Opus 2023-064: The Big Jump

Hypothesis > Theory > Conclusion tested> Hypothesis

Science was born under the above process,  It is a never ending cycle because there will always be another question down the road, or there will if it is real science.  Real science is never settled.  It keeps asking questions.

If you have been thinking while you watch the world turn, you will be in a place where you doubt much of what you hear science reporting.  That is because post-modern science has taken a big step backwards.  They are now leaving out the middle portion which involves testing and repetition before conclusion.  In real science the idea was that you learned something even if you experimented and your hypothesis turned out to be wrong.  That meant you knew how to be more focused with the next series.  There are two reasons why we have had the change.

One is economic and political.  Science is not longer the genuine seeking after knowledge.  I would say that at least for the big science you hear about, the goal of the process is to come up with solutions and evidence that the bank rolling organization is paying to hear.  Much of the “science” done today is done with computer models instead of physical trials.  Often the pseudo-scientists will work backwards from desired conclusion to the beginning of the computer run.  They will adjust the variable and equations until they get the results they want.  It can be global warming or pandemics.  You can fake the whole process and proclaim a breakthrough.

Another reason for the loss of credibility is a change in philosophy.  Modern scientists are so anxious to remove the divine from the equation that they are forced to abandon the procedures and assumptions that were at the foundation of the development of modern science.  They have been forced to go back to the Greek method of only logic.  Up to a point logic can help you make decisions, but only up to a point.  There comes a time where logic must be guided by reality.  Logic by its nature is a human skill and being human it is very fallible.  The example I find that resonates best with us laymen is the temperature of water boiling on a fire.  Most people accept that water boils at 212 F or 100 C.  If you ask them how hot it will get if you keep the fire on, logic will come up with something that says it just keeps getting hotter.  That is logical.  It is also false.  If you do an experiment you will find that it doesn’t get hotter unless you put a lid on it and then it can explode.  

The process of experimenting depends on a philosophical, or if you will theological, assumption.  The assumption is that there are laws of science that do not change on a whim.  You can count on those laws being the same tomorrow as they are today.  In the pagan world of the Greeks, Indians and Chinese you have a belief system populated by capricious gods who might be in a bad mood and suspend the First Law of Thermodynamics.  The God of the Bible does not do that.  Yes, there were miracles but they were one time events that were clearly labeled.  Even non-Christians can agree that the development of the science that transformed the world was based on the Judeo-Christian view of God.  In a universe created by the God of the Bible you have truth and falsehoods.  In the post-modern, pagan, Marxists world truth is whatever fits the current political narrative.  That is as true in their science as their philosophy.

We need to discern which method was used before we buy into the conclusions.  If it is acceptable to lie to achieve a political goal then you can’t believe anything you are told.  If truth is a requirement than you might be able to build an airplane that will stay in the sky.  

What you believe makes a difference.

homo unius libri