Follow The Science – With Caution

Let me run down a short list of what Science has gotten wrong.

– Science once said 75 years ago smoking cigarettes was healthy.

– Science, as recently as 30 years ago, believed shoving slits under your eyelids and inducing electric shock therapy helped remove negative memories.

– Science, as little as 20 years ago, believed you could have multiple “split” personalities, though this has never actually been proven.

– Science 120 years ago believed bloodletting cured diseases. Our first President died from bloodletting under the care of our first Surgeon General, who also believed black people were “subhuman.”

– Science once believed the Big Big occurred 6.7 Billion years ago, now it is 14 Billion. Along with this belief is that everything came from nothing. How on earth could you every prove that in a lab experiment?

– Science believes that it is okay for a child as young as 3 to choose its own sexual identity and will provide hormonal therapy to alter the body, even though there is absolutely no science to show (in nature ) that any species can choose its sexual identity, nor can you actually change the sex of any person through therapy. They may look more feminine and/or masculine, but those are only physical features that have been manipulated by chemicals.

– Science says that people who suffer from mental illness have a “chemical imbalance,” but never actually state what chemicals are actually imbalanced, nor what such chemicals do in the human mind that causes mental illness. Most often treatment is nothing more than mood-altering medication that has no lasting health benefit to the patient.

– Science says mankind can adjust the world’s temperature when there is no evidence to support the claim; lots of studies, but no conclusive evidence that can be reproduced in the laboratory. The IPCC climate report nothing but studies that suggest outcomes, but without actual scientific evidence most of its claims are nothing more than model-based theories.

– Science says that man is increasing the global temperature through the emission of carbon, the most plentiful gas on the planet.

– Science says that we evolved from ape, though there has never been a “missing link” that bridges our species with that of the Primate species.

– Science asserts modern man evolved out of Africa from ape, new evidence suggest modern Man came from Asia and migrated to Africa and then Europe, much later.

-Science said that coronavirus couldn’t be spread human to human, but then changed and said it could, then said masks were good, then bad, and reversed that decision as well.

-Science says the coronavirus came from a bat, even though there no evidence to support the claim. If untrue, then we have a manufactured virus.

-Science says societies remaining closed are doing more harm to people than opening up society, but many political leaders ignore this science.

-Science says less that less 0.1 percent will die from Coronavirus, about the same as a serious flu, but the only science that is being reported are growing “infections” with only 1 percent of those cases showing symptoms.

– Science said there is nothing but the material world, everything is subjective, even reality.

– Science asserts that a living universe came from nothing and for no reason.

– Science said we would run out of food by the 1800’s, we would all starve from overpopulation. They said it again in the 1950’s.

It’s not that Science isn’t important or valuable. We can be grateful for a million scientific discoveries that have improved our lives. But scientists are human, and humans have egos, so theories remain so until they are proven. This is the scientific method that prevents our egos from dictating what is true and what isn’t.

No matter what consensus or probabilities remain, unless we can prove a theory as fact and it have it repeated, we should always be skeptical when Science pushes something as fact when it still remains unproven. If it ceases to do this, then Science is only subject to the whims of whatever is popular at the time, and that is not true science.

Today, people use science to frighten others. They use statistics to push an agenda, oftentimes only partial numbers are used, as in the case of new coronavirus cases. One set of numbers might make you believe people are in danger, but if you look at another set (numbers of death, actual sickness, demographics, underlying conditions, etc), the numbers are more realistic and provide greater information.

The same is true when we talk about climate change. People might use a particular crisis, (i.e., a hurricane) to state it as evidence of climate change, but there is no evidence, only a theory that man’s production of carbon dioxide increases the global mean temperature. The idea of man’s carbon creating climactic events is a whole other theory. Consensus agreeing with a current theory, no matter how probable, is not a scientific fact.

Science is also driven by profits. Hormone therapy is very profitable and it is a lifelong procedure. So the medical industry has no problem creating a profit center of sex change therapy if popular opinion, supposedly backed by science, says it is acceptable if a person wants to change his/her sexual identity.

Not long ago it was became quite popular for teenagers to have therapy to cope with the stress of modern life. Parents were accepting that people as young as 12 were being prescribed anti-anxiety medication, which changes the chemical composition of the brain (and creates lifelong dependency). The Science said young people can experience stress, the same science also had the medication to reduce stress, which led to side effects like depression and suicide that, you guessed also have treatments.

Is there no reason to be suspicious?

Common sense, critical thinking and careful evaluation are all necessary components when trying to get to the facts. It is only when we segregate facts and leave out the parts we don’t agree with does science become compromised, nothing more than a political agenda where facts are used as evidence, and much of what we call Science today couldn’t be further from the truth.

We give ourselves far too much credit when we think we can figure things out. This is why socialism is so dangerous. We have conned ourselves into believing we are so smart we can actually control population amd engineer society, as if we are predictable chess pieces that can be moved around for a specific desired effect; as if happiness could be engineered into society by simply laying ground rules for everyone to follow.

We all wish life could be controlled and that everything fits into nice little pieces. But such is not the case. Human beings are very complex, and we operate on so little known facts about our origins on how we arrived at this point. We are only barely emerging from savagery.

We hope that Science can offer us the answers to life, and the push for us to follow the science is predicated on that hope. But Science is tied to the physical realm; Science can evaluate physical facts, laws and probabilities, but Science cannot explain why things are beautiful, or why we seek truth. We also know very little about our origins, which may someday reveal our purpose.

I believe mankind, like all life, seeks perfection or equilibrium, balance; we seek unity, in truth as well as in thought. But the path to that unity is a long one, and our hubris will not get us there any faster. Which is why I say follow the science with caution; always assume there could be something more to the story that is not yet revealed, and then proceed accordingly. Question everything someone else tells you, but especially what you tell yourself.

One thought on “Follow The Science – With Caution

  1. In my youth, I began distrusting “experts”, for I had to ask, who made them experts. And with time, I discovered many things, including some you have shared. Here’s what I shared: Recently, listening to a well-researched scientist, I was further amazed the amount of data available, though also realizing, by their lifetime of research, that there is a tremendous amount of data needed to better understand this planet. (Timothy Ball, Vincent Courtillot, Murry Salby, Nicola Scarfetta, Khabibullo Abdusamator, David Legates, Tim Patterson, Arthur B. Robinson, Fred Singer, George H. Taylor, Jan Veizer, Freeman Dyson, Ivan Giaever, Claude Allegre, and Peter Chylek are a few among many that are easily found, papers and videos available.).
    Some factors, each of which are complicated in and of themselves, including their relationships to the others, needs additional studies which may take lifetimes. 1) Inside the planet is an incredibly hot metal ball, which heats the magma, and studies concerning that relationship to the planet and atmosphere, perhaps temperature variances in need of further study. 2) Soil, both land and below the ocean, to discriminate variances as years pass require research, study, and data collection. 3) The incredible amount of life and plants on the planet and their relationships to the air, soil, and other elements on the planet needs to be studied. As we all know, living organisms breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide (CO2), but plants take in carbon dioxide and breathe give off oxygen, so any increase in CO2 results in more plant growth and more oxygen, and more oxygen increases the opportunity for ozone creation which protects us from solar heating. That relationship needs tons of research in many locations, under the sea as well. 4) Some scientists study ice bergs and other frozen places, studying the CO2 levels in times past to present, seeking to evaluate CO2 emissions over many years. We can go on and on, learning about the sun and it’s cycles, heating and cooling (eleven year cycles we think), perhaps studying the effects of all those planets and suns out in space and their effects, as well as gravitational and magnetic effects (The sun affects Earth’s magnetic field.), along with things perhaps we don’t yet know about, and some that require further studies. But with time, we would learn more of the complexities, but also the incredible interdependence and adaptability inherent in such complexities.
    We once talked about the scientific method, but remember, humans created the scientific method, which while good, doesn’t answer all questions, because we still have to do the work with honesty. I encourage readers and those who believe “experts” and “scientists” who believe humans are responsible for destroying the planet (Last I checked, the Earth seems to be humming along, unaware of our presence.), to do a small experiment. For instance, taking a plant (many examples) and devising an experiment to discover the best combination of factors to bring out the best growth and perhaps fruit/vegetable. As you experiment, using the sun in different locales (i.e. full sun, partly shaded, shaded, in the home near the window, and such), using different amounts of water (i.e. pouring certain amounts, trickling water and different time periods, misting, and varying amounts of dry periods, both in and out of the house.), using different food sources (i.e. food sources from the plant store, home provided sources such as fish and meat, and anything else researched and tried.), talking to the plants (Some believe plants hear.), putting different types of plants around to see which have the most positive influence, sprays, and more. All ingredients require data collection, research, and study. And if you can devise quality experiments, over the years, you will know more about that plant, but also about the plants around to lesser degrees. And through the scientific method (i.e. data collection, learning, hypothesis, experiments, theory, and continued research), eventually more will be known, but also, more will be required if we continue to find the best circumstances for that plant.
    Here’s the thing. That’s one tiny experiment, which could take years, and I seriously ponder upon the knowledge of blogging, home scientists, or couch potato scientists, many who probably didn’t have the time to read the above, even understand the complexity needed to understand small things in full. Then attempting to extrapolate what information they/we have to the Earth, a planet we can’t hope to fully understand during the time humans are on the planet. Eons won’t be enough. I have learned enough to realize I don’t know much, but what I do know, what I have read and researched, tells me that others don’t know either.
    The moment we hear “The science is settled” on such incredibly large concepts, we have to ponder the reason behind the statement, what do they stand to gain, and what exactly it is they understand and don’t understand. Then, we have to seek out more information and find the scientists who dispute that claim. And there are tons. Even library books have information refuting. We grew up learning that “The science is settled” statement goes against every true scientist understanding of true science. They know, that statement, indicates incredible dishonesty, ignorance, or fear. To truly understand, scientists also have to share what they don’t know, which is a lot.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s