Valid Scientific Persuit Of The Unfalsifyable

Once an atheist boasted that if you take away all American atheists, you will take away over 90% of American scientists and only 1% of American prisoners! Of course you can guess what he was trying to insinuate. In modern times, 'science' has become a term like a perfume that we sprey on someone so he may smell like a 'genius'. I will latter show you that that was exactly the reason behind the invention of this word.When you close exermine the scientists, they kill their hours and people's taxes smashing inexistent, zero dimensional particles, gawking at ridiculus fantasies as wormholes, blackholes, time travel, big bangs etc. Isn't it a great thing for America to lose 90% of such a gang of idiots?An atheist might think that their supposed dominance in science mean something cool about atheists. However, it may as well mean that science has decraded into an idiology! It doesn't take a lot of effort to understand that if atheists has dominated science, it can hardly fail to be biased towards atheism! when catholics dominated science in dark ages, they could see the 'hand of God' everywhere in the universe. It is both naive and stupid to think that atheists are immune to this human tendency of 'seeing what we want to beleive' or 'not seeing what we want to doubt'. Our society have left only people of a particular mindset to rule science and then wonder why some questions (such as what consciousness is) remain subbonly unanswerable.WHY WAS 'SCIENCE' COINED?It has ended up becoming the platform to insinuate the difference between that which the pholosophers think is valid 'knowledge' and what he think are baseless beleifs. Unfortunately though, when the concern with a sharp discrimination between knowledge and nonknowledge exceeds the concern for expanding knowledge, our body of knowledge becomes surverely limited.WHAT IS SCIENCE?When you ask almost everybody, he tells you something like: we begine by observing the world, then some self proclaimed 'godman' frame some hypothesis to 'explain' what we observe. Then some 'astrologers' uses the hypothesis to predict something. Then we go and persuade some self proclaimed priests to exert some peer review (or preasure) against or for the new whisky. Then as more and more members of 'experts' join the new cult, the hypothesis is relabled 'theory'. Once the cult spread all over the world, it becomes unquestionable fact!So what people have in mind for science is actually 'scientific method' defined by philosophers. It is curius that even though science is ultimately founded upon philosophy, our scientist try to deny on your face that philosophy and science has any relation!'Science' however does not equal 'scientific method'. 'science' is coined from a latin word 'scientia' which simply means 'knowledge'. There is no method for aquiring knowledge! Any method only limit our body of knowledge!FALSIFIABILITYThe claims that can be objectively verified are also falsifiable. However, this criteria has often been swang too much by philosophers to mean that unfalsifiable claims cannot be persued scientifically! This is the standard, cheap criteria by which our scientist (people with a particular mindset) shove off the kind of things they don't want them to be part of 'science'. They can then use the fact that your claim doesn't appear in science books to belittle it.The claim that unfalsifiable propositions can never get to be of scientific study was just an atheistically inspired quest to remove 'god' etc as a valid hypothesis for scientific investigation. The atheist feer that if we persue 'God' scientifically, not only does the hypothesis become more respectable, but soon we may find a mounting evidences for God. So the only way is to exclude 'God' a priori from science. Then the atheist (which is just the scientist but now comming from the window) can use the fact that 'God' does not appear in science books to dismiss that the 'knowledge of God' is not legitimate knowledge. The atheist is infact engaging in curcular reasoning, though one that is a bit hard to notice as the circle is too large.To refute the claim that unfalsifiable propositions cannot be studied scientifically, lets consider the search for exoplanets. The claim that exoplanets exists is unfalsifiable because one can never go all around a possibly infinite universe trying to prove that there is no planet everywhere other than the solar system. However to verify the existence of the exoplanets, one must consider a special case of the generaly unfalsifiable claim. The special case itself must be falsifiable.This is exactly how to persue unfalsifiable claims (such as the claim about the existence of God). In sammary we do it this way:1.)Let P be an unfalsifiable claim.2.)There can be some set of of possibly infinite claims say claims q1,q2,q3,...,qn all of which are falsifiable.3.)Proving any of the qn proves P.So even if science must work with falsifiable claims, it can still persue unfalsifiable claims!Lets for instance consider a case with 'God'. P is the claim 'God exist'. Then q1 is the claim: if you discover life in exoplanets, then their DNA will look exactly like those on earth even if there has never been a physical contact between these planets. Ergo 'God' can be studied scientifically! The otherwise claim is based more of on stereotype and indoctrinations than carefull thinking!

Critical Thinking. An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. By Max Black, Professor of Philosophy, Cornell University. (New York: Prentice-Hal…

The unfalsifyability ruler is used far much more rigidly when applying to non mainstream theories, especially those distastefull to atheists! Our payed scientists wants a very quick way of brushing aside what he does not want in the basket of 'science', sweeping it into the basket of 'pseudoscience' (these guys takes the beer when it comes to labels)

For instance, to explain the null results of some of his experiments in telepathy, Rubert Sheldrake said that the presence of skeptics affects the results! Our atheistic mindset scientist immediately throws such claims to the folder of 'pseudoscience' when the proponent suggest even a single ad oc. However, when General Relativity failed to correctly predict the dynamics of galaxies, Einsteinian fanatics were at ease with their claim that some unseen fairy tooth as 'dark matter' affected the results!

Why should dark matter ad oc warrant further investigation but not the claim that our beleifs affect the universe? Because the latter suggest a mind working in the fundamental forces of nature. It is realy not because the latter makes the theory unfalsifiable as they pretend. Our atheistic scientists judges the ad oc with their mechanical view of the world of which beleifs affecting molecules are deamed nonsense without proper investigation. It is this beleif (in ubsence of mind from fundamental interactions) though that we are trying to question by conducting a psi experiment and atheist cannot be allowed to use it as a platform to declare by fiat what is a 'sensiblee' and what is 'nonsensible' ad oc. When viewed from atheistic viewfinder, Sheldrake ad oc looks nonsense. However when viewed from spiritual viewfinder, it fits perfectly the world view Shaldrake is trying to prove by proving telepathy: can mind interact with matter, in ways not anticipated by mainstream science?

"The tide is turning Drexk-and Isreal just bombed Iran to escalate WW3 that will make everything else yeaterday's news (hope not)-explosions in Syria and Iraq too
Iran is the biggest sponsor of organized terror strikes, but Biden released $6 billion…"

Antarctic pyramids and structures.....No preamble today.We may be getting a clearer picture of what the “we’re going down this weekend” might involve. And it’s only Thursday Urgent Alert: Space Force Flexed on Deep State Showing they can/will Shut…

You need to be a member of Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community to add comments!

Join Ashtar Command - Spiritual Community

Comments

Roaring Lovely October 22, 2016 at 2:20pm

Wings, I can't read the link you provided!
Roaring Lovely October 22, 2016 at 2:18pm

One place to start that exploration is to consider how the mind interact with the brain. But a new philosophy of science is necesary for appropriate paradigm shift. Our cognitive neuroscientists are stucked with thinking that the mind must be the by product of neural activities. It never seem to occur that causality is also in the other direction.

I have also begun considering arcane means of isomerizing bio chemicals. When you see me do this, getta know that it is akin to a goalkeeper comming to the field to score lol! It means that our 'foward men' are realy doing poor job!
Feather Winger October 22, 2016 at 9:45am

I agree that that we need to explore the ways that mind interacts with matter.. I also noticed how you do your logic as a kind of math. I use a system from Max Black where I use diagrams and circles.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy/article/critical...

Critical Thinking. An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. By Max Black, Professor of Philo…

Critical Thinking. An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. By Max Black, Professor of Philosophy, Cornell University. (New York: Prentice-Hal…
Roaring Lovely October 21, 2016 at 1:08pm

Then what realy does 'falsifiability' mean? The same same philosopher, Carl Popper suggests that we realy can never get to prove any scientific claim! If we can never prove anything, then most likely, we can never falsify anything either, at least not, to the satisfaction everybody (some people still hold even the flat earth theory!). So there is no such a thing as 'falsifyable'. Our scientist momentarily forget that truth is in some way dependent on perspective. To whom must we falsify things? Who gives him the authority?

Now lets come back to the atheist. He says that he has no need to disprove the existence of God and that it is the one who makes the claim who should make the prove. True! However, if given arguments for god, he rejects them based ultimately on absence of 'God' in science books! So he denies the 'proof' cause God is unfalsifiable but demands the proof even if he cannot falsify 'God'!
Roaring Lovely October 21, 2016 at 12:50pm

The unfalsifyability ruler is used far much more rigidly when applying to non mainstream theories, especially those distastefull to atheists! Our payed scientists wants a very quick way of brushing aside what he does not want in the basket of 'science', sweeping it into the basket of 'pseudoscience' (these guys takes the beer when it comes to labels)

For instance, to explain the null results of some of his experiments in telepathy, Rubert Sheldrake said that the presence of skeptics affects the results! Our atheistic mindset scientist immediately throws such claims to the folder of 'pseudoscience' when the proponent suggest even a single ad oc. However, when General Relativity failed to correctly predict the dynamics of galaxies, Einsteinian fanatics were at ease with their claim that some unseen fairy tooth as 'dark matter' affected the results!

Why should dark matter ad oc warrant further investigation but not the claim that our beleifs affect the universe? Because the latter suggest a mind working in the fundamental forces of nature. It is realy not because the latter makes the theory unfalsifiable as they pretend. Our atheistic scientists judges the ad oc with their mechanical view of the world of which beleifs affecting molecules are deamed nonsense without proper investigation. It is this beleif (in ubsence of mind from fundamental interactions) though that we are trying to question by conducting a psi experiment and atheist cannot be allowed to use it as a platform to declare by fiat what is a 'sensiblee' and what is 'nonsensible' ad oc. When viewed from atheistic viewfinder, Sheldrake ad oc looks nonsense. However when viewed from spiritual viewfinder, it fits perfectly the world view Shaldrake is trying to prove by proving telepathy: can mind interact with matter, in ways not anticipated by mainstream science?

This reply was deleted.

Spiritual Blogs

Valid Scientific Persuit Of The Unfalsifyable

Comments

Featured Blogs

Calm In The Midst Of The Storm

Book: ASHTAR – A Tribute Compiled by Tuella

The Fiery Forces Of Creation Are Sweeping The Earth - June 22th, 2022

Interdimensional Being: Where Do You Consciously Reside?

Note: this page contains paid content.

Latest Activity

New Forum Posts

Soothing Aid To Ascension By Natalie Glasson & The Venus Beings

I'm Pansexual, and Here's What I Want You to Know

World Economic Forum (WEF) member and lead adviser to Klaus Schwab by the name of Yuval Noah Harari is eager to see the world taken over by "non-organic entities"

The 5 Principles Of Co-Creation By Solara An-Ra & The Pleiadian Councils Of Light

Note: this page contains paid content.