Dear friends,
It seems to me, a statement isn’t, “the science,” simply because an expert said it, statements only become science when they’re empirically proven, the data published and is repeated. Experts are supposed to know what the empirically proven data is, they aren’t supposed to pull data from their derrieres, and feed it to us. Yet that’s what experts do today. They’re so wicked smart they don’t need tests or results to know. They can think data up… a priori. That’s how they knew the vaccines were safe and effective. Not by rigorous testing and analysis but by thinking it up. Which is why it’s astounding the vaccine turned out to be a human health disaster. How could that have happened? No long term testing, but much thinking by the experts… The Science said, it should have worked.
Science isn’t an entity, it’s a process. Reality is reduced to its constituents, then those constituents are analyzed by hypothesis, testing/falsifying, retesting/falsifying then the results must be reproduced by another lab… before data is considered empirically proven. Even then there could be other explanations that fit the observed phenomenon better… but haven’t been thought up yet. Which means empirically proven theories are never cast in stone. Any one of them, could be replaced by a better explanation, any time. Making science an ever evolving process. The implications of this are huge. One is that everything we think we know for certain is subject to change. We could observe something that obliterates our understanding of any field of endeavor. Moreover, sooner or later… we will.
Today our experts fall back is appeal to authority. Because… How dare you question the experts! They’re the experts! Begging the question. But they’re limited by human knowledge. Since we don’t know everything, it’s impossible for an expert to know it all. Moreover, any question that’s answered authoritatively by an expert, must necessarily require expertise, in fields the expert is novice in. Expecting a human being to be omniscient is foolish. It’s elevating a supposed skeptic to a representative of an all knowing religion. The materialist religion. One who’s authorities wield the power of… The Science! Tremble before the expert. For their words have the authority of the Science! In other words… our experts rely on appeal to authority, and begging the question.
Science is an empirical endeavor not a rational exercise. While the hypothesis is rationalized, the testing is always focused on empirical results. The mind is capable of flights of fancy, and then rationalizes those dreams as reality… or at least a possible reality. That’s one way mankind grows our standard of living. In the regime of science however, those flights of fancy are supposed to be grounded by empirical testing, with an eye to falsifying the hypothesis. In matters of political moment however, that system is flipped, and the testing is designed to prove a flight of fancy, rather than ground it in reality. Allowing the absurdity plane to lift off and fly wherever the politically favored want it to go. Which is always to a place where they have more power, wealth and privilege… and we have less.
We live in a very technological age. I think we’re obliged to understand at least the fundamentals of it. Including economics, philosophy and the scientific method. Strip them of the gobbledy gook and they’re as understandable as a toaster. The jargon is to protect the kingdoms of the experts from barbarians. Science isn’t religion, though it’s treated as if it was. Science isn’t appeal to authority, although if we ask questions experts claim we’re bad people, in need of censoring. Even as science isn’t an entity. Science is a means to an end… not an end. Our treating science and experts inappropriately, is why science is stagnating, our governments are becoming despotic, and our education systems are useless. Learn what science is, and you’ll never accept, “The science says…” again.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
