It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

news Article: Scientists Say They Often Censor Selves

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I meant to post this article a few days ago but didnt get around to it until today, so sorry if it may have been posted and discussed already.

abcnews.go.com...


"It appears that controversy shapes what scientists choose to study and how they choose to study it, and we need to look a little bit more closely at the effects it might be having," said Joanna Kempner, a researcher at the University of Michigan.


This article may be a bit off topic for this section but I thought it was interesting in it's speculative relation to the study of the UFO phenomenon.

How many good scientists out there are working on developing a better hand cream or sun block rather than researching paranormal phenomena like UFO's because of fear of ridicule??




posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 03:13 PM
link   
As usual let me just state that this is my opinion of course, but yeah I would think scientists are scared to death of openly discussing or studying anything that would be consider "crack pot" or "nutty" by the scientific community.

Science as an industry long ago stopped being about exploration. People are very vested in their particular view of how the universe works. Grants, royalties, six figure salaries, tenure(sp), being published all these things are put in jeopardy the minute you speak out.

Of course there are some places like MIT, Stanford and other institutions and companies that do research these things but they're not highly publicised or they are done under misleading project names.

Like anything else if you've spent thirty years as a scientist (or anybody) whose been saying a+b=c and someone comes along whos new and whose research says no actually a+b=7. Usually this person is discredited or put out on their ear. Usually it's the crackpots who decades later their theories and formulas get hijacked by "mainstream" science.

So unfortunately we will have a better sunblock, handcream, cellphone/computer/girlfriend, macrowave ovens and 67 inch plasma screens before we see cleaner fuels, new modes of transportation and new ways of looking at the universe we live in and the universes that most likey live side by side and all around us.

Again, just opinion, go ahead mainstream science and surprise...please for the love god surprise me.

Spiderj



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 03:39 PM
link   
I can relate to those scientists. I am constantly 'censoring' my self in regards to UFOs and Aliens. Even when I'm posting on another board on ATS I find my self thinking about adding the ET perspective. Even in conversation with people I know I end up holding back.
I guess that is what keeps me posting on this board, the freedom not to be ridiculed.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Excellent post Spiderj.


I wonder how much the fear of being discredited and the fear of ridicule has set the human race back over the years in terms of our knowledge of the universe.

I'd like to think if we were more open minded and willing to study thing's that we would otherwise be considered a lunatic or "crackpot" for studying, we'd probably be farther progressed as a race by now.

And good point about how crackpot scientist's theories usually become mainstream science. For example the guys who said the world wasnt flat and the Earth revolves around the Sun and not vice versa.



Originally posted by Umbrax

I guess that is what keeps me posting on this board, the freedom not to be ridiculed.


That's the main reason I post here.


[edit on 15/2/05 by Meteor_of_War]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Thanks meteor, and yeah just think how far ahead we'd be if science wasn't essentially a corporate run quagmire.

Sort of loosely/quasi related, I had a friend who had this great theory about what the world would be like today if the Greek civilization hadn't fallen. It was pretty cool, I should try and find that paper.

Actually a lot of theoretical anthropologists do stuff like that with different ancient cultures very cool stuff.

As for this:



I guess that is what keeps me posting on this board, the freedom not to be ridiculed.


Anonymity is a beautiful thing that's why I post here.


Spiderj



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   

How many good scientists out there are working on developing a better hand cream or sun block rather than researching paranormal phenomena like UFO's because of fear of ridicule??


More out of a fear of not getting any more grant money more likely...


A crappy, but effective side-effect of the coverup and ridicule factor...



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   
There are two types of research: practical and pure. Practical research is when a researcher tries to create a better fuel, mouse trap, or sunscreen. Pure research is when a researcher drops a thousand golf balls off a ten story building to measure the bouncing pattern of golf balls on asphalt. Both kinds of research are important. The researcher who is looking for a better mouse trap is likely to get funding rather easily from Mousetrap International, Inc. and their competitors. The golf ball analyst will probably have to make do with a government grant.

The mousetrap researcher will never be called to task because everyone wants a better mousetrap and private industry is paying for it. The golf ball analyst only has the vaguest idea about what his research will reveal, but he's fairly certain that a better understanding of the dynamics of bouncing balls on asphalt will have meaning to the scientific community in general, even if only tangentially.

The problem that the golf ball analyst faces is that if Senator Wildhair is looking for some cheap publicity, he uses the federal funding of the golf ball project to demonstrate the rampant waste in government. Never mind that projects like golf ball bouncing and other seemingly idiotic research yield data all the time that is important to many researchers who are working on more practical matters from the effects of gravity on dimpled spherical objects to the effects of atmospheric friction on the design of supersonic aircraft.

[edit on 05/2/15 by GradyPhilpott]

[edit on 05/2/16 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
There are two types of research: practical and pure. Practical research is when a researcher tries to create a better fuel, mouse trap, or sunscreen. Pure research is when a researcher drops a thousand golf balls off a ten story building to measure the bouncing pattern of golf balls on asphalt. Both kinds of research are important.

Its important to know the bouncing patterns of golf balls on asphalt? How many golf courses are made of asphalt?


At any rate, its always been like this. Even in this "modern" and "free" society we still censor as if it was the dark ages. There are many ways to burn a heretic scientist



posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 09:08 AM
link   
o come on people bring let it out!!!!!!

consider this:

what for someone is a stupid post about lets say aliens may be a total revelation for someone else, perhaps a piece of a puzzle he is missing, perhaps you are not the only one who had this experience. Look, from my personal experience, it doesnt hurt, i swear, not a bit. And MiB havent been to my house (yet)

besides if you are witholding the evidence you know what you are



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join