Global warming has been shown to exist, by a vast amount of research, that it is impossible to not consider it to be a fact.
There was a time, though, when it was considered a conspiracy theory by skeptics.
I am of the opinion that a lot of conspiracy theories are based in some sort of truth. If global warming has been proven to be an actual phenomenon, is it not possible that other conspiracy theories can be proven to be fact also?
A conspiracy theory usually sparks from some sort of information becoming available to the public. For example, global warming was theorized by scientists and a scientific research paper was published on the topic. Without which a conspiracy theorist wouldn’t have known such a thing existed thus they would have had nothing to debunk with conspiracy claims.
If UFO and alien sightings and encounters hadn’t been documented, then again the conspiracy theorists wouldn’t have anything to denounce.
It seems logical to assume, then, that conspiracy theorists and their theories against phenomena not yet verified by science seems to me to warrant consideration. The possibility of truth even if only somewhat truthful, is worth pursuing. We should at least think about the possibilities of such claims.
It appears to me from my viewing of science talks, documentaries, and articles, that the conspiracy of UFO’s and alien existence is changing from conspiracy fallacy to scientific probability by our current scientific experts (e.g. physicists, astrophysicists etc). Neil de Grasse Tyson is a leading expert on physics who is widely respected by the scientific community and general public alike. He could be considered today’s face of science. His presence in the media is becoming ever more frequent, with him espousing the view that alien existence on other planetary bodies is not only possible but inevitable.
To voice these scientific beliefs he tends to debunk religion and religious beliefs, in an offensive manner. It is almost like his argument to convince audiences on interplanetary life forms is based on turning the focus of the public on to the religious folk, shifting the sceptics and conspiracists on to the existence of the soul, God, Heaven and Hell.
I can’t help but find myself wondering if this is really necessary. It seems mean and attacking to me.
When the possibility of alien life was considered impossible the people who believed in them, perhaps even witnessed UFO’s, and put their faith in the possibility of intelligent life forms from other planetary bodies, the scientists mocked them for unjustified belief and faith in an idea without scientific evidence as verification.
My respect and love of science has been diminished by scientists such as Neil de Grasse Tyson who thinks it’s okay to treat certain groups of people as uneducated, stupid and gullible, and treating them with such disrespect. All because scientific enquiry has not found evidence for what they believe in.
I believed in aliens before science uncovered the evidence to prove their potential to exist. I did not need science and its slow advancement to catch up enough to be able to provide evidence. Just because I didn’t have the data to back up my claims did not stop me from believing that it was possible.
My belief in aliens was considered so far fetched without evidence and shut down as an uneducated and ignorant opinion by the very scientists who are now filling the media with their faces, voicing their expert opinions as verification that aliens exist.
I am offended. It offends me that my belief in aliens somehow proved my ignorance and lack of objectiveness to everyone who considered themselves as smart in science terms. Scientists and educated folk and people aspiring for the title ‘educated’ felt it was okay to humiliate me for my belief in aliens when now they are trying to convince the public that actually, if you don’t believe in the possibility of aliens then you are now the laughing stock. Anyone with half a brain knows aliens are so possible that their existence is considered inevitable.
I guess it would be humiliating for them to just admit they were wrong. That science was slow to catch up with these enlightened and intellectually advanced folk who blindly believed in something without evidence. That perhaps, their strong and hurtful views of those believers was totally unjustified and they are sorry. That scientific evidence now suggests otherwise.
I guess its easy considering their superiority view of themselves to instead turn the public’s focus onto some other group. Like the group of people who are religious and believe in a God. For if they did not then the public may actually think about their hypocrisy and actually hold them accountable.
It is much easier to shift the focus of a flock of sheep.
It is much easier to convince their believers (followers, thinkers, subscribers) that their new found claims supporting alien life was and now is the status quo by victimising some other group instead.
Namely the religious faith believers.
But does not their behaviour favouring evidence from science, a science that evolves and develops painstakingly slowly, but evolve it has consistently done since its genesis, not make them simple believers also? Does it not sound ludicrous to you that the science community puts so much faith in evidence that they fail to develop thoughts that would advance knowledge when history proves we know so little about anything. Discoveries thus far were found by eccentric people who imagined impossibilities that were considered outrageous and crazy to the vast majority. Nevertheless they pursued their crazy ideas and discovered things like electricity, gravity and the laws of physics that we now consider facts of nature. Do they not see the errors in their thinking? Can their unwavering loyalty to scientific evidence not suggest they too are merely blind followers and believers of evidence that is limited in terms of the potentiality of how much is yet to discover?
I consider myself a scientist. I have even conducted my own research and written a science paper on my experiment and findings in a previously unexplored area of topic.
And as a scientist I am embarrassed by the leading science experts’ behaviour towards people who subscribe to a faith based religion.
I believe that intelligence is characterized by an open mind, curious nature, and thirst for discovery. The smart people should know that science is ever evolving and what we know is actually very little. That intelligence is the act of thinking and questioning and thinking and not believing everything you are told, read, see etc. It is the mark of intelligence to consider scientists the same as any other information source – with scepticism. It is this scepticism that aroused the thoughts I share today.
If you want to be considered intelligent – then THINK!
Don’t blindly agree simply because a science expert told you so.
It is unethical to advance your opinions via discrimination of others. Respect of people and people’s is an ethical code that should be followed by the entire human race.
If you believe in God – good!
If you believe in scientific evidence – good!
But remember they are just beliefs.
Science has not advanced anywhere near enough to be considered as the end of our knowledge possibilities.
Research from the field of quantum physics is currently providing evidence of a shared consciousness.
That means that the existence of God may well be proved a fact by scientific evidence in the future.
Stay humble and kind!
© I Digress 2017