It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


NSF to ATS: You're Stupid!

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 06:41 PM
reply to post by behindthescenes

F*** You NSF!

Fact is the NSF is a government dog and pony show and were responsible for cooking Global Warming data for the Bush Administration. If they want to accuse someone of not being able to perform critical thinking then they should look in the mirror. Because only a sick, delusional mind would cook information that could warn humanity of impending natural disasters.

posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 08:00 PM
-"[44] A survey of 1,500 first-year college students found that 48.5 percent of arts-and 33.4 percent of science-students considered both astronomy and astrology scientific (De Robertis and Delaney 1993). "

What a load of BS. How is Astronomy NOT scientific? Lol that is the most ludicrous statement I have ever heard.

-"Between one-third and one-half of Americans believe in unidentified flying objects (UFOs). A somewhat smaller percentage believes that aliens have landed on Earth (Gallup 1996; Southern Focus 1998). "

Well DUH! Seriously, please define an Unidentified Flying Object? It is quite literally an airborne craft which defies identification by the observing party. So how does that NOT exist? If a bushman in Kenya has never before seen an F-117, to him, it's a UFO. Those lights filmed in the skies, regardless of what they ACTUALLY are, they are for all intents and purposes unidentified.

-"Some fans of The X-Files find the show's storylines "highly plausible," and also believe that the government is currently conducting clandestine investigations similar to those depicted on the series (Evans 1996). "

Of course the U.S. Conducts Clandestine Investigations, it is called INTEL. Gathering. It is routinely conducted by the various Intelligence Agencies, and is a necessary facet of National Security.

-"Belief in most-but not all-paranormal phenomena is higher among women than men. More women than men believe in ESP (especially telepathy and precognition), astrology, hauntings, and psychic healing. On the other hand, men have stronger beliefs in UFOs and bizarre life forms, for example, the Loch Ness monster (Irwin 1993). In the NSF survey, 39 percent of the women, compared with 32 percent of the men, said astrology is "very" or "sort of" scientific; 56 percent of the women, compared with 63 percent of the men, answered "not at all scientific."[43] (See appendix table 8-38.)"

Yeah, so I guess every religious person is a nutcase following a faith, which science fails to prove, so it just HAS to be wrong. Also, Hauntings have received much in the way of scientific investigation, and the evidence is quite bountiful. Just take a look at "Ghost Hunters" for a truly scientific endeavor into the Paranormal.

-"[47] CSICOP's official journal The Skeptical Inquirer is a vehicle for disseminating and publicizing the results of scientific studies of paranormal claims"

WOW, that just says it all I am afraid. "The Skeptical Inquirer" is one of the biggest loads of decisive garbage ever put into print. The SI does not look into unknown issues with a scientific mindset, they look for excuses instead, and come up with some of the most absurd excsuses for events and happenings. Without any funding, I have been able to reach far more logical and scientifically proven conclusions than the Inquirer, and I am sure some on here can do the same.

-"[37] Pseudoscience has been defined as "claims presented so that they appear [to be] scientific even though they lack supporting evidence and plausibility." In contrast, science is "a set of methods designed to describe and interpret observed and inferred phenomena, past or present, and aimed at building a testable body of knowledge open to rejection or confirmation" (Shermer 1997). Paranormal topics include yogic flying, therapeutic touch, astrology, fire walking, voodoo magical thinking, Uri Geller, placebo, alternative medicine, channeling, Carlos hoax, psychic hotlines and detectives, near death experiences, UFOs, the Bermuda Triangle, homeopathy, faith healing, and reincarnation (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal)."

So in other words, anything that Science cannot currently explain is not even worth examining? I guess Einstein must have been a silly old pseudoscientist then.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 07:53 AM
I just sent an E-mail to NSF regarding this article. And although there's alot in that article I agree with, it is not a scientifically driven study and it is certainly not what Americans are paying the NSF to do. If I wanted to pay money to be called stupid I'd apply at UNLV.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 04:47 PM
I sure hope they lump a belief in Jesus or Allah or any other religious diety in with paranormal beliefs.

If not, then they are not exactly being true to the topic

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 05:50 PM

Originally posted by behindthescenes
I just wanted everyone to know that the National Science Foundation recently concluded that anyone who believes or has an active interest in the paranormal, UFOs, cryptozoology, fringe science, etc.:

a) lacks critical thinking skills

b) Is inable to make well-informed decisions

c) Probably shouldn't sit on a jury

d) Often confuses fact for fiction

At least, that's the general views expressed by the NSF (The group didn't mention ATS specifically, I was just inferring that from the paper).

[edit on 31-8-2006 by behindthescenes]

Unfortunately I think that all 4 of these items describe the vast majority of Americans.

Guess what I think of the NSF? Here is my reply:

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:19 PM
Hopefully the NSF is not as arrogant and narrow minded as they project. In reality I think they do study "paranormal" events but mostly behind the scenes and in top secret underground labs. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest this.

"On the record" they want to portray a "what are you talking about face" while off record it is a completly different story! I don't think it is much of a coincidence that we have so many science fiction movies and books but when asked no one seems to take this stuff seriously. The point is to indoctrinate society gently rather than "here it is in your face approach".

National Security is also a big concern because they rely on this new reverse enginereed tech to keep a perpetual technological advantage over potential future adversaries. There appear to be many reasons to keep fringe science secret but eventually we must and will know...the only question is when and how much.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 02:43 PM
The following is my opinion based on personal experience.

In my personal experience, the NSF is the most civilian of civilian funding agencies. As a granting agency, It tends to give grants to young, up and coming scientists in academic positions who want to make ALL of their research public and promote another generation of open science.

Of all of the funding organizations, they are, in my humble opinion, probably the least likely to be hiding something.

DARPA, for example, stands in contrast to NSF, but even there many first rounds of funding are public. (Usually because the results are too mundane to bother classifying.)

In my opinion, in this NSF report, what you have is simply Orthodox Skepticism as it dominates the scientific establishment. While I am not personally an Orthodox Skeptic, I have no problem with people with less life experiences being Orthodox Skeptics as scientists. It helps keep religion and politics out of their agenda, and thus serves it well.

I do not believe Orthodox Skepticism is the correct philosophy to use with respect to UFO research, because it discourages active investigation of the phenomena, and promotes Armchair Science Mythology. But I respect those who disagree.

The NSF is primarily concerned with ensuring American predominance in science. This involves keeping the Boogie-man out of common debate and teaching new generations of young people to think critically and apply scientific over mythological thinking. As such, Orthodox Skeptics believe they are doing this when they poo-poo alien-ufo hypotheses. I think they are wrong, but I believe this is their main agenda. There may have been a significant infiltration of Orthodox Skepticism religion on this particularly committee. But by in large, I don't think you should think of the NSF as some dirty clandestine farce. Unless the way they are often duped into supporting the most flashy, aggressive, and yet least useful young scientists bothers you

I should add that I got my share of money from the NSF before I got my degrees, and I did know someone who worked for the NSF in Washington, and that was a really, really good person.

[edit on 8-2-2008 by Ectoterrestrial]

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:19 PM
I want a pizza. Outside the fact I just told you that I wanted pizza, do you think you could prove this?

Long story short. Unless I told you, as I did, you couldn't prove I wanted pizza.

Does that make the fact that I want pizza unreal?


posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:24 PM
ATS is one of the most intelligent collective of people I've ever seen communicating with one another. Critical thought is the path to true enlightenment... and this place enforces it.

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:30 PM

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen
-"[44] A survey of 1,500 first-year college students found that 48.5 percent of arts-and 33.4 percent of science-students considered both astronomy and astrology scientific (De Robertis and Delaney 1993). "

What a load of BS. How is Astronomy NOT scientific? Lol that is the most ludicrous statement I have ever heard.

FFS , give me strength

that out pouring of idiocy is just the sort of inability to comprehend a basic and straight forward sentence that the NSF would have issue with

ok - try reading it again - slowly if required

it does not claim that astonomy is unscientific , it CLEARLY states that some retards believe that BOTH astronomy AND atronomy are scientific

has it sunk in yet ???????????????

your failure to comprehend this basic premise beggars belief

[edit on 8-2-2008 by ignorant_ape]

posted on Feb, 8 2008 @ 03:55 PM
wow, they actually list "placebo" as a forum of pseudo science... but... erm... isn't that an actual scientific method? In many cases, isn't a placebo used along with a control?

[edit on 8-2-2008 by scientist]

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in