Standing on the Shoulders of Pseudoscientists

[Chris_com28]

I find it funny how people seem to base their materialistic beliefs on people who seem to be what they would call new age mumbo jumbo (or NAMJ, as they seem to like abreviating things) believers. Which is funny as whenever I read about them I usually read that they were into the "occult" and believed in things that "skeptics" (I believe that to be an incorrect definition) would class as pseudoscience (there seems to be a lot of acusations of that around on the Internet).

I read that Newton's discovery of light was because of his belive that it was the light of God or something like that. Arthur Lodge (I think that's his name) invented the CRT (Cathode Ray Tube) and he was a firm believer in ghosts and was evwn part of a team investigating them. I've even read that Plato did some dowsing and he had a school of sacred geometry. Of course ♥♥♥♥♥ stated that his interest in dowsing was only because he believed it was down ot the idiometer effect, which I think was trying to steer well clear of any occult attachments.

It was even stated by someone that learned people don't believe in such nonsense. I would think otherwise. It seems a deliberate coverup by "skeptics" to make everyone into the "occult" as either bad or stupid. This is hardly the case. Even Jung was into Kundalini yoga. Though he seemed to misinterpret the texts he was an intelligent person and into non-mainstream topics. I think it's time they stopped classing us as conspiracy theorists and wackos. But that's just me.

[Korpo]

A lot of scientists saw and see their work as a service to God or interest in the creation. Polls on US scientists show that religious belief is not an outside view among accomplished researchers.

The usual atheistic reasonsing "based on science" is to state since science did not find God that God doesn't exist. You cannot even remotely think we "know it all" but people think we already know everything that disproves God, which is very silly. Our knowledge is very limited. Light existed before it was described, radio waves existed before they were first used technologically, and many "invisible phenomena" have since been found that surely would have found enough people back before their discovery that would have called the idea hogwash.

So, there's no lack of people that want to believe something with or without any proper evidence. Goes for atheists and skeptics, too.

Oliver

[ButterflyWoman]

Even Jung was into Kundalini yoga.

He also believed in reincarnation.

Yes, there is a common argument amongst dogmatic materialists that "scientifically educated" people don't believe in the paranormal or, indeed, anything that can't be materialistically proven. That, however, is a lie. The majority of scientists are believers in some type of God, be it Christian, Jewish, or Islamic, or even neo-pagan, these days. So far as I'm currently aware, nobody has yet proven the existence of Allah or Yahweh or Thor, so...

Real scientists are real people, just like anyone else. And most of them understand perfectly well that there are things that are beyond the scope of science. It's just the obnoxious fanboyz who can't figure that out. Their dogma doesn't allow for it.

[Chris_com28]

I think I remember him believing in reincarnation. I think he's most famous for his ideas on dreams and syncronicity. Apparently he was always into such things and it wasn't after his practise of yoga to help with a few mental problems.

Yes, there is a common argument amongst dogmatic materialists that "scientifically educated" people don't believe in the paranormal or, indeed, anything that can't be materialistically proven.

It's interesting to note that apparently even Dawkins doesn't deny that all scientists are materialists, but the only good scientist is a materialist. Funny that as he wouldn't be as well known as he is if it wasn't for a certain occultist.

I've always understood that most scientists were materialists. I don't know were you got that idea from. Maybe you could enlighten me.Though there still are plenty of scientist with occult beliefs. They've got very high in their study so it doesn't seem to be that that the more you learn about science the less you belive in God. Sonetimes it's the other way.

[ButterflyWoman]

I've always understood that most scientists were materialists. I don't know were you got that idea from. Maybe you could enlighten me.

Just because you study things in the material world doesn't mean you don't believe there's anything else. I haven't got the statistics on hand, but my husband is very well versed in this field. He actually goes to atheist blogs and argues with them, rationally, calmly, and with impeccable logic. It really pisses them off, because he's not an atheist (and many of them want to believe that only atheists can be rational). He's also got a science degree...

[CFTraveler]

Einstein was a real scientist and believed in God. Remember "God doesn't play dice?" The phrase which he uttered, to the point of working to disprove himself when he discovered the implications of his discoveries?

[sleeper]

If i may interject my opinion of this, i think it's a matter of observation vs. creating natural laws.

Einstein, as well as all other great scientists of the past were observationalists. they wanted to understand the world that they were observing.

the modern scientists seem to be philosophers who want to create natural laws. Quantum physics is, from what i've seen (as well as much other modern science) simply trying to use math to justify someone's beliefs. when the math doesn't work, they create new math. when the beliefs get weird, they change those.

for instance, with the new hadron collider, for fear that they might create black holes, many scientists have abandoned string theory (without announcing it) in order to make the math work, so that black holes won't appear. as if changing the paper we do our math on, will change the universe we live in.

[CFTraveler]

the modern scientists seem to be philosophers who want to create natural laws

Someday I'll quote you on this.

[ButterflyWoman]

Einstein, as well as all other great scientists of the past were observationalists. they wanted to understand the world that they were observing.

Yes, exactly. And even if they privately believed in God or Gods or ghosts or some other paranormal/metaphysical things, they didn't apply those beliefs to their studies because, well, that's not what they were studying.

Science, as my husband likes to point out, is a process. It's not a religion, it's not a philosophy, it's not a lifestyle. Science is a methodology. It can sometimes be applied to things other than physical reality, but it doesn't always work very well. IMHO, "I did it this way because it's more Scientific!" is as dumb a reason to do something as "I did it this way because it's more Religious!"

[Jaco]

for instance, with the new hadron collider, for fear that they might create black holes, many scientists have abandoned string theory (without announcing it) in order to make the math work, so that black holes won't appear. as if changing the paper we do our math on, will change the universe we live in.

Maybe there are changing the universe we live in that way. According to some, we shape our reality with our thoughts.

Sience for me... is seeking the truth, whatever the truth is.