Well, Mr. Roeker, that's part of the conspiracy: the Breakaway Group keeps the evidence - think of Roswell and the several people who said they saw alien technology and even aliens themselves there. There are many other similar cases, and you have to admit, some things cannot be duplicated in a lab - you have to trust the source. However, I, too, am skeptical - not about something strange happening, for something certainly is, but about the specifics. I don't know, but I will say that, given the circumstantial evidence, one would not a fool to investigate or to believe that some other intelligence is interfacing with us.
However - you went to the easier "odd thing" to dismiss. Psi events have been investigated in the lab and elsewhere, and the results have been, overall, millions to one against chance. True, verifiable info has gotten to people through telepathy, and telekinesis has been demonstrated even in the lab - although the savants cannot always produce on demand, just as a musician cannot always come up with a new tune on demand. And yet, those in charge of science deny this. For some reason, they don't want to believe even though it is in front of them. It is not the scientific method so much as the scientists themselves that deny these phenomena.
"The rejection of any source of evidence is always treason to that ultimate rationalism which urges forward science and philosophy alike." (Whitehead, 1929)
This segues nicely into the new book I am reading, "Simone Weil, Her Thoughts..." by John Hellman. Weil, a French intellectual of the 1920's to 1940's, began as an agnostic Jewish Marxist, but her trajectory led her to become a major influence on the future Pope Paul VI and she is considered by some to be a Catholic saint. In her day, her sex and upper-middle class status led her - and nearly all the intellectuals of her day - to speak of the plight of the working class without ever having stepped foot in a factory. Weil, however, did, spending two years in the 1930's in a factory, and what she came away with amazed her contemporaries. Proletariat work, she claimed, would NOT change the thinking of the worker into one for revolutionary action - rather it made slaves of them. This she blamed - again, heresy for her day - not on capitalism, but on technocracy, making all the political institutions of the day - communist, socialist, capitalist -more or less the same. Science, she claimed, has become the new religion, oppressing just as religion had once done, and its chief priests were the scientist. This creates a power hierarchy of technocrats, no less oppressive than the classical capitalist model of owner and worker. This led her to believe in empathy, or internal humanistic change, that would be necessary to alleviate world suffering - which eventually led her to strong spiritual and religious beliefs. More on that in other blogs, but for now, the point is that SCIENCE has become the new religion with its structure of power, and the dogma of scientism that which protects that power. It is our new priesthood, the scientists, and our new dogma, technology, that is now keeping us from the truth that shall set us free.
It thus becomes clearer why science refuses to acknowledge certain facts of life - not because such facts of life are not amenable to the scientific method, but because they are inconvenient to the current power structure. I do not say that a cabal is deciding this, but rather an attitude that dismisses what might upset the apple cart. It is about power and control - and at bottom, the complete ascendancy of the superficial ego. But there could be cabals who help maintain this control - it makes sense. And while it is not the individual scientist or technocrat who is a sociopath, the designs of the scientific collective is sociopathic, formed not to better mankind, but to further its grasp on power. Thus the cover-up or denial of certain forms of knowledge. And thus Weil's turn to religion and the spiritual. FK
However - you went to the easier "odd thing" to dismiss. Psi events have been investigated in the lab and elsewhere, and the results have been, overall, millions to one against chance. True, verifiable info has gotten to people through telepathy, and telekinesis has been demonstrated even in the lab - although the savants cannot always produce on demand, just as a musician cannot always come up with a new tune on demand. And yet, those in charge of science deny this. For some reason, they don't want to believe even though it is in front of them. It is not the scientific method so much as the scientists themselves that deny these phenomena.
"The rejection of any source of evidence is always treason to that ultimate rationalism which urges forward science and philosophy alike." (Whitehead, 1929)
This segues nicely into the new book I am reading, "Simone Weil, Her Thoughts..." by John Hellman. Weil, a French intellectual of the 1920's to 1940's, began as an agnostic Jewish Marxist, but her trajectory led her to become a major influence on the future Pope Paul VI and she is considered by some to be a Catholic saint. In her day, her sex and upper-middle class status led her - and nearly all the intellectuals of her day - to speak of the plight of the working class without ever having stepped foot in a factory. Weil, however, did, spending two years in the 1930's in a factory, and what she came away with amazed her contemporaries. Proletariat work, she claimed, would NOT change the thinking of the worker into one for revolutionary action - rather it made slaves of them. This she blamed - again, heresy for her day - not on capitalism, but on technocracy, making all the political institutions of the day - communist, socialist, capitalist -more or less the same. Science, she claimed, has become the new religion, oppressing just as religion had once done, and its chief priests were the scientist. This creates a power hierarchy of technocrats, no less oppressive than the classical capitalist model of owner and worker. This led her to believe in empathy, or internal humanistic change, that would be necessary to alleviate world suffering - which eventually led her to strong spiritual and religious beliefs. More on that in other blogs, but for now, the point is that SCIENCE has become the new religion with its structure of power, and the dogma of scientism that which protects that power. It is our new priesthood, the scientists, and our new dogma, technology, that is now keeping us from the truth that shall set us free.
It thus becomes clearer why science refuses to acknowledge certain facts of life - not because such facts of life are not amenable to the scientific method, but because they are inconvenient to the current power structure. I do not say that a cabal is deciding this, but rather an attitude that dismisses what might upset the apple cart. It is about power and control - and at bottom, the complete ascendancy of the superficial ego. But there could be cabals who help maintain this control - it makes sense. And while it is not the individual scientist or technocrat who is a sociopath, the designs of the scientific collective is sociopathic, formed not to better mankind, but to further its grasp on power. Thus the cover-up or denial of certain forms of knowledge. And thus Weil's turn to religion and the spiritual. FK
RSS Feed