What is science hiding from us?

[Imaginarynumber1]

Yeah, but read the OP again. He's imagining secret scientific ventures by those in high places; not what is common knowledge and in books at the library.

Yeah, but those :secret nefarious types" are just the ones that bothered to take the time to learn something, unlike the OP who has an irrational fear of people more educated than him, it would seem.

[Lava_Lady]

as in the people behind science!

This could only be IF the "people behind science" are working for ONE organization, which they are not.

There are so many branches of "science" that to bunch the fields represented by the term in one lump and then make a generalized statement about the scientists "hiding things" does not make sense.

What "things" would "they" be hiding?

Maybe if you chose one specific scientific field and then accused one specific scientist of hiding a factoid or something...

[Likely Guy]

Actually, the converse of what you fear is what I think is actually coming true. So much information and ideas are being tossed about on the internet now, that people are becoming jaded, and not believing anything any more, even if it might be true. The internet user's battlecries "photoshop" and "fake and g**". I ain't scared of people being taken over by information. Bring it on.

What you were thinking is actually the 'inverse' of what I was thinking, not the 'converse'.

That said, you said; "...people are becoming jaded, and not believing anything any more, even if it might be true."

I'm not saying that this is what you mean't but, I don't see how becoming jaded and not believing what might be true is helpful.

The internet gave the world an encyclopedia and tore all of the responsible parts out of it.

After all, anyone with a blog and a question can call themselves an 'investigative journalist' nowadays, can't they? But, back in the day, journalism courses came with an 'ethics' class.

Media-wise, we're moving into the age of instant propaganda. I don't fear the movement of information, I fear the movement of disinformation.

[_Only]

Thanks for the vocabulary lesson. It was helpful. I wouldn't have learned my mistake until you corrected it, and I checked a respectable backup source online.

That said, you said; "...people are becoming jaded, and not believing anything any more, even if it might be true."

I'm not saying that this is what you mean't but, I don't see how becoming jaded and not believing what might be true is helpful.

Whether it's helpful or not is beside the point that people are commonly doing the opposite of what you say; believing whatever is thrown at them. The point in tossing in 'even if it may be true' is only to show that people are now showing hypersensitivity to the possibility of mis/disinformation, as opposed to desensitization. This is a fairly new thing to people; questioning what they read. You can't thank Encyclopedia Britannica for that. You have to thank the internet. Were you as questioning to information you read 20 years ago? Did you seek out alternate resources to agree or disagree with what you read, and then weigh out the options to decide?

The internet gave the world an encyclopedia and tore all of the responsible parts out of it.

Which sites on the internet exactly, so we can be sure what part of the internet, which is all encompassing? Because it seems like you're ignoring the responsible to inflate the ridiculous. Would you read something you saw written here as fact and not ask for citing of its source? Do you think you are that different from many people in that? Or are you right, and that anything people say is taken as written law, and can't be challenged, because it's on the internet, where no one is responsible for what they say? David Icke a respected speaker, and Scientology a well reputed belief system.

After all, anyone with a blog and a question can call themselves an 'investigative journalist' nowadays, can't they?

They can call themselves whatever they like, but that doesn't mean people with healthy critical thinking skills don't see them as anything more than what they are. The people who think otherwise are the same type who will not stop for a police officer flashing his lights on them because "the NEWS TOLD ME not to stop for ANYONE unless it was safe!!" Hopefully these types of people are starting to learn some tools to start to translate information they receive, due to an increase in information flow, include a degree of false information passing below their eyes.

Media-wise, we're moving into the age of instant propaganda. I don't fear the movement of information, I fear the movement of disinformation.

Then you are in good company in this forum area.

Just keep in mind how the majority of replies to this thread have gone, and every one like it. How many people are blindly following, and how many are questioning them? There's your sign on the way things are going.

edit: IMO!

Edited August 28, 2013 by _Only

[Mikko-kun]

Actually in my opinion science has no answer to the really deep questions, and not even a clue on how it might proceed. Science is just organized, institutionalized knowledge of physical phenomena.

Well not the scientific community body that consists of "skeptic"-approved sciences. Depends what you approve as science though. Science does not have to be just a method of understanding the physical world, it's just boxed there to assure integrity which I think it loses in that boxing-in.

[Mikko-kun]

And for the OP's question, are the shot-callers in the international approved science gang plotting nefarious (or just plain plotting) some hidden agenda? How should I know, and why should I care, I keep asking myself (I'm not denying anything). I think that they're just the likely scapegoats of the era, at the very least, the era of questioning authority (Pluto = to question, Capricorn = authority).

You gotta admit there's a lot of authority-questioning going about, with all the conspiracy theories and the like, they've become more a mainstream thing by now. People question the integrity of politicians and their bosses and those who try to act as authorities without first showing proper credentials (sceptics asking proof is a form of questioning the authority, authority of a believer). I think the OP's question falls to that category.

[ShadowSot]

Well not the scientific community body that consists of "skeptic"-approved sciences. Depends what you approve as science though. Science does not have to be just a method of understanding the physical world, it's just boxed there to assure integrity which I think it loses in that boxing-in.

Well as long as you can provide repeatable evidence and support and make verifiable predictions with your claims, that should count as science.

[Mikko-kun]

Well as long as you can provide repeatable evidence and support and make verifiable predictions with your claims, that should count as science.

But what if you can't repeat anything in the most exact manner due to a constant, permanent change in reality? Then you either have inaccurate science or no science if you use that criteria, unless you take to account the possible conditions. I'm talking about verifying things at a later time. You can't have integrity with a shut-in mindset.

[Frank Merton]

But what if you can't repeat anything in the most exact manner due to a constant, permanent change in reality? Then you either have inaccurate science or no science if you use that criteria, unless you take to account the possible conditions. I'm talking about verifying things at a later time. You can't have integrity with a shut-in mindset.

Could you elaborate? You seem to be worried about some systematic change in the nature of the universe going on that we can't detect. That seems an elaborate and paranoid thing to worry about.

Scientists do tend to have a "shut-in" mindset. They are experts at spotting nonsense and dismissing it.

[ShadowSot]

Could you elaborate? You seem to be worried about some systematic change in the nature of the universe going on that we can't detect. That seems an elaborate and paranoid thing to worry about.

Scientists do tend to have a "shut-in" mindset. They are experts at spotting nonsense and dismissing it.

It's an excuse to justify why woo brand x won't work, but we can confidently launch probes out of the solar system on a planned orbit.

[frenat]

In all seriousness, I'm actually afraid of what the internet has become. Some say it's the "democratization of information". I think that it's become more like the spread of misinformation that answers to no one. If you get the most hits and links, the search engines will put you at the top of the list. The conspiracy theory or alternate religion websites know that, and thrive off it.

the best AND worst things about the Internet is it allows information to spread so easily. There is no filter for stupidity.

[Frank Merton]

There are always cults and stuff. I think the internet does the world a favor by making it so easy for them to show themselves whole so naive people can get exposed to it indirectly (not person to person) and thereby build up immunity to the toxins gradually.

[Stellar]

But what if you can't repeat anything in the most exact manner due to a constant, permanent change in reality? Then you either have inaccurate science or no science if you use that criteria, unless you take to account the possible conditions. I'm talking about verifying things at a later time. You can't have integrity with a shut-in mindset.

If you can't repeat it, why should anyone believe it happened in the first place? If i told you I manage to walk on water, but I can't show you, would you believe me?

[Frank Merton]

Well no two experiments can ever be carried out exactly the same. For that reason all measured quantities have an accuracy attached to them, usually just implied by the number of decimal places but sometimes explicitly stated. For most ordinary activities such as sending objects to the moon and building skyscrapers, the accuracy we can achieve suffices.

[Peter B]

so it seems as if science has an answer for everything these days. The possible thought of what if comes to mind..right? like, {What if Scientists are secretly against the civilians}..well, they do create cures,have logical explanations for a majority of things, ECT. but.....WAIT, Science must have a plan for future creations...key word.."future". look at all of the UFO sightings that have been surfacing lately. look at all of the accusations of extraterrestrials being held at Area 51. so the question is...WHAT IS SCIENCE HIDING FROM US?

Good thought.

I mean, scientists at Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation develop WIFI technology, and what do we do with it? http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/259530/woman-walks-off-pier-while-glued-to-phone

*sigh*

[Mikko-kun]

If you can't repeat it, why should anyone believe it happened in the first place? If i told you I manage to walk on water, but I can't show you, would you believe me?

I'd be on the fence with that.

But how can science say they know what's bs and what's not about things they dont study properly?

It's an excuse to justify why woo brand x won't work, but we can confidently launch probes out of the solar system on a planned orbit.

Have you studied any "woo" science for a good amount or is it just your personal opinion?

Edited December 20, 2013 by Mikko-kun

[ShadowSot]

Have you studied any "woo" science for a good amount or is it just your personal opinion?

Can you make an actual solid and testable claim with your knowledge of astrology? If so, I have a guy who will give you one million dollars.

[Mikko-kun]

Can you make an actual solid and testable claim with your knowledge of astrology? If so, I have a guy who will give you one million dollars.

Anyone probably can, if they practise enough. I've just year and a half of study under my belt, and I dont study the birth time rectification that much, about 1/8th of my studies that, and I bet a lot of astrologers use that portion of their time too, no more, for that. Trying to interpret the person's chart is too iffy to pass a Randi challenge, but birth time rectification leaves no room for ifs. This is the problem, to find an astrologer who'd be an expert on that thing and also willing to take the challenge. Ask me a decade or two from now and just maybe I might... maybe. No point to try half-assedly, wouldn't you agree? Or... you might make it in a decade or less if you focus on just that. But I'm sure it's entirely possible, no question about that. Just very impractical and elaborate, not what clients want usually. And certainly not the reason people get involved with astrology and study it.

But tell you what, I can give anyone willing all I know about that subject so you can try that million for yourself. You might be surprised how easy it is if you're motivated. I have no motivation for a million... not just because other than the million, it's not how I want to use my time, it's not the most useful thing I can do with my life either, unless it's 10 million. You could do a lot good with that sum, million is kinda small unless you're thinking just yourself. In that case 100k would be enough. But if I wanna make the selfish choise, I just bail out until I feel I can pass it like a breeze, because until then it's just not worth the trouble.

And I bet it's like that for a lot of other astrologers, for selfish or philanthropist reasons, money is not just the main thing driving them nor proving it. And we've proven it works for ourselves and for most clients already, so million is kinda weak. If he could pay it in advance, that'd be a whole another matter, but understandably that won't be the case.

And sorry for the wall of text but... proving to myself astrology works was and still is one main thing for me, proving it to others is not as important. It would take more altruism than what I have to go out of my way and make proving it others a personal quest that can take such a long time. And look at myself when I'm 70 or so and say "well good for you sir, you got your million and mark of approval from Randi, feeling really good about yourself? This is what you wanted to do with your life?"... that's kinda the problem. I dont wanna feel disappointed at living my life, and it's really not such a small undertaking, and the reasons are.... not good enough as they are.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Mikko-kun

[Stellar]

You sound like you're just upset because you want to believe in something that's not supported scientifically, but you cant accept that maybe you're wrong in your belief.

It also seems that quite simply everyone with any sort of supernatural power or ability is just "not interested" in doing any of the required work to establish it scientifically --- yet then go and cry out about how bad science is, or how its "hiding" stuff from people because science doesn't back you up.

I dont wanna feel disappointed at living my life

Then you certainly don't want to go take a challenge, fail and have science tell you your belief is unfounded, right?

[Stellar]

This whole thread seems to simply be a hissy fit thrown around because certain people's beliefs go against science and they can't accept that their belief is anything but undeniable fact. This hissy fit is only compounded by the fact that most people these days will stick with science instead of unfounded claims.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Stellar

[ShadowSot]

So... no then.

it's not the most useful thing I can do with my life either, unless it's 10 million.

Oh sure. I bet you are rolling in so much money you've nothing that you could turn a million dollars to.

Of course, it's a bit more than just a million. Prove it through the Million dollar challenge, tehn you can prove it through and win a Nobel prize, which carries it's own monetary reward. You'd be single handidly responsible from moving astrology from a joke to a serious scientific field.

10 million would be a bit low of an estimate.

And I'm sure you can imagine a few things of which a million dollars would go a long way towards.

And we've proven it works for ourselves and for most clients already, so million is kinda weak.

You've managed to prove cold reading works, any mentalist can do as good and has done as good a job as an astrologer.

[Mikko-kun]

Prizes, money, fame... pain in the horse, all of them. I can't prevent you from taking my words however you want, but put yourself in my shoes, try it, really try it. And then consider my words again. It's your life at stake, it's your free time at stake, it's your motivation at stake. And I dont know where you got the idea money should be so important to everyone, but people got better things to do with their life, the things they actually like and enjoy, than hunt for a million and in old age "enjoy" that. Or did you miss me saying it probably takes decades if you start the studying from scratch.

It may be a wall of text I wrote for you, unpleasant because we have bad forum blood, but you should read it with thought before keeping this "prove yourself with Randi" up. Is all I have to say if all you gonna do is just have a go at me instead of think about my side of the coin. If you're so frustrated for me not trying, then nobody prevents you from proving us I was a bailout and you could do it. I even help you if you go for it, if you want. But of course it just has to be me because...? I'm a holy astrologer? Because I've studied it a year and a half? Because it's my thing? Really? Well everyone's entitled to their opinions, but pull your head out of whereever it is if you think I dont have a life.

[ShadowSot]

And I dont know where you got the idea money should be so important to everyone, but people got better things to do with their life, the things they actually like and enjoy, than hunt for a million and in old age "enjoy" that

You think small. A million dollars is how many vaccines, how many bowels of rice, how many shoes or clothing, how much towards proving things you claim will benefit towards the future of mankind.

Ask any scientist who has won the nobel prize, and I can say I've met a few, if the point was the money. It wasn't. They were doing what they were interested in and by benefit received the accolades for their work.

I read your post, it just came off as a justification for why you aren't going to take the test and prove what you do actually works, and not anything different than what mentalists or similar types do.

I really don't believe it works, and I have good reason to believe it doesn't work, decades of studies that show at best a bit of cold reading and post hoc rationalization.

Which puts it the same as homeopathy, ancient aliens, and many other claims that people are absolutely sure of but have no real proof, with plenty of counter evidence to their claims.

[Stellar]

And now we go to the next line of defense: "You disagree with me because you haven't actually thought my post through!"

Perhaps ppl have thought your claims through and they still just disbelieve you?

[Mikko-kun]

You think good, but I think big and weight the options. Why buy vaccines and rice when you could buy them land of their own and let them become economically more independent with garden-farming? Land ain't that cheap, and I dont see why I should be the one in this situation... it seems you're the one who's trying to push me to do things you just think you can't do yourself. On one hand you dont believe it, but on the other hand you think I could do it... which one is it? Can't be both. I believe you could do it. And I'm not messing around. Maybe you are, I'm not. That why I took it bad, tho I know it's just forums.

If you think it should be done, do it. I dont think it needs to be done. Not for just a million and some approved label we dont need. Might be different if you had something to refute the theory of astrology, not just some practitioners. It's a common fact not all astrology practitioners are legit and try to patch it up with things they shouldn't. Studying them gives a twisted picture of the thing itself, ShadowSot.

I dont mind you disbelieving me at all, I just dont see why, apart from pure denial, Stellar.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Mikko-kun