posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 09:34 PM
We run into this dilemma in my labs often enough. We have scientists who wish to pursue the full predictive testing set on a conventional explanation
until they have exhausted the viable set of constructs which are bound up in that research pathway. They have a pre-formulated doctrine or a desired
outcome which they wish to methodically establish as accepted, through a long hierarchical set of predictive tests. Fun for scientists and nice
career sustainment, but not fun when YOU are the one spending money on such 'diligence.'
For me as the owner of the business, I do not want my lab expense wasted on testing 40 different predictive/supportive ways of generating acceptance
on a conventional explanation, when all that is required is to falsify the conventional pathway set through one single test
and move on. Even
if that test involves pursuing a pluralistic avenue of research. As an economist I don't care about political correctness or that my science career
might be besmirched; as a business owner I do not want to waste 400 basis points of my earnings on predictive testing hierarchies which give us no
near term definitive conclusions. I simply refuse that quarterly plan and ask everyone to try again. Call me impatient, but it works.
This is the same case with our collective ignorance over this subject. Chasing brainwave patterns as the sole pathway of research, in some desperate,
but never conclusive, method of explanatory avoidance; seeking some corroborative results which mildly support or can be contorted to support a
desired outcome or a personal religious doctrine of atheism, is a large waste of our collective money and time. When, indeed one single test -
generation of information during an NDE which cannot have been obtained through any other means - (and this can be tested much more economically) will
falsify the entire branch of 'conventional brain activity' expense pathway, in much less effort and cost.
Unfortunately, one who tests in this manner, on this subject, will be expunged from serious science. This is unfortunate and is a great example of
how we cultivate and sustain institutional ignorance.
It is much more expensive to hide our collective heads in the sand pretending to do official lab coat clad 'research;' wherein we purchase endless
sets of predictive reports which make us feel all scientifically comfy and present the façade of diligent success. But it is nonetheless a folderol
supporting the authorized religion; getting us nowhere in reality.
Fear costs money. I would rather see the real research.
edit on 7-9-2013 by TheEthicalSkeptic because: (no reason given)