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.

 

Tomorrow is a better place for Yesterday

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   
(just an op.ed. perception, nothing serious here folks, move along)

For over 30 years now I've been hearing phrases like "Scientists now believe (fill in the blank)" or "We now know that (fill in the blank)" and I'm curious what that says about not only the scientific community in general, but we as a people.

To me it implies that yesterday we were wrong, but today we are right... yet today will soon become yesterday, so where does that leave us? Are we that certain of our "facts"? And if so, where does that certainty come from? How much faith should we place in that certainty when the historical data would seem to indicate that such faith is unwarranted?

The scientific communities track record is anything but stellar. These are the same people who told us that man would never fly (if man were meant to fly he would have wings!), that life cannot exist on the bottom of the ocean (no sunlight, the pressure is too great, impossible!), and that there is no such thing as little green men from Mars (there’s no water, the atmosphere is too thin, No Way!).

Another observation I've made over the years is the surprising similarities between the scientific community and the religious community. Their methods may vary, but their base goals seem to be the same: Answering the tough questions like "where did we come from?”, "how did we get from there to here?", and "where are we going?" Both communities seem to be majority driven. Anyone not adhering to the majority is placed on the fringe, not to be trusted, and usually persecuted.

When (if) a fringe group (such as, say, Mormons or Anthropologists) manages to gather enough followers and/or funding then it is reluctantly tolerated by the majority... barely. Scientists seem (to me) to hold onto their theories as blindly and tenaciously as the religious hold on to their faiths, yet when either side is put on the spot and asked to explain just exactly Why they do this, the best answer either can come up with is simply "this is what we believe to be true".

How can we be expected to have faith in that? How can I be expected to trust a majority driven organization that resorts to emotionalism and character assassination when dealing with fringe groups and radical concepts?

My biggest concern with the scientific community is not so much in how it deals with the present, but rather its attitudes towards the past. According to the mainstream scientific community ancient peoples were a bunch of ignorant bozos incapable of adequately recording events. Anything even remotely resembling an extraterrestrial encounter as recorded by ancient chroniclers is considered a myth, a metaphor, or a fairytale. Those things are not real and are pure flights of fancy.

Yet the very same primitive peoples are quite capable of keeping accurate records when it comes to matters of state and commerce. An ancient document stating quiet clearly that a tangible object flew down from space and a powerful being emerged is poppycock. That never happened. That is a myth. Yet there is very little doubt as to the authenticity of a document from the same time period (perhaps even written by the same hand) that states such and such a king found it necessary to declare war on one of his neighbors. Of course that happened. It says so right here in this old document. That is Real.

The scientific community would have us believe that ancient peoples were both incredibly stupid and incredibly clever at the exact same time. They were completely and totally incapable of understanding the world they lived in, cowering in fear whenever the ground quaked or the sky flashed with lightening, while at the very same time they could calculate the next lunar eclipse and were aware of the precession cycle.

These primitive peoples were versed enough in the sciences to perform incredible feats of engineering, produce fabulous works of art, devise the logistics necessary to move large armies and forge vast empires, yet when they describe vehicles flying in the sky it is some pitiful attempt to describe lightening (or swamp gas). When they tell us of powerful beings who came from the sky it is simply a fairytale, not to be believed. Ancient peoples were simply too stupid to know what they were talking about.

But that is what some people believe in today. Who knows what they will believe in tomorrow?

twj




posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 01:41 PM
link   
wow, a dozen folks have actually looked at this, and no one has told me to take a flying fling at a rolling donut yet… odd that, but cool. (skunkworks, gotta love it)

Here’s some more of what I’m on about… The following link will take you to a web page full of pictures of Mars.

www.torbtown.com...

These pictures were created using state of the art technology, and the data from said technology was analyzed by some of the best minds of the times.

The pictures start at 1800 and end with a shot from this year (2006)

Our understanding of Mars has changed radically in the past 200 years. The most dramatic changes in our perception of the red planet have come about in the past 60 years (or, during the life span of one average human).

In 1800 we knew it all.

In 1900 we Really knew it all.

In 2000 we Really Really knew it all….

So, what? Tomorrow we’ll really Really REALLY know it all?

Facts are fleeting. They don’t just sit there; they can’t be ‘nailed down’.

That’s why we can Never rest, never stop looking, never stop re-evaluating, and never stop Questioning.

Today’s ‘fact’ is tomorrow’s ‘fiction’.

twj



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Remember this little number?



That was one of Aristotle’s babies.

Aristotle was considered to be a bit of brainiac in his day. In fact, he was such a hot shot, and was/is so famous, that I doubt that anybody taking the time to read this had to go look up his name.

He put the Earth at the center of the Universe. Not just the solar system, the whole freekin’ Universe.

As I understand it, he had some hard-core math and some pretty groovy models to ‘prove’ this theory.

People liked it. It passed the ‘common sense’ test, it seemed ‘logical’, the math worked, the models were cool… No Problems.

Time passed. Some folks came along who were every bit as brainy as good ol’ Aristotle, but perhaps just a bit more lazy. They discovered that if you put the Sun here, move the Earth to there…. presto. The math gets easier, the models get simpler.

For them, it still passed the ‘common sense’ test, and it seemed just as ‘logical’ as the other scenario.

Lot of folks had some problems with this new fangled idea, but eventually most people finally pulled their heads out and began to accept this new notion of the Sun is the center of the Universe.

More time passed. More folks came along and said ‘ya know what? We’re not at the center of the Universe at all. We’re way out near the edge of the thing… in fact, we’re a rather insignificant little mud ball in the middle of nowhere.’

Again, it took a while, but most folks decided to pull their heads out and embrace this new notion.

Still More time passed, and this guy in a wheelchair who can’t even talk for himself but was considered to be one of the biggest brainiacs of all time comes out and says ‘ya know what, YOU are the center of the Universe. And so is your Cat. And the Horse you both rode in on… And Alpha Centuri, and any other point in space you wanna pick… they are ALL the center of the universe.’

He threw out phrases like “the universe is infinite yet bounded”… pretty heavy stuff, actually.

He made the comparison of the Universe to a big polka dot covered balloon… Stand on any polka dot and blow up the balloon, and All the other dots seem to move away from you…. let the air out and ALL the polka dots seem to converge towards you, no matter which dot you stand on, you are Always at the ‘center’.

There’s math, there’s models, a lotta people buy into his theories…

So, Aristotle was ‘right’ after all, the Earth really IS the center of the Universe.

Facts are fluid in motion, not stagnant stone.

Anybody up on their Bruce Lee? Water is stronger than Stone.

Never stop looking, never stop questioning, never rest. Reality doesn’t rest, why should you?

twj



new topics
 
0

log in

join