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.

 

The End of Science - Let's all pray to the monkey gods!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
'What the Mayans can teach us about wind turbines' is the title of an article in the Daily Mail whose central premise is:


when society becomes more complex, Man substitutes belief for science - as the ancients discovered to their cost


In these troubled global times where we are seeing a plethora of massive natural disaters resulting in huge casualties from Katrina via Hiati through New Zealand and to Japan it is interesting to note what is cited as the ultimate cause for the breakdown of civilisations. That there is a biological limit defined by evolution causing an inability for the human race to cope with such events, it is a really interesting premise that we are evolved to a state of understanding that limits what we can collectively cope with:


Something is happening to us. All of us. And it's happening at the same time. We've lost our ability to solve our most dangerous problems: skyrocketing debt, terrorism, natural disasters, nuclear proliferation, faltering education, the rapid depletion of the Earth's resources.

Despite having more technology, knowledge and wealth than at any time in history, every advanced nation has become gridlocked. How have we arrived at this point?

The answer comes from the most unlikely of sources, 152 years ago. When Charles Darwin discovered the slow pace at which living organisms adapt to change, he inadvertently stumbled upon the reason that civilisations stall and eventually collapse.

Simply put, human beings are a 'work in progress'. So, at any point in time there is a biological limit to the levels of complexity we can discern and manage. When we reach that limit, progress comes to a standstill.
In other words, we can only progress as far and as fast as evolution has equipped us to. The uneven match between human evolution, which is slow, and the rapid rate at which societies advance, eventually causes every civilisation to reach an impasse.

My book The Watchman's Rattle, named after an 18th Century wooden device to warn of an impending emergency, describes what occurs as we approach the limits of the cognitive abilities.

The first sign is gridlock. Leaders and governments become unable to solve chaotic problems. The unsolved problems then migrate from one generat ion to another, growing in magnitude and peril until, according to Dr Joseph Tainter in his book, The Collapse Of Complex Societies, the problem is upon us and no resources or number of smart people can stop the avalanche.

The second symptom occurs as we begin to substitute facts with unproven beliefs. When the facts surrounding a problem become too complex to discern, we make decisions based on what we believe to be true. Like a swimmer trapped in an undertow, we believe that if we simply step up our efforts and swim harder toward the shore, we will prevail against the current. No data, information, or facts will deter us from our conviction - not even the threat of death.




*Just to highlight I am no way linked to the author and have not read either book quoted in the article.

I do however really like the premise that as science fails to explain things around us that we turn more and more to ethereal belief systems. We see it often with non-religious people say for example who find themselves praying for the survival of a sick relative. The feeling of hopelessness that a scenario that you are powerless to directly intervene in leads to desperate behaviour - in this case emotionally.

The premise is sound and relevant I think. The signs are around us in terms of natural disasters coupled with incessant warmongering.

I would love the discussion on this topic to develop, but for the SHTFers there will be very real signs according to this article for you to look out for of impending doom, and ironically it seems the science to back up the theory is sound


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...

Artcile by author of book The Watchmans Rattle




posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
We can pray to the monkey gods or the French-fry gods since it doesnt make an ounce of difference either way.

Talking to oneself is talking to yourself regardless of what imaginary friend we choose to select.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil

all hail the mighty monkey gods


i ask science: what have you done for me lately besides developing ways to further control me or kill me more efficiently?



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by pplrnuts
 


I totally agree. My take was that it is an interesting theory and particularly relevant to the world today. There will be people who have previously not been religious who turn to religion for a belief system as they find themselves unable to rationalise what is happening in the world. As far as a limit on evolution limiting our understanding could one categorise the discoveries made by Science as evolution of the human race? Have we migrated from pure biological evolution to scientific innovation as the definition of our races evolution - I would argue we have for one simple reason.

In my opinion at some point in time if the human race remains uninterrupted from a global disaster then there will be a day when the human mind/sentience can be transferred from a biological vessel into a machine based system, be it robot whatever where effectively immortality will be achieved. That is for me the absolute definition that scientific innovation has superseded biology and natural selection as the yardstick of evolution for the human race.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Don't agree with the thrust of this author's thesis but would agree three fundamental principles of modern science are at the point of implosion: the Standard Model of Particle Physics, our Victorian centred notions on evolution, and our understanding of the cosmos.

When everything you've been led to believe in is a sham, the out come won't be a surprise.
edit on 20-3-2011 by chocise because: typo



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by chocise
 



When you say implosion, do you think because of new evidence or revelations that are coming? I know nothing of particle physics but the other two are areas i have basic knowledge of. The victorian evolution aspect is still the prevelant theory because there is nothing more mainstream to replace it?

The cosmos aspect is something i am particularly interested to hear more about. How will this implode?



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnotherYOU
hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil

all hail the mighty monkey gods


i ask science: what have you done for me lately besides developing ways to further control me or kill me more efficiently?


With all do respect, I believe that through out history religous wars and crusades is responsible for an unjustly amount of death. The technology back then was spears swords, crusification, burning at the stake, and whatever torture they put you through for not believing. Religion is a form of control. Religous people do not realize this because it is "a good form of control".

So I ask religion, why is it ok to kill in the name of god? Blind faith gets you nothing but ignorance, and gets you no where with the same old stories about how some people lived 2,000 years ago.

So please if you do not like science, then take everything you own and throw it out of the window. Oh, and the window too. Because everything and I do mean everything you use today is from somebody inventing it.

But we do not want to talk about that do we, because that is different?



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by liejunkie01
 


it's not about not liking science, but hey i don't live in the middle ages, i havent lived during the inquisition, sure religion has a bad rep, and im not defending religion one bit, but it has never done any harm to me personally, now science...

what i really meant is how religion was and is all those things you spoke of, the problem is you see.

what you call now science has become the new religion.

and it's being mainly used to further advance the goals and intents of organized religion.

let me ask you this: give me ONE just one example of one new technology or one new scientific breakthrough that wasn't tapped and researched for and by the military for it's "peace keeping" methods...
before being introduced to the public at large.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
^It wasn't science that dropped the atomic bomb, it was us, mankind dropped the bomb. I dont understand how you could connect the actions of ppl to the method of discovering new technology.

edit: science is not a religion, it is self correcting, peer reviewed, and requires evidence.
edit on 20-3-2011 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedonk
reply to post by chocise
 



When you say implosion, do you think because of new evidence or revelations that are coming?
Yes. Many are already being voiced but the mainstream have a habit of protecting their own self interests. What is at stake is the rejection of 50 years work. That's alot of peer scientists who have effectively wasted their entire academic lives. Great, established lives too... great pillars of the scientific community who got it completely wrong. That's a difficult pill to swallow.

I began with particle physics, because its here the repercussions are greatest, and changes here affect everything: from our understanding of reality, to the creation of species.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by AnotherYOU
 


Good points.

The only technology I can think of might be the pencil. But then again the military might have wanted something to write their messed up plans with...lol

The simple answer to this is. Welcome to the military industrial complex. They have the money and the power. We can complain, bitch ,and moan, but these people run the show. It is sad, but that is how it is.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnotherYOU


I am not posting this to knock your religious beliefs as I believe for each of us, they are very personal.
I grew up in the Christian Church/Church of Christ realm - though everything seemed all light and love on the outside, it was very dangerous. There were ways of brainwashing and if you didn't conform to a particular principle you would indeed be punished.

Perhaps not killed like in the inquisition, but a torture of your person or spirit was likely. Like in my mom's baptist church: having to be re-baptized because the pastor thinks you may not REALLY have been baptized in a godly manner. The person might not have been "clean." Even if it was by 5 ordained real ordained ministers - if you choose not to be re-baptized, you are ostracized - makes absolutely no sense - but it says: You are not really an acceptable child of God - not enough to join our church. He would have gone nuts living in the middle east shortly after the time of Christ - no water to baptize with. lol

What I'm trying to illustrate with that is that religion still has ways of punishment/conforming/control and you WILL be punished if you do not follow suit. It may be more subtle than murder, but it's still there.

For me, religion was very dangerous. But like I said, it's very personal to each of us.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TravellingFool

Originally posted by AnotherYOU


I am not posting this to knock your religious beliefs as I believe for each of us, they are very personal.
I grew up in the Christian Church/Church of Christ realm - though everything seemed all light and love on the outside, it was very dangerous. There were ways of brainwashing and if you didn't conform to a particular principle you would indeed be punished.

Perhaps not killed like in the inquisition, but a torture of your person or spirit was likely. Like in my mom's baptist church: having to be re-baptized because the pastor thinks you may not REALLY have been baptized in a godly manner. The person might not have been "clean." Even if it was by 5 ordained real ordained ministers - if you choose not to be re-baptized, you are ostracized - makes absolutely no sense - but it says: You are not really an acceptable child of God - not enough to join our church. He would have gone nuts living in the middle east shortly after the time of Christ - no water to baptize with. lol

What I'm trying to illustrate with that is that religion still has ways of punishment/conforming/control and you WILL be punished if you do not follow suit. It may be more subtle than murder, but it's still there.

For me, religion was very dangerous. But like I said, it's very personal to each of us.


That particular anecdote seems to highlight control on a very intimate community sized scale. When you consider the George W Bushes of this world talking about fighting wars or taking on a cause in God's name it is also about control, but on a much larger scale. It is using the beliefs of individuals to reinforce actions that would otherwise be considered immoral. Lest we forget: Hitler fought with God 'on his side' too. Just as an earlier poster mentioned most wars in history have been fought in the name of a god of one style or another but cruicially by BOTH SIDES.

I too believe that religion is for each individual to followas they chose and in whatever guise they chose, fgor me its the theory that religion becomes the crutch for the scenarios science cannot explain that is fascinating!



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I don't, yet again, understand why debates on religion are dragged into this issue.

I strongly believe many confuse religion and its associated anthropomorphized interpretation with the true [in its purest sense] gnostic interpretation that 'all is One'. The cosmic, universal forces, whatever they are, are in fact, what you all, without exception to race or creed, call this word 'God'. It's in the detail.

There is no snowy bearded old gent, no all-seeing greater power, it is simply the power of the universe. And we still don't understand it [although we must rank supreme in misrepresenting it].



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by chocise
I don't, yet again, understand why debates on religion are dragged into this issue.

I strongly believe many confuse religion and its associated anthropomorphized interpretation with the true [in its purest sense] gnostic interpretation that 'all is One'. The cosmic, universal forces, whatever they are, are in fact, what you all, without exception to race or creed, call this word 'God'. It's in the detail.

There is no snowy bearded old gent, no all-seeing greater power, it is simply the power of the universe. And we still don't understand it [although we must rank supreme in misrepresenting it].


Agreed, but the manifestation and representation of such is the snowy bearded old gentleman and its ilk to create a unified banner for people to hang their colours to. You have created your own version of the belief system with its own manifestation as the 'power of the universe'. I too think that the organised religions have been manipulated and utilised for control.

I like the idea of combining the power of the universe that is just not understood from your side of the equation with the faith of the organised religious individual. It is this perhaps that in the evolutionary terms of the original article will provide a breakthrough of the authors percieved glass ceiling by providing a harmonious existence of the scientific and faith. Perhpas the particle science you spoke about will aid with such a mindshift with the power of the universe evidenced as 'the power' religious believers take faith in through the organised faiths?



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedonk

I like the idea of combining the power of the universe that is just not understood from your side of the equation with the faith of the organised religious individual. It is this perhaps that in the evolutionary terms of the original article will provide a breakthrough of the authors percieved glass ceiling by providing a harmonious existence of the scientific and faith.


So do I.

But it's the rationalisation of this concept which escapes the vast majority, and as you've intimated, is used [by people] to subjugate other [people] in some insane power struggle.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join