Science and Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person holds two or more conflicting beliefs, ideas, or values.
Science is made-up of propaganda, lies, assumptions, circular arguments, is self-contradictory and filled with paradoxes. What more could a cognitive dissonance sufferer wish for? I’ll see you on the dark side of the Moon.
Wiki: According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent. The discomfort is triggered by the person’s belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein they try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.
Mental illness and cognitive dissonance
thebipolarwriter.blog: There exists an endless number of factors that influence, weave in and out of, and cause mental illness, and it can take decades of therapy and medication to root out the reasons behind it, never mind help resolve it.
One of the biggest pain points for me – and for many people I know – is that there exists a discrepancy between what they see and what they feel, or between what they believe and what they’re told to believe. It can be as simple as feeling worthless when everyone around you tells you how great you are; it can be as complex as believing that you don’t physically exist, despite being able to touch and feel your own body.
Weaponisation of science
Politics has ensured that science has become ‘politicised’ which is not science, but it plays a major role in making the population who do believe it mentally ill. A licence to say and do anything it likes is by default given to the political power behind the science in the name of science. Using the word science is implying the truth when in fact it’s political propaganda – a weapon.
During this time of pandemic, fear and gloom pours forth from our TV screens 24/7 but it’s all very scientific – so they say. It is in fact a mishmash of unscientific doublespeak intended to confuse and instil fear. Claiming that the government’s response to the Coronavirus epidemic is based on the very best scientific advice should be of great comfort, but when it changes daily, as it does, it becomes a conflicting uncertainty.
But then science has always been confusing, remember Einstein? Not even the scientists themselves know what he was talking about; the hallmark of politicised science. It’s all part of a plan to imbue the public with a sense of inferiority. ‘You don’t understand because you lack education, it’s counter-intuitive’. Education in this case means remembering something that will make you conform to the will of science. You are required to believe that there are super-scientist hidden away somewhere who know it all. You are meant to feel helpless, worthless and compliant at the very mention of the word science.
No true scientist would claim that a surgical mask protects anyone from viruses. No true scientist would claim that lock-down protects anyone when we need exposure to develop immunity. No true scientist would claim that CO2 is going to destroy the planet. (See “The Carbon Problem below) There are very few scientists or doctors who know anything about vaccines and viruses and those who do know very little. Vaccines and viruses are the domain of big pharma and secretive. Don’t believe me ask a friendly doctor.
Scientism: The idea that scientific reason surpasses all other knowledge or opinion. “The only authentic knowledge is scientific knowledge, and that such knowledge can only come from positive affirmation of theories through strict scientific method.” This is not science it’s politicised mind control.
Science education is much like any other, aimed at average intelligence. Scientists don’t get a brain transplant and if you go into science stupid you come out stupid – and educated. It’s much the same as other education in that it rates learning by rote (memory) above above teaching real thinking skills. Quoting dead men’s brains is rated higher than thinking for ones self. Science education does not include logic or critical thinking as they don’t want students asking awkward questions.
Scepticism is no longer the ability to spot a rogue car salesman, it’s become politicised: it’s dependent on whether the science fits the personal belief system of a particular sceptic. All sceptics are amateurs, the word sceptic means different things to different sceptics. Scepticism is an emotion not a science. There are no qualifications in scepticism. They call themselves scientific because ‘science is smart’ and they want to be thought of as being smart. Science has been invaded by sceptics and being a sceptic ensures promotion.
Sceptics are indispensable when it comes to debunking, they are masters of the debunk. Anything that threatens the tenets of science is debunked by sceptics, which is the very opposite of what science is supposed to be about. No sceptic is going to discover anything new they like science when it’s chiselled in stone. You can find them editing Wikipedia.
“Loyalty to a petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul.” – Mark Twain
The Angry Evolutionist, newsweek.com: A Newsweek headline declared: “More Americans believe in angels than in evolution and Richard Dawkins isn’t going to take it any-more.”
Evolution is the transition of creatures from one species to the next with a few intermediate fossils to prove the point. The bones just don’t exist. Richard Dawkins, one of the world’s foremost promoters of evolution, in a speech delivered at Washington University in St. Louis, Dawkins said, “We don’t need evidence. We know it [evolution] to be true”. A downright lie and the very antithesis of science. Dawkins is a fool and a sceptic who claims to do science from a position of faith; confused? Evolution is a pillar of science, one of the big lies that holds-up the other lies. Basically it’s a case of ‘if they believe this they will believe anything’; it’s all part of the treatment. To be a biologist it’s necessary to become mentally ill or you don’t pass your exams. It’s politicised science – propaganda.
And don’t forget folks, the treatment and medicine you get from the doctor is dependent on biology.
Richard Dawkins slammed for saying ‘of course’ eugenics would work’
How many times does it have to ‘not work’ before idiots take notice?
Physicists are thought of as the Crème De La Crème of science. All other branches of science look to physics for the materialism of their subject matter. Physicists don’t like words such as ‘mind’ or ‘spirit’ as they are not material. They don’t mind ‘time’ though which is odd.
The concept of time as something we move in or through is crucial to the survival of physics as a bona fide scientific discipline, but there never has been a scintilla of evidence to show that time even exists. The speed of light, for example, depends on time and without time as an entity it becomes meaningless.
Wiki tells us that:”Time has been a major subject of religion, philosophy, and science, but defining it in a non-controversial manner applicable to all fields of study has consistently eluded the greatest scholars. A simple definition states that “time is what clocks measure”, nothing more.”
And so, a strong argument can be made in support of the idea that time does not exist, except in the form of numbers, measurements and movements made by the fingers against the face of a clock. Physics works with things that don’t exist.
Click to read more about time and physics
The particular physics used around 1900 gave us the prototypes of ALL of our electrical technology. By the 1930s it was gone, debunked and replaced by the electron of J J Thomson, the theories of Albert Einstein and eventually quantum theory. Unlike the 1900 theory none of these have produced anything that can be engineered. Anything “new” today is usually from around 1900-1930, introduced by the back door. In other words modern physics is totally useless to anyone other than physicists and mathematicians who live on a kind of social security whilst doing nothing useful for mankind.
Imagine where our technology would be if physics had stuck with a theory that worked?
It’s paradoxical that the electronic technology we use was debunked and yet is still in use today. This has got to be the mother and father of all dysfunction. A complete science of electricity aborted with no alternative replacement.
Physics no longer studies the nature of electricity because it’s become politicised.
Click for a taste of the 1900 electrical physics
If you yearn to make a name for yourself in physics there are a few simple rules: You take something very simple and you complicate and convolute it, bury it in an ocean of occult maths, make-up a rational sounding story about it, invent a language for it, generally make it hard for the general public and even scientists to understand. Make it difficult or impossible to check. And before you know it, you will be proclaimed a genius. Then you can tell everyone they don’t have the intellect to understand it, its counter-intuitive to all but a physicist and the others are uneducated, naive – you can become a snob about your knowledge. This of course is much easier if you happen to have the full backing of the main-stream media.
Any names come to mind? You’re looking at politicised science.
William of Ockham c. 1287 – 1347 stated what has become known to science as Occam’s razor: “Entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity.” In other words keep it simple. The very opposite of what physics does.
Nuclear fusion your time is up
Wiki: Nuclear fusion timeline: 1920s: Based on F.W. Aston’s measurements of the masses of low-mass elements and Einstein’s discovery that E=mc2, (he did not discover it) Arthur Eddington proposes that large amounts of energy released by fusing small nuclei together provides the energy source that powers the stars.
One hundred years later, almost to the day, and physicists are still trying to tap the power of the stars, but no glimmer of star-light. The source that powers the stars is obviously not going to work, but given the opportunity physicists will cling to the cash cow for another hundred years.
Nuclear fusion was meant to be the answer to pollution and high energy costs. The theory the physicists debunked in 1900 would have done the job. However, it would have cost the energy barons a shed load of money and we can’t have that!
I hope dear reader you are beginning to get the picture?
“Asked in 1919 whether it was true that only three people in the world understood the theory of general relativity, (Eddington) allegedly replied: ‘Who’s the third?” (He was a bit of a wag)
― Arthur Stanley Eddington
If only Arthur Eddington and Albert Einstein understood general relativity they didn’t pass the secret on, because no one understands it today.
Eddington said he had proof of Einstein’s theory, gained by using a dodgy telescope, in the jungle, in bad seeing conditions. Only the true believers believed him and it was this that set the mould for all Einstein proofs.
It’s quite amazing that anyone with half a brain would fund the physicists after the nuclear fusion fiasco. But they obviously do and we now have/or should I say don’t have, the quantum computer. This is yet another project with a misguided theory that will drag-on for countless years with zero results. Remember that neither quantum physics nor relativity has come-up with anything engineerable? Why spoil an unblemished record?
It’s impossible for physicists to make anything useful because they debunked the one theory that worked.
Albert Einstein said: “I have now struggled with this basic problem of electricity for more than twenty years, and have become quite discouraged, though without being able to let go of it. I am convinced that a completely new and enlightening inspiration is needed.”
There has been no enlightenment.
The invention of the transistor and the Nobel prize were a politicised scam throughout.
The Nobel Prize in Physics 1956 was awarded to William B. Shockley John Bardeen and Walter H. Brattain of Bell lab’s “for their researches on semiconductors and their discovery of the transistor effect…” Quantum mechanics gave new insight into the properties of these materials.
There is for me an obvious problem when I look at the last sentence above. J E Lilienfeld (below) made transistors in 1926 without reference to quantum mechanics. Someone wanted to enhance the reputation of quantum mechanics by claiming it was the means by which the transistor was invented.
One of the first transistors and what must be the first transistor radio were invented by Julius Lilienfeld in the 1920s. Evidence for transistors goes back to 1910. They have been around in some form or other as long as radio. The world and his wife were trying to make a crystal diode into an amplifying transistor by adding a third electrode.
Although Lilienfeld is mentioned in passing Wiki has this to say: “John Bardeen, Walter Brattain and William Shockley invented the first working transistors at Bell Labs, the point-contact transistor in 1947 and the bipolar junction transistor in 1948. The MOSFET (metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistor), also known as the MOS transistor, was later invented by Mohamed Atalla and Dawon Kahng at Bell Labs in 1959, which led to the mass-production of MOS transistors for a wide range of uses. The MOSFET has since become the most widely manufactured device in history.
The problem with Wiki’s interpretation of the facts is that Lilienfeld’s patents were well-known to the Bell labs scientists as was his transistor radio. Like anyone else they would have done a prior patents search.
The Lilienfeld transistor, and evidence of a Bell Labs coverup
Currently the consensus is that J. E. Lilienfeld’s transistors of 1926
were never built, and could not have worked. But every time I read
stuff about Lilienfeld, the hair on the back of my neck stands right
up. My gut feeling has always been that something is wrong. I’m led
to ask, (on) what evidence is this consensus about Lilienfeld based?
In 1981 the semiconductor physicist H. E. Stockman said “Lilienfeld
demonstrated his remarkable tubeless radio receiver on many occasions,
but God help a fellow who at that time threatened the reign of the
tube.” See Bell Labs Memorial: Who really invented the transistor?,
starting at “Oscillating Crystals”…
Click for the complete article by Bill Beaty
And a paper which details some history of the laboratory
testing of Lilienfeld’s patent claims by others: The Other Transistor:
early history of the MOSFET See pp235-236:
Wiki and my own words in perenthesis: ((Russell) Ohl, (an engineer who worked on the early transistors at Bell Labs) it should be noted, was the man who invented the silicon solar cell in 1941 and discovered during World War II that semiconductors could be doped with small amounts of impurities to create useful new properties. Born in 1889, he was bitten by the radio bug at the age of 16 and devoted much of his life to making simple radio receivers employing semiconductors. His accidental discovery of the P-N barrier in his work at Bell Telephone Laboratories led to the development of solar cells (and transistors).
If we return to the sentence by Wiki at the top of this section: “Quantum mechanics gave new insight into the properties of these materials.” we find it was Ohl who invented doping and the P-N barrier, something that kinda cancels out quantum mechanics as being the materials expert. I recall in my researches that Ohl speaks about being accompanied by a quantum physicist during transistor research.
Wiki never gives credence to those who are not scientists especially in the case of a major breakthrough like the transistor. Inventors are written out of history and replaced with names of scientists. Ohl’s crucial contributions to the transistor were the doping treatment and the P-N barrier of crystals. He knew nothing about quantum physics as can be read in the documentation about him.
beatriceco.com: Ohl, it should be noted, was the man who invented the silicon solar cell in 1941 and discovered during World War II that semiconductors could be doped with small amounts of impurities to create useful new properties. Born in 1889, he was bitten by the radio bug at the age of 16 and devoted much of his life to making simple radio receivers employing semiconductors. His accidental discovery of the P-N barrier in his work at Bell Telephone Laboratories led to the development of solar cells.
Click for more on this subject
Beginning in the 1960s when NASA began to explore our solar system it dawned on them that there was a problem with information given by the astronomers. In fact nothing the astronomers had said about the planets and moons was correct. It’s now impossible to find a fifties or sixties book on popular astronomy as they have all been binned. I know, I looked for one. Now extrapolate this to all the stars and galaxies out in the cosmos and the confidence displayed by astronomers that they know it all. The black holes, the neutron stars neither of which have been observed, the big bang – no one was there. Then look back and compare their hubris to the complete lack of knowledge of the 1960s? Have they, after centuries of astronomy, suddenly become good at it? I doubt it.
And, as if they hadn’t had enough bad luck along came Immanuel Velikovsky. He made some predictions about the Solar System, Venus and the Moon; the Moon was about to be explored by NASA. He wrote a book about it all that became a best seller and the astronomers had a fit. One of them threatened the publisher with withdrawal of the order for university textbooks. Another got fired for showing Velikovsky’s theory at the planetarium. They blackened Velikovsky’s name in every tome they could find. The idiotic childishness was not ignored by contemporary writers and several books were written about the mad antics of the astronomers (The Velikovsky Affair). All of his predictions about the Moon turned out to be correct. If the reader cares to check the astronomers are not keen on going to Venus.
Today we have yet another Velikovsky torment to send the astronomers bonkers. It’s called the Electric Universe and many are beginning to suspect that the old man was right about that.
The politicisation of science has made scientists into floundering fools.
The Russian Kola Superdeep Borehole
Very little is known about what’s beneath our feet and geologists of three or more countries decided to bore a super-deep hole in an attempt to tap the mantle – or to see what’s below the Earth’s crust. Drilling began on 24 May 1970.
Just about everything the geologists had predicted about what would be found while boring the hole turned-out to be wrong. The seismic reflection surveys were completely wrong. The density of the deep rocks was wrong and even the upcoming Plate Tectonics theory was shown to be wrong.
The German KTB deep drilling site
The same kind of boreholes were drilled by German KTB deep drilling site and other national teams with almost identical results.
“Another hole drilled into the Earth’s Crust was the KTB superdeep borehole the German Continental Deep Drilling Program. The results found here were even more surprising. Firstly there is much more available data from the superdeep drilling and also it was carried out by Germans so you would expect everything to have been planned and modeled correctly. They had also reviewed the Russians attempt and results.”
Tectonic plate missing (Today the science of plate tectonics relies on tectonic plates so one would think this was quite serious for geology).
At a depth of about 7000 m (22,966 ft) they had expected to drill through the boundary between two tectonic plates that collided 320 millions years ago, forming the Eurasian plate. However, this boundary was never crossed, and the geologists have had to redraw most of the subsurface picture. ( No I don’t think so)
Not even the contrary evidence from the deep boreholes and the missing plates was going to shake geology, as to do so would delay student qualification, not to mention awkward questions for the lecturer. Geology unmindful, marches on, oblivious to the stark realities of experiment and practical experience.
Nothing has changed. They are not going to predict earthquakes.
davidpratt.info: The results of superdeep drilling show that seismic surveys of continental crust are being systematically misinterpreted. Much of the modelling of the earth’s interior depends on the interpretation of seismic records. If these interpretations are wrong at depths of only a few kilometres, how much reliance can be placed on interpretations of the earth’s structure at depths of hundreds or thousands of kilometres beneath the surface?
Geologists claim to know what’s going on all the way down to the inner core!
The following is never discussed today for obvious reasons:
The carbon problem
“Our planet’s immense inventory of coal, along with giant oil fields and, most important of all, carbonate rocks, constitute the so-called “carbon problem”. Briefly, these minerals contain so much carbon that the earth’s crust is anomalously enriched in this element with respect to the carbon inventory expected in the primordial crust. The source of this “extra” carbon may be outgassing from deeply buried carbon. T. Gold’s theories about the origins of methane, oil, and coal depend upon deep crustal sources of carbon. A less likely source of additional carbon, but one which must still be considered, is the influx of extraterrestrial debris in carbonaceous meteorites and comets.”
Theories of coal and oil are at odds with carbon quantities. There is so much carbon in the Earth that geologists are at a loss to explain it. (To such an extent that it’s surprising the CO2 in the atmosphere is so low.)
Click here for more on this subject and the coal theories of T. Gold
Who Invented Radio Astronomy, Jansky ?
It appears to be a law of nature that ideas are visited on the man in a garden shed before they are revealed to the professor. Science knows this and has devised cunning plots to garner the credit for itself. Here’s just one example:
Wiki tells us, and most assume it to be true: “Karl Guthe Jansky (October 22, 1905 – February 14, 1950) was an American physicist and radio engineer who in August 1931 first discovered radio waves emanating from the Milky Way. He is considered one of the founding figures of radio astronomy.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Guthe_Jansky
Karl Jansky is presented by science as a physicist and the first radio astronomer, but it was Grote Reber, an amateur radio enthusiast who was responsible for the invention and development of the science. Jansky is someone that most people today take for granted and see radio astronomy as the domain of astrophysicists and cosmologists. But, Grote Reber built the first steerable parabolic radio astronomy dish at home in his back yard, with no help or advice from any scientific source. A new branch of science was born without a scientist in sight.
Reber said “The astronomers were afraid of it because they didn’t know anything about radio. The radio people weren’t interested because it was so faint it didn’t even constitute interference. Nobody was going to do anything. “So, all right, if nobody was going to do anything, maybe I should do something”. “So I consulted with myself and decided to build a dish!”.
Grote Reber was later invited into the scientific brotherhood that had earlier rejected him but he declined hence Karl Jansky was given his thunder.
There’s much more of this out there and I may continue indefinitely –
The history of science shows it to be a chain of uncorrected errors. These errors are passed on to other disciplines where they create and compound further errors in the various sciences. Being an authoritarian discipline with responsibility for education, science, because of its nature is incapable of correcting its own mistakes. It’s collective ego forbids the very notion of historical error and so it sinks ever deeper into its own mire.
Further corruption occurs with funding from corporations with a vested interest in maintaining the economic status quo for their own gain. They award funding on the condition that the research is beneficial to them. And so we have a completely corrupted system that will not touch certain areas of research. Specifically that includes clean alternative energy sources. Make no mistake, science will lie through its teeth in order to gain funding and retain its position as the font of all knowledge and it does so on a regular basis. This is not publicised because science is held in a perceived but undeserved high regard and like the tale of the emperors new clothes many are afraid to criticise for fear of ridicule.