posted on Jun, 10 2013 @ 01:10 AM
We hear a lot of rhetoric about the evidence for alternative life forms being insufficient to prove any conclusion. Indeed this is the case. But in
reality, this 'lacking of proof' is an irrelevant construct, a presumptive error resulting in a stalemate of ignorance; a contrivance of
convenience. It is a Ponzi Scheme of fake science.
I find it ironic when people exhibit the swagger of thumping everyone they know on the head with their supposed knowledge of the scientific method.
Then the first thing they demand of outsider sponsors (non-scientists) is 'proof.' I find that rather confusing.
The first step in the scientific method is NOT 'proof.' The salient issue is not whether we possess absolute conclusivity. That is a logical
fallacy of presumption called 'Proof Gaming.' It is akin to an employer saying to an applicant. "Fine, you want me to give you a job? Go bring me
a million bucks, and I will give you a job." Most of our scientific consensus resides on a competitive process of expository data collection,
predictive testing, falsification testing, and is rarely underpinned by airtight proof from the very start. And even when proof is attained, it is at
the conclusion of a long process of evaluation and peer review. Even then, some scientists will dissent. Science is a method and a process. It begins
with observation, necessity and plurality. This we have in ample supply to surpass any objective threshold.
So why can the science not be started? The a priori lack of objectivity. As long as there are those who block the process of science, those who
enjoy and benefit with personal power from the game, there will always be a state of insufficient evidence, always be a state of mockery and derision,
always be a state of ignorance.
There are those who dissent with this contrivance. And their numbers continue to grow.