The scientific method
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-02-2012, 06:21 AM
RE: The scientific method
(07-02-2012 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  I think you are talking about what gets funded vs. what is the scientific method.
Yep, I'm a little confused on this point. Scientific method is about control over the evidence. Who gets funded is not the scientific method itself, but this too is decided by how we demonstrate evidence.

(07-02-2012 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  For me, evidence is evidence. I can tell the difference between that which I believe and that which has been shown to be true. No objective evidence doesn't mean I won't believe it, but I am not at all surprised that someone else doesn't or won't.
Exactly! Now you should understand me at least a little. I'm not surprised that you aren't convinced.

(07-02-2012 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  And I most certainly won't continue to try to convince anyone without presenting evidence. I would try to find evidence, possibly by convincing someone to fund the research necessary.
All right. Do you think you might try to present the claims to someone anyway, without trying to prove them? There may be some benefit in that.
Let's see how this works on the message I sent you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-02-2012, 08:39 AM
RE: The scientific method
(10-02-2012 06:21 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(07-02-2012 04:25 PM)Chas Wrote:  And I most certainly won't continue to try to convince anyone without presenting evidence. I would try to find evidence, possibly by convincing someone to fund the research necessary.
All right. Do you think you might try to present the claims to someone anyway, without trying to prove them? There may be some benefit in that.
Let's see how this works on the message I sent you.

If you believe something wouldn't it be dishonest not to present it? Why not educate yourself in science and do your own research? If what you believe has a basis in reality, only science will provide convincing evidence.
I think I have only said that there does not seem to be any objective evidence for your claims, and without that you shouldn't expect anyone to believe the reality of what you claim.

I believe that you, like KC, are sincere in your beliefs, but I don't share them as there is no objective, verifiable, repeatable test to provide evidence. Is there anything unexplained that this etheric/subtle stuff explains?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2012, 06:14 AM (This post was last modified: 11-02-2012 08:31 AM by Luminon.)
RE: The scientific method
(10-02-2012 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  If you believe something wouldn't it be dishonest not to present it? Why not educate yourself in science and do your own research? If what you believe has a basis in reality, only science will provide convincing evidence.
I think I have only said that there does not seem to be any objective evidence for your claims, and without that you shouldn't expect anyone to believe the reality of what you claim.
Wow, damn right you are! You know, usually I encounter skeptics who think I'm a preacher of some belief system and that I need to convert them to keep my own faith, so I'd better shut up. So you say I should come out of the closet and don't be apologetic or quiet about it? Big Grin

(10-02-2012 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  I believe that you, like KC, are sincere in your beliefs, but I don't share them as there is no objective, verifiable, repeatable test to provide evidence.
Well, what exactly are KC's beliefs? I've poked around in his topic a little but I haven't found one where he explains the script to those who came in the middle of a movie. He seems to me like a regular Christian.
I have beliefs and I have perception. My beliefs are fallible and open to interpretation and I choose them according to their explanatory power. But my perception just is as it is, a firm part of reality. I don't get to choose it.

There are of course possible tests, but like most of other tests they require personnel, material instruments and financing. Or at least your personal presence if I should convince you subjectively. Some things just can't be done over the internet.

(10-02-2012 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  Is there anything unexplained that this etheric/subtle stuff explains?
Yes, many phenomena in astronomy, physics, biology... Whole books are written on this topic, listing evidence after evidence, and I'm like "Stop, dammit! I'm already convinced and it's 50 pages to go!" Well, I'm exaggerating a little, but the scientific theory of a subtle world is not a unique idea and you might as well read up on it now. I just came to it independently because my senses compel me, not that I'd invent it all.

Jay Alfred is the guy who took made the effort to compile the scientific evidence into books and draw the parallels with esoteric knowledge of the unseen world. He basically did as good job as I could, there is only one objection I have to his reasoning. He insists on explaining all the UFO phenomena and pretty much everything strange in human history and culture as subtle-material life forms. From my experience the answer is not so simple, for mostly technical reasons. Etheric materialization is not an easy thing at all and most of weird stuff people see are deceptive astral visions. But he's still probably right in estimating the abundance of subtle-material critters floating out there and we might as well just go along with it for now.

You can expect things like flyby anomaly of Pioneer probe, or highly excessive microwave signals detected by NASA ARCADE experiment. Dark matter might in fact be partially emitting light in microwave and infrared spectrum. But there are other questions from other areas, like in biology, what is the template that cells grow into, to recreate specific tissue shapes?

To be honest, I must warn you. This is a very messy area of science. As a whole new level of the material world to be discovered, it touches pretty much every area of knowledge. It must also include specific occult tradition (which I happen to be well-versed in because of its explanatory power), for the obvious reason that people over history must have made observations with their own etheric or subtler bodies as well. The scientific language seems to be used correctly and properly referenced to other research. Just be prepared for drawing lots of blasphemously multi-disciplinary parallels and coining new terminology. I'd say this is a big test of open-mindedness.
All right, you can start with Dark Earth and continue with Our invisible bodies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2012, 10:53 AM
RE: The scientific method
(11-02-2012 06:14 AM)Luminon Wrote:  To be honest, I must warn you. This is a very messy area of science. As a whole new level of the material world to be discovered, it touches pretty much every area of knowledge. It must also include specific occult tradition (which I happen to be well-versed in because of its explanatory power), for the obvious reason that people over history must have made observations with their own etheric or subtler bodies as well. The scientific language seems to be used correctly and properly referenced to other research. Just be prepared for drawing lots of blasphemously multi-disciplinary parallels and coining new terminology. I'd say this is a big test of open-mindedness.
All right, you can start with Dark Earth and continue with Our invisible bodies.

The problem with a lot of that literature/research is that it is concocting a theory to provide an explanation of things whose very existence has not been shown. There is no evidence of ghosts or djinns or ETs or psi or any of the other things that orgone/subtle world idea is attempting to explain.

It seems to me to be a solution looking for a problem.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2012, 12:41 PM
RE: The scientific method
Is the scientific method similar to the missionary method?
I'm always looking for new things to try.

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thomas's post
12-02-2012, 07:03 AM
RE: The scientific method
(11-02-2012 10:53 AM)Chas Wrote:  The problem with a lot of that literature/research is that it is concocting a theory to provide an explanation of things whose very existence has not been shown. There is no evidence of ghosts or djinns or ETs or psi or any of the other things that orgone/subtle world idea is attempting to explain.

It seems to me to be a solution looking for a problem.
That's what I say! The djinns or ETs are superfluous in there. We don't have a proper definition of them anyway, so why bother explaining them?
I wanted you to skip parts like that and look at explanatory power for scientific phenomena. You know, astronomy, physics, biology...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2012, 09:51 AM
RE: The scientific method
(12-02-2012 07:03 AM)Luminon Wrote:  
(11-02-2012 10:53 AM)Chas Wrote:  The problem with a lot of that literature/research is that it is concocting a theory to provide an explanation of things whose very existence has not been shown. There is no evidence of ghosts or djinns or ETs or psi or any of the other things that orgone/subtle world idea is attempting to explain.

It seems to me to be a solution looking for a problem.
That's what I say! The djinns or ETs are superfluous in there. We don't have a proper definition of them anyway, so why bother explaining them?
I wanted you to skip parts like that and look at explanatory power for scientific phenomena. You know, astronomy, physics, biology...

I will look, but I currently maintain that it looks like a solution looking for a problem.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: