The Science Deceit

Anything on the news and elsewhere in the media with evidence of digital manipulation, bogus story-lines and propaganda
sharpstuff
Member
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 1:31 pm

The Science Deceit

Unread post by sharpstuff »

The Science Deceit
or Science, what science?

It seems to me, at least, that Man, to understand his environment and what happens within it, is to reduce the world to a singular entity from which all else is derived. This entity might be called the ‘God particle’, based on the belief that an entity such as an amorphous god of sorts, created the universe from this ‘building block’.

In this attempt, many theories have been put forward throughout the centuries to explain how this ‘God particle’ arranged itself into what we are able to communicate with our senses. The first question to ask would be: How did this ‘original’ particle replicate itself into the Universe, whatever that is?

If an original notion is based on a false premise, where do we go from there?

We call this, in its various incarnations, ‘science’.

I would like to explore the notion of ‘science’ as it has become a catch-all for explorations into Nature, technology, medical research and so forth.

It is my belief that the notion of science and its explorations and ‘discoveries’, have been usurped by those who deem to control the world for their own reasons and subjecting us all to their notions. Logic and research have been modified or created from scratch, to suit various agendas that have little to do with ‘real’ science (the perpetual ongoing study of something or everything) which must be open-ended and can never be, in a sane world, ‘set in concrete’ with such expressions as ‘the science is in’ or ‘there can be no doubt’. I am sure readers can add their own phrases.

A dictionary might offer the following:

Meaning of science in English

Science, noun:

(knowledge from) the careful study of the structure and behaviour of the physical world, especially by watching, measuring, and doing experiments, and the development of theories to describe the results of these activities.

pure/applied science:

recent developments in science and technology
Space travel is one of the marvels/wonders of modern science. (?)

the science:

The facts and opinions that are provided by scientists who have studied a particular subject or situation:
We spoke with a few dietitians to help us understand what the science tells us about celery juice and your health.
The government insisted that it would follow the science with regard to the wearing of face masks.

Note: italics mine.

**********************************
Etymology of the word ‘science:

Note: The following is copied from the site below. The italics are mine.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/science

science (n.)

mid-14c., "what is known, knowledge (of something) acquired by study; information;" also "assurance of knowledge, certitude, certainty," from Old French science "knowledge, learning, application; corpus of human knowledge" (12c.), from Latin scientia "knowledge, a knowing; expertness," from sciens (genitive scientis) "intelligent, skilled," present participle of scire "to know," probably originally "to separate one thing from another, to distinguish," related to scindere "to cut, divide" (from PIE root *skei- "to cut, split;" source also of Greek skhizein "to split, rend, cleave," Gothic skaidan, Old English sceadan "to divide, separate").

From late 14c. in English as "book-learning," also "a particular branch of knowledge or of learning;" also "skillfulness, cleverness; craftiness." From c. 1400 as "experiential knowledge;" also "a skill, handicraft; a trade." From late 14c. as "collective human knowledge" (especially that gained by systematic observation, experiment, and reasoning). Modern (restricted) sense of "body of regular or methodical observations or propositions concerning a particular subject or speculation" is attested from 1725; in 17c.-18c. this concept commonly was called philosophy. Sense of "non-arts studies" is attested from 1670s.

Science, since people must do it, is a socially embedded activity. It progresses by hunch, vision, and intuition. Much of its change through time does not record a closer approach to absolute truth, but the alteration of cultural contexts that influence it so strongly. Facts are not pure and unsullied bits of information; culture also influences what we see and how we see it. Theories, moreover, are not inexorable ("unyielding" or "inflexible.") inductions from facts. The most creative theories are often imaginative visions imposed upon facts; the source of imagination is also strongly cultural. [Stephen Jay Gould, introduction to "The Mismeasure of Man," 1981]

In science you must not talk before you know. In art you must not talk before you do. In literature you must not talk before you think. [John Ruskin, "The Eagle's Nest," 1872]

The distinction is commonly understood as between theoretical truth (Greek epistemē) and methods for effecting practical results (tekhnē), but science sometimes is used for practical applications and art for applications of skill. To blind (someone) with science "confuse by the use of big words or complex explanations" is attested from 1937, originally noted as a phrase from Australia and New Zealand.

********************END****************************

Basically, ‘science’ is a search based on any or all of our skills. We end up making deductions at a time and place. However, if we change the time or place, we end up with different deductions, constantly, since time and place can never be the same from one moment until the next. However, the sciences presented to us, especially in today’s pretty much insane ‘world’, we seem to have ground to a halt. ‘The science is in’, we are told, so no need to go any further, with (or mostly without) palpable evidence to the contrary. The teacher rules, O.K.?

So for a start, we are confronted by words such as ‘scientists’, ‘experts’, ‘doctors’ and other terms. These are very nearly always referring to individuals or groups who are nameless, have ‘qualifications’ gained only in a ‘College’ or ‘University’ from books and lecturers who are following an agenda (either theirs or others). They follow a standard line like a railway track heading for a specific railway station, where no side-line/track is possible. Those who deem to wish to deviate will, in some way, be ostracised and not be allowed on the train and no other line is possible. This is not science, it is a form of coercion.

Evidence must be palpable. It must be seen and experimentation must never cease. Even when exploration seems to have been completed, it never can be, since the Universe is unfolding continuously, even when we no longer exist.

Science has become akin to a religion. Indeed, it has become a religion. To exist, it requires followers, where truths (as always) are products of beliefs. They are personal, even if one follows a particular line of thought or worship. So-called colleges and Universities are religious institutions. They work in the same manner as churches and cathedrals. They insist they have the knowledge and wisdom from their respective bibles, long known to be mainly fabrications of events and supported by icons, secret rites, language and so on. They insist we believe their wares, books or ideas or their fabrications on pain of severe punishment.

We have been ‘taught’ (and I use the word lightly in a real sense) to believe what we are told by those who deem to know more than us. If we follow these teachings, we end up as extensions of the teachers, not ourselves, if we wish to delve deeper or that we see anomalies most of which will not be tolerated, of course. One is not ‘allowed’ to concentrate or doing what should be done, or to attempt to falsify what has become a ‘truth’. As I have said, any ‘truth’ is a product of beliefs which are personal and no ‘universal’ truth can be attained, no matter what. The fact that millions of people might agree to others’ truths is evident from the notions and adherence to minds that are deemed better or cleverer than ours and the failure, through lack of the teaching of alternatives to the current narrative/s, are observable in everyday life.

We must always ask:
What science? when confronted with any aspect of our lives.
Who exactly are these people dictating to us?
By what ‘right’ do they imperil our future with their so-called ‘science’?
What replicable evidence supports their claims about anything?

Be well.