Could this be how new scientist feel when, they find theie first book of science, or maybe the book found them but, i can't seem to get this book out of my mine, its like my first stepping stine for my life to science.
Its a book about nature in general. Origins of humans, different typea of rocks, elementary material to be honest but, the same thing i thought when i read my elementary history text book, and i came out understanding more then i did before.
@shortstories English Version
My opinion about the timeline of natural history is that people just make up stories about the past and call it science
Both Atheists and Theists are guilty of doing that in my opinion
For better or worse, however, the *vast* majority of Man absolutely cannot escape the need to understand reality as a Narrative. While Science truly consists of facts and hard-data, 99% of us will never possess the necessary understanding of these data on their own terms, and are doomed to “make up a story” about them in order for it to mean anything.
You’re not wrong by any stretch, but the present situation is understandable.
@KingOfWhiteAmerica @RodrickSage
I think it is "cheap and dumb" when both theistic creationists and atheists make up stories about the distant past and call it science to fit their atheist or theistic agenda
I think they should just stick to using science to make models that make predictions that can be tested and then use the models which seem to often get predictions that work out well enough to make decisions instead of fabricating history and calling it science
Agreed, no dispute. It very often is. But the problem I see is that it’s completely subject to “market forces”. And I honestly don’t know that there’s a solution that’s forthcoming.
> … they should just stick to using science to make models that make predictions that can be tested and then use the models which seem to often get predictions that work out well enough to make decisions …
That should indeed be the way it goes. But the real problem is that every one of these guys that sticks to this rule, gets edged out by the other guys with a better “marketing department”.
It is an undeniably shit situation. But my point is that it‘s understandable - not that it’s good or reasonable.
@KingOfWhiteAmerica @RodrickSage
I do not think this problem would happen in an anarcho-capitalist society
They are not marketing it so that corporations can have better products to sell that achieve better results for their customers based on the principles of science
I think it is the government and synagogues that are funding atheistic "origins science" and the churches and synagogues and mosques that are funding theistic "origins science"
Ironically both Atheists & Theists fund big bang
I know - the reason I put “marketing” in ”scare quotes” is because I’m using it as a synecdoche for storytelling-in-general.
For the Science to be purely facts-driven, the wealthy-and-powerful of the world would have to agree that that’s what *we’re* doing - and not the other guys that are fellating the State, say, or making big sweeping doomsday predictions, or whathaveyou. I don’t mean literal marketing - I just don’t really have a better idea to pin it to.
@KingOfWhiteAmerica @RodrickSage
I think there are a group of unknown sentient beings even above the so called Jews
These sentient beings use the governments, corporations and religious institutions as media outlets
Instead of using violence to control people
They deceive people with fiction stories that they call news which later becomes official history
They then trick other people into enforcing their will through violence
All these outlets agree on the same fictional news stories
@KingOfWhiteAmerica @RodrickSage
I combined ideas from
Tim Ozman, paranormies and others who shows news fakery
Plus my understanding of brainwashing from Steven Hassan & Mary Alice Chrnalogar
Plus my understanding of Anarchism in the sense of disbelief in the government from Larken Rose, Mark Passio and other anarchists
How I tie this to the previous points, is that in my experience, many of those in the position to finance scientific research, consider these sorts of positions as “populism” - which automatically disqualifies us from consideration by grantwriters or R&D departments. It’s darn tragic, imo.