Why Mainstream Science is a Religion

Tuesday 31 May 2016

The Freedom Articles: Get a Dose of the Truth

NOTE: the annoying subscribe section will disappear by hitting the escape button on the upper left of your keyboard. There's no "X" to remove it.

"Science is a religion with its own priests (who wear white coats not black gowns). It requires belief (faith) in its unprovable theories (doctrine)."
.
freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...
.

[some reparagraphing because their paragraphs are sooo long]

Mainstream science, despite all its claims of objectivity, and despite the fact it attempts to lay claim to the truth, is itself a religion. Science places itself on a pedestal and assures everyone it has dispassionately arrived at its conclusions. Meanwhile, however, it is full of assumptions, denials and limitations, and makes the serious mistake of presenting its theories as facts. The errors of mainstream science are gladly seized upon by technocrats, eager to use science and technology to further their own ambitions of control, and include forcing the vaccine, GMO, surveillance, manmade global warming, geoengineering, SMART and microchipping agendas onto an unsuspecting public.
.
The planned New World Order has a massive technocratic aspect. Materialism, the driving force behind mainstream science, has been shown again and again to lack the capacity to explain the world around us, especially in relation to idealism or other theories that account for the energetic nature of reality. Yet, despite this, we remain collectively bedazzled by materialism, because science is a religion that has induced a certain faith in us. Up until recently, it has still been difficult for society at large to accept the fact that the unseen energetic realms are more powerful and more primal than the material realms we can see and touch … but that is starting to change.
.
. . .
.
BEGIN Tesla quote
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.
--Nikola Tesla
END Tesla quote
.
. . .
.
Science is a Religion: We are Basically Blind to The Electromagnetic Spectrum
.
Materialism places so much stock in what we can apprehend with our 5 senses, especially sight, since it is the dominant sense for most people. Yet, of what we know exists in the full electromagnetic spectrum, we can only see a tiny range from approximately 700 nanometers (abbreviated nm) to 400 nm, between the infrared and ultraviolet rays. According to this short video clip, if the electromagnetic spectrum were a reel of film 2500 miles long (stretching from California to Alaska), then the band of visible light would be around 1 inch! According to my calculations, if these numbers are correct, that means that we only perceive 0.00000000631313% of what is really there. So why does mainstream science place so much faith in our 5-sense reality and disregard the unseen as fantasy or imagination, when we are so blind?
.
. . .
.
This fake and fraudulent science, which is not true science at all but rather corporate junk science which passes under the rubric of science, is all pervasive. See my articles The Massive Flaw with the Scientific Hierarchy of Evidence, The Top 10 Tricks Used by Corporate Junk Science and Most Scientific Research of Western Medicine Untrustable & Fraudulent, Say Insiders and Experts for a fuller discussion of this point. As Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the esteemed New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), had to say about the pervasive fraudulent scientific research:
.
BEGIN New England Journal of Medicine quote
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines … I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
END New England Journal of Medicine quote
.
. . .
.
Conclusion: Science is a Religion Which Requires Faith

Mainstream scientists will probably feel aghast to hear it, but the truth is that science is a religion with its own high priests – they just wear white coats rather than black gowns. It requires belief (faith) in its theories (doctrine) which can never ultimately be proven (Evolution, Relativity, Big Bang) because they are full of assumptions and contradictions. There is always at least one question that can never be answered, and constantly redefining terms, omitting numbers or inventing new factors becomes, at a certain point, like twisting facts to suit theories, rather than twisting theories to suit facts, as the fictional character Sherlock Holmes liked to say.
.
Terrence McKenna humorously put it like this:
.
BEGIN Terrence McKenna quote
“Modern science is based on the principle: ‘Give us one free miracle, and we’ll explain the rest.’ The one free miracle is the appearance of all the mass and energy in the universe and all the laws that govern it in a single instant from nothing.”
END Terrence McKenna quote
.
. . .
.
Sources:

*www.youtube.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*www.scienceandapologetics.org...

*brianwhitworth.com...

*www.youtube.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

*www.nybooks.com...

*freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com...

.
Welllllllllllllllllllllll, it's a long article but it says a lot of true things.
.
I might not agree with every sentence but the main assertions are accurate, factual, imho.
.
It is probably one of the substantive ones on the topic.
.
Even though it's a long article, it still left a fair amount out.
.
Though, there are a lot of links listed at the bottom of it.
.
I think it left out a LOT of the HIGH PRIESTLY sorts of mentalities; gate-keeping; orthodox dogma only allowed; religious initiations; etc. involved in far too much of the 'scientific' realm, in our era.
.
Anyway--I don't know that this topic CAN be discussed rationally in calmness hereon. Would be nice. We'll see.
.
Ranting diatribes--particularly without evidence of reading most of the article may not get a response from me.
.

a reply to: BO XIAN

didnt have to that all you had to say was , the masses that are not scientists believe a small group of people that write down their beliefs in books and articles and believe with out doing the science themselves. and the when a new book comes out they believe that without question, and it continues on

a reply to: BO XIAN

Science is not a religion.

Science believes in ideas and tries to break them, albeit sometimes too slowly.

Religion believes in an idea and continues along with it even if it is demonstrated to be an abject failure.

Sure science isn't perfect I'm not going to argue that, but it's certainly not a religion.

Kind Regards
Myselfaswell

a reply to: myselfaswell

When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, lays eggs like a duck, swims like a duck, poops like a duck, looks like a duck . . .

Some of us will continue to call it a duck.

Denial of it's 'duckiness' is expected of the "true believers" in the religion of scientism.

a reply to: DOCHOLIDAZE1

There's plenty of truth to that phenomena.

Was wondering what the "ALMIGHTY" aspects of the religion of scientism might be . . .

--the ALMIGHTY LOGIC god
--the ALMIGHTY TRUTH-VIA DISSECTION god

--the ALMIGHTY if-it-can't-be-sliced-diced-measured-it-isn't-real god
--the ALMIGHTY TRUTH MUST BE APPROVED BY THE BISHOPS OF SCIENTISM god

--the ALMIGHTY unpublished-'truth'-is-not-real-truly-true-truth god
--the ALMIGHTY if-it-didn't-come-from-an-approved-religion-of-scientism-true-believer-it-isn't-truth god

There is no doubt that sections of the scientific community who are fundamentalists, who don't require evidence, who proselytize
Fortunately I think it's a minority, think you even hinted at that

What bothers me more is the fraud, the doctored science, be it climate change, medicine, natural health, green energy rah rah

Some people just trust scientists and doctors, each to his own

a reply to: myselfaswell

it very much is, in regards to the masses that blindly follow, such as theoretical religion is blindly followed.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
There is no doubt that sections of the scientific community who are fundamentalists, who don't require evidence, who proselytize
Fortunately I think it's a minority, think you even hinted at that

What bothers me more is the fraud, the doctored science, be it climate change, medicine, natural health, green energy rah rah

Some people just trust scientists and doctors, each to his own

INDEED.

Though I'm not sure how much of a minority it is. I think on many subject areas and sometimes in general attitude--the vast majority of dyed-in-the-wool science types treat science as a religion--most without a clue that they are doing so.

Not very scientific, doing that.

originally posted by: DOCHOLIDAZE1
a reply to: myselfaswell

it very much is, in regards to the masses that blindly follow, such as theoretical religion is blindly followed.

YUP.

The dogma aspect is very telling. Deviate even slightly from the approved dogma . . . and it's "off with their heads!"

--prevent tenure
--don't publish them
--prevent their speaking at conferences
etc.

And, science's history is replete with issues that were "PROVEN" as untrue . . . but were later truly proven to be totally wrongly considered untrue.

a reply to: BO XIAN

religion of scientism.

That's a classic.

I can tell you my friend that science is nothing more than a demonstration of human curiosity and intelligence.

Of course there are scientists out there who have agendas to make them more money, fame, whatever, I'm not going to argue that. You could make the same argument about economics, but it's not economicsism is it, except perhaps for a few weirdos, which by the way is statistically inevitable. The same could also be said about science, but we are talking about little more than an aberration, not carte blanche.

There is one bizarre human construct on this planet that shouldn't however, by it's own doctrines, be subject to such human failure or even statistical inevitability of failure, but yet over the centuries and to this very day it continues to demonstrate it's abject failure with despicable repetition. And that construct would be religion.

Kind Regards
Myselfaswell

originally posted by: BO XIAN
Tuesday 31 May 2016

.

The Tesla quote was telling (telling me he wasn't much chop with mathematics). Mathematics is a clean language devoid of metaphor and similie, and giving repeatable, testable, accurate results. Not everyone has the visualization capabilities of Tesla (which is mathematical anyway).

Those who venerate science are usually not those who work in it. It is full of fraud, deception, egos and illogic.

It is also about fashion. Ideas come and go and wax and wane in popularity as public or academic interest dictates.

Science can be an intellectual tool, or make one an intellectual tool.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: myselfaswell

When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, lays eggs like a duck, swims like a duck, poops like a duck, looks like a duck . . .

Some of us will continue to call it a duck.

Denial of it's 'duckiness' is expected of the "true believers" in the religion of scientism.

Come on, we all know it is actually Anas Platyrhynchos.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Brave of you to question the nature of modern Science. However, be prepared for the backlash that accompanies challenging those who hold Science dear to their hearts.

PS: Science itself is wonderful, the scientific industry is not.

a reply to: BO XIAN

When it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, lays eggs like a duck, swims like a duck, poops like a duck, looks like a duck . . .

Does a religion begin with observation of natural phenomena?
Does a religion form an hypothesis to explain these phenomena?
Does a religion devise a means of falsifying that hypothesis under controlled circumstances?
Does a religion reject that hypothesis if it is falsified by these experiments?
Does a religion insist that all such experiments and observations be repeatable?
Does a religion reason from the specific to the general?
Does a religion modify its body of knowledge based upon new information?
Does a religion encourage everyone to apply these methods in order to solve problems in their daily life?

If the answer to all of these is "yes," then yes, science is a religion.

Quack.

Just another attempt to discredit credible concrete things by people who believe there is a giant ghost in the sky who loves them so much, he makes them suffer.

As one who believes in science, I'm driven to challenge and disclaim the unproven. A religious person mindlessly protects, defends, and never challenges the unproven.

Science allows me to build my own destiny based on my personal research and achievements. Religion defines my destiny for me based on inflexible and contradictory fairy tales written hundreds of generations before I was born.

I don't think the two are similar at all.

a reply to: damwel

Exactly damwel, exactly.

Curiously the article referenced in the OP has no author, why would a person do that if that argument was legitimate.

Kind Regards
Myselfaswell

Yes Science is a religion , the worst kind.
All religion is Bad .
believing in something is good.
experimenting is good.

Science is incomplete and doesn't tell the truth to the general public.
Science doesn't question fundamental problems.
Science excommunicates members of it's community that are too radical.
Science is no solution for a better life.

originally posted by: damwel
Just another attempt to discredit credible concrete things by people who believe there is a giant ghost in the sky who loves them so much, he makes them suffer.

So
You are saying that everything scientists are saying is accurate

Don't think even a little could be wrong

Delusional

originally posted by: myselfaswell
Curiously the article referenced in the OP has no author, why would a person do that if that argument was legitimate.

Also look at the crap they are advertising....

"Edible Oxygen"
"liquid Zeolite"

So they obviously do not like science as it shows their snake oil is just crap!