Again, I've been warned that I'm going to make myself unrespectable by the shocking act of reading a book about science by the most renowned of scientists and regarding what he said as being what he meant. It's remarkable, considering how much the materialists hate post-modern analysis how readily they take to even its most absurd practices of literary criticism when the plain-spoken words of one of their icons are inconvenient and unacceptable.
Well, in order to both show how deep my rebellion against the totalitarianism of conventional materialist dogma is and because it is full of rather startling information I am going to post a link to the recent Science Set Free Podcast,
Beyond Phyicalism
Some of the startling things said:
- The "file drawer effect" a tool of materialist refusal to look at scientific research they don't like* and which they hold discredits that science, is, actually, a near ubiquitious practice of the science they not only accept but do, themselves.
- The frightening situation where an enormous percentage of medical and pharmacological studies which are published and taken as valid science, effecting treatments and other areas of health could not be replicated.
- The materialist straight jacket that is, still the absolutely required framing of everything is and has been falling apart even as the requirements of it are even more rigidly enforced through the media and on educated discussion. Even informed atheists are openly talking about its complete inadequacy.
It is growing clearer that the common received and required way of thinking enforced on us since the advent of CSICOP is a fabric of ideological lies and the result is massive intellectual decadence with a patina of sciencyness.
One of the worst effects of that is something I've talked about here, that the atheist-materialist tactic of impeaching peoples' experience cannot be isolated and is a definite contributor to the refusal to believe valid science. The cynicism of that insistence that we can't trust our experience insists on ignoring that everything about science relies on that same experience, on the experience of those who do the research. If someone can't trust the experience which they have, they have even less reason to trust the reports of experience that other people claim that they had. Mix that with reports of retracted studies, studies which are not replicable , of scientific fraud, of science whose results are fudged to please the corporations that pay for them, the militaries that commission them, etc. not to mention those which are made to support materialist ideology instead of to look honestly at phenomena, and it's no wonder that there is so much skepticism, much of it illegitimate skepticism of real science. It is turning out that pseudo-skepticism, bad skepticism drives out good skepticism and the results are a general cynicism and a fear of expressing belief in anything.
* As Rupert Sheldrake and Mark Vernon discuss, the routine dismissal of reviewed, published psychic research, over decades has led to the situation where it may, well, be the field of scientific study which is free of file draw effect. That has, actually been studied, rigorously. For the file drawer effect to be a valid way to dismiss the results of the published studies there would have had to have been an enormous number of formally conducted studies which were suppressed, far more than the number of those engaged in the formal study of reported psychic phenomena could have conducted and suppressed, especially given the miniscule amount of money given for that research. It is almost certainly the case that the one area of study most subjected to false claims of a file drawer effect is among those where that is least possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment