The Science Council defines science as “the search and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence. Scientific methodology includes the following: objective observation; measurement and data (possibly, although not necessarily, using mathematics as a tool); evidence; experiment and / or observation as benchmarks to test hypotheses; induction; reasoning to establish general rules or conclusions drawn from facts or examples; repetition; critical analysis; verification and proof; critical exposition to scrutiny – peer review and evaluation. “
Critics label the mystical sciences as “non-science-based things that have no supporting evidence,” since you won’t find them in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
Our view that astrology, reincarnation, psychic work, and other metaphysical disciplines are as valid as conventional science such as biology, is controversial, although these fields of study involve all parts of the scientific method (in addition to revision in pairs) described above.
Critics dismiss past lives, but extensive Near Death Experience scientific research supports the reincarnation theory.
My-science-is-science-and-yours-astrology is not that skeptics laugh at the idea, but over and over again, they are only acquired with modern sun sign astrology, horoscopes, and other trivial forms. of astrology. . It is not very scientific to claim to have invalidated a body of work without first examining that body of work. Complex patterns in ancient astrology and numerology allow for pattern recognition, the foundation of predictive astrology; these disciplines are less indistinct as sciences than cynics believe because they provide exact patterns based on the energies associated with place, time, and date of birth.
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”
“He who despises the power of intuition will never rise above the ranks of official calculators.”
“But instinct is something that transcends knowledge. We undoubtedly have certain finer fibers that allow us to perceive truths when logical deduction, or any other voluntary effort of the brain, is useless.”
“Common sense is the set of prejudices acquired at the age of eighteen.”
“Learning many things does not teach understanding.”
The conventional scientific approach has serious flaws. James Delingpole describes the failure of peer review: “… Peer review is the benchmark by which most new scientific research tends to be judged. Whether that research is to be taken seriously by the community scientific, then it must be accepted for publication by one of a fairly small number of academic or quasi-academic journals, such as Nature, Science, and Scientific American. Peer review is not a perfect system. In the golden age of 20th century science it was not even thought necessary: neither Watson & Crick nor Einstein were peer-reviewed. But in today’s fragmented and abstruse world, where the various branches of science have become increasingly recondite and specialized, peer-review has become widely accepted as the worst method by which quality science can be separated from junk science. … What we see happening is the deterioration of ‘review by p ares’ into something more like ‘review by friends’ “.
The crisis of modern science is dire, evidenced by 157 peer reviews that failed to detect a bogus cancer study.
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/03/27/open-access-journals.aspx?e_cid=20140327Z1_PRNL_art_1&utm_source=prmrnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_4Zetaign=20140327Z1_PRNL_art_1&utm_source=prmrnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_4Zetaign=2014032c71&utm_campid67&utm_content= art1 & utm_4Zetaign = M4032c571 & utm_campid67 & utm_source = prmrnl?
“… Many studies have shown that peer review does not improve the quality of scientific articles. Scientists themselves know that it does not work. However, the public still regards it as a sign of quality and says: ‘This article was reviewed “or” this article was not peer reviewed “, as if that meant something. It is not like this. Science is a human activity as corruptible as any other. Its practitioners are not saints, they are human beings, and they do what human beings do: they lie, cheat, steal … they sue, hide quotes, falsify data, exaggerate their own importance and unfairly denigrate opposing views. That is human nature. It’s not going to change “.
–Michael Crichton, “Next”
The glaring flaws of modern science are further illustrated by the accepted standard regarding the true history of civilization on planet Earth, despite evidence to the contrary; ancient history could be very different from what conventional archaeologists accept as true.
“What we know is a drop, what we do not know is an ocean.”
â € • Isaac Newton
“Certainly there are things worth believing. I believe in the brotherhood of man and the uniqueness of the individual. But if you ask me to prove what I believe, I cannot. You know they are true, but you could spend a lifetime not being able to test them. The mind can only advance so far on what it knows and can prove. There comes a point where the mind takes a leap, call it intuition or whatever you like, and it goes out to a higher plane of knowledge, but you can never to prove how it got there. All the great discoveries have involved such a leap. ”
Psychology is dismissed as a solid science because there is no clear consensus in many areas within the field, according to skeptics. So it may not be considered a “real” science, but it surely has credibility. Few objective people would deny the concepts of repression or emotional projection, for example.
The mindset heard in the world of mainstream science silences many, but not all, as the following quote demonstrates.
“The reason they are not paying attention (to astrology) is that it would embarrass them in front of their colleagues. There is no set of proven facts … that says that human behavior does not contain elements related to planetary patterns in the world. Instead, there is a broad and arrogant understanding among social science professionals that folklore, like astrology, is for the simpletons. Without doing any simple experiments to test some of the principles of astrology, the Psychologists around the world have completely ignored it The last two centuries … Most of them have the false impression that it is unscientific and is not a suitable subject for serious study. They are completely wrong. astrology whether they are using scientific methods or not has no direct bearing on whether the body of knowledge they use is true and valid. ”
–Dr. Kary Banks Mullis, Nobel Prize Winning Scientist
We encourage you to keep an open mind towards unconventional thinking, such as the mystical sciences of astrology and numerology, along with psychic work and reincarnation because an open mind, with a healthy sense of discernment, is vital to making the most of his life.