's risk in taking a step out of the front door of your home any given moment. Hell, there's risk even being in your own home at any given moment. Where is there not risk? Hmm... let me think. Not sure such a place exists.

However... there's a difference between the risks you know and the risks you don't, isn't there? The answer is "yes", in case you were still pondering. Also, last I checked, 10 whole whopping percentage points is a far cry from 0.000083%

 

[gnostic]

It's good for fringe dwellers to take a swing at the establishment occasionally, but I can't say I found Rupert persuasive when he behaves like a showman instead of a scientist.

Yes, he is more akin to those horrible televangelists.

Video presentation that has more rhetoric than substances.

ps Happy birthday, blü!

 

[blü 2]

ps Happy birthday, blü!

Why thank you!

One of these birthdays I'll be old enough to know better. Or so they say.

Anyway, while I'm pouring, can I offer you ...

 

[gnostic]

Why thank you!

One of these birthdays I'll be old enough to know better. Or so they say.

Anyway, while I'm pouring, can I offer you ...

Vodka?

Sorry, I am not Russian...but if you have cognac or single malt scotch, that would be great!

Waitasec, I am not French, nor a Scot! That would mean I have to drink rice wine. Bah!

 

[blü 2]

Vodka?

Sorry, I am not Russian...but if you have cognac or single malt scotch, that would be great!

Waitasec, I am not French, nor a Scot! That would mean I have to drink rice wine. Bah!

Talisker? Lagavulin? I can put a few grains of rice next to the glass if you prefer.

 

[Sapiens]

Modern science cannot take into account the larger scope of reality because it is confined to physicality and to the materialist paradigm. This has been enforced for centuries by the various factions that aim to keep humanity in a state of degeneration and anti-evolution. Why? Because a man that can fend for himself and stand upon his two feet doesn't make a very good state-dependent slave. The materialist attitude It is the same reason as why imagination nor thoughts can be proven or explained properly, because we lack the critical understanding of the human psyche. Materialist science will never be able to uncover why and how remote viewing works, because it doesn't use physicality to work. This is all deliberate. The contemporary scientific community is grounded to physicality as we lack the innate senses to assess and perceive subtle energy - which for sake of ease, we'll call the "counterpart" of dense (physical) energy. Here's the thing. Everything is energy, every single part of our universe. Not all of these are either physical, and certain types of energy can pass through physicality with ease. Now here is the catch; not all of these are physically observable to our physically oriented senses. But they very much are to our subtle energy senses. These however, are under constant attack and have been for the past few ages.

Here's an example of the subtle senses. There's a recent study done that demonstrated conclusively that the human body can sense imagery and events before it happens. The participants weren't informed, and momentarily before they were shown a series of images, their body had already responded to types of images that would show up. If memory serves me well, these ranged from sexual images to "begin" images that illicit no natural response.
That studies shows it is testable and observable. But can it be properly explained by the materialist physical paradigm? No, it cannot, because it doesn't take into account the subtle, non-physical counterpart of nature and reality.
Access to these subtle energies used to be a conscious ability of ours. However, because of the thousands of years of spiritual neglect and corruption, this ability has completely watered down and gone dormant. Think about the "dark ages", or how the church systematically murdered those who DID have the ability to interface and manipulate subtle energies. Millions were murdered because of this. Gifted bloodlines needed to be eradicated so that the malevolent established order could continue its reign over the non-spiritual man.
The mentioned study;
Predicting the unpredictable: critical analysis and practical implications of predictive anticipatory activity

This is also a Banned Ted Talk talking about the flaws of modern day science:

Your quoted study explains: "One seemingly reasonable explanation for PAA is that our conscious mind is wrong about when events occur. That is, our conscious experience of events is delayed by seconds relative to some external/physical time of which we are not conscious. Meanwhile, unconscious neural processes are much less delayed relative to this external time. The explanation goes as follows: one important role of the unconscious is to assess the environment and mobilize physiological resources when it senses challenging external events. Once resources are mobilized and the body is readied, the conscious mind is presented with an ordered version of events that is necessarily temporally delayed so the conscious mind does not initiate counter-productive actions that might interfere with the preparation of physiological resources. Because challenging external events can occur at any time, the conscious mind is always receiving delayed and filtered information about sensory and motor events. Virtually all behavior is unconscious, and conscious awareness rides on top of this activity like an unfolding and delayed story."

This is remarkably like what many neurophysiologists say when they claim that there is, in reality, no such thing as free will: There’s No Such Thing as Free Will

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Here's the thing. Everything is energy, every single part of our universe.

I don't see how consciousness IS energy.

 

[gnostic]

I don't see how consciousness IS energy.

It isn't.

 

[gnostic]

I feel I am fair and objective in my considerations. All of the studies and experiments done by highly qualified parapsychologists (like Sheldrake) and many others showing results that don't make sense in a materialist worldview are wrong you say?? As well as all the anecdotal evidence?? To each their own 'honest' judgment.

Parapsychology isn't science, and parapsychologists aren't scientists.

Parapsychology falls under the pseudoscience.

 

[George-ananda]

Parapsychology isn't science, and parapsychologists aren't scientists.

Parapsychology falls under the pseudoscience.

I disagree and that is just wordplay anyway by the pseudoskeptic community.

 

[Polymath257]

Vodka?

Sorry, I am not Russian...but if you have cognac or single malt scotch, that would be great!

Waitasec, I am not French, nor a Scot! That would mean I have to drink rice wine. Bah!

How about Hibiki whiskey? or you could do Hakushu.

 

[Polymath257]

Talisker? Lagavulin? I can put a few grains of rice next to the glass if you prefer.

I'll take a Laphraoig.

 

[blü 2]

I'll take a Laphraoig.

Ice? A dash of water? Even soda?

 

[Polymath257]

Ice? A dash of water? Even soda?

Depends on my mood. Either neat or a dash of water. You?

 

[blü 2]

Depends on my mood. Either neat or a dash of water. You?

When young I drank it neat (knowing that's what Real Men do). After that I started paying attention to how it tastes. Now I drink it with a splash of water, and occasionally ice as well.

 

[Polymath257]

When young I drank it neat (knowing that's what Real Men do). After that I started paying attention to how it tastes. Now I drink it with a splash of water, and occasionally ice as well.

I'm fairly new to whiskey, so I am still exploring what I like and why. I very much like the peaty aspect of some scotches. But, like I said, I am still exploring.

 

[blü 2]

I'm fairly new to whiskey, so I am still exploring what I like and why. I very much like the peaty aspect of some scotches. But, like I said, I am still exploring.

That never ceases to the best part, I'd say.

At a humble level, I like 1. Teachers, 2. JW Red. One up, I'd say Chivas Regal was better than JW Black. Above that, we've already mentioned some great names and there are plenty more. Glen Moray 12yo is excellent too. (I've never warmed to Glen Fiddich.)

Don't forget to look beyond Scotland and Bourbon County too. For a very impressive mainstream scotch flavor, try Amrut Fusion, made in India using British peat. Or Suntory's The Yamazaki, the single malt of which won the world title, or someone's version of it, in 2014 (a different style to scotch, though Suntory as a label is scotch style). Or (if you can get it, which I can't) Australia's (Tasmania's) whisky from Sullivan's Cove or Lark (also a distinctive style).

And above all, have fun disagreeing with me! After all, my usual drop is rum (Bacardi Oro with ice and water).

 

[gnostic]

How about Hibiki whiskey? or you could do Hakushu.

Now, there's the thought.

Why didn't I think of that?

 

[ChristineM]

I'm fairly new to whiskey, so I am still exploring what I like and why. I very much like the peaty aspect of some scotches. But, like I said, I am still exploring.

I drink very little but will always welcome hogmanay with a glass of neat single malt.

 

[Polymath257]

That never ceases to the best part, I'd say.

At a humble level, I like 1. Teachers, 2. JW Red. One up, I'd say Chivas Regal was better than JW Black. Above that, we've already mentioned some great names and there are plenty more. Glen Moray 12yo is excellent too. (I've never warmed to Glen Fiddich.)

Don't forget to look beyond Scotland and Bourbon County too. For a very impressive mainstream scotch flavor, try Amrut Fusion, made in India using British peat. Or Suntory's The Yamazaki, the single malt of which won the world title, or someone's version of it, in 2014 (a different style to scotch, though Suntory as a label is scotch style). Or (if you can get it, which I can't) Australia's (Tasmania's) whisky from Sullivan's Cove or Lark (also a distinctive style).

And above all, have fun disagreeing with me! After all, my usual drop is rum (Bacardi Oro with ice and water).

So far, I've been exploring bourbons and scotches. A couple of others (Bushmill's red, Hibiki), but I am still very much learning how to taste. So far, I like Four Roses (small batch) and Buffalo Trace (less expensive) for bourbons and Laphraoig and Glen Livet for scotches. But I *know* I have a lot to taste and learn!

I always appreciate a recommendation! Thanks!