I’ve found my calling as a scientific skeptic. I have set out to explore the nether regions of scientific inquiry and to call out the threads that seem to me to have the most validity. I ask your indulgence for a two-sentence rant. An easy way to build a career as a “skeptic” is to be skeptical only of challenges to the mainstream. I’m thinking of
Why grope in the fog at the edges of science when there is so much that is clear and solid that I haven't learned? The odds are against learning that something I've believed a long time is wrong, but it's a sure thing that my knowledge of conventional science is deeper and more solid if I challenge it from all angles.
Since you're asking for recommendations, check out Tom Campbell and his quantum physics experiments designed to test his claim that consciousness is fundamental and the physical universe is actually a virtual reality. The experiments are funded and are now being prepped. Details at CUSAC.ORG. This could turn out to be the most important development since the original double-slit experiments.
This looks like a fascinating list and I can’t wait for your analysis of these many topics! I also have a strong hobby interest in alternative science. Eric Dollard is well worth a look and James DeMeo (expert in Reich) too. I’ve Arp’s red shift book on the bookshelf so interested in what you have to say.
If everybody knew what a virus was, a tiny dead particle with zero agency, then nobody would believe that they could be pathogenic. And everyone would drive Geert Van Den Bossche to the stocks as well. If everyone knew the history of germs (as they were mostly previously called) and viruses (as they have been latterly called) then it would be pitchfork time.
As you’re a skeptic I guess the above makes me mainstream. But you could have fooled me.
I appreciate your mention of Wilhelm Reich; I have occasionally referred to him as the original "tin foil hat" -- maybe you've read him more recently and thoroughly; is my assertion even close?
Cowan, Baily, et al are an interesting bunch. The "Virus Mania" series is worth watching; the book "Vanishing Illusions" is even better -- it's a fascinating tour through the history of microbes. Cowan's presentations are marred by his careless articulation of concepts, as if he were arguing downhill from an endowed university chair.
I'm glad you mentioned Dane Wiggington. And the book "Angels Don't Play this HAARP" by Nick Begich is a masterpiece of presentation of atmospheric, or astrophysics for a lay audience -- I, for one, know nothing of physics.
"Galileo Was Wrong", volume one, by Robert A. Sungenis and Robert J. Bennett is, like "Vanishing Illusions", a wonderful tour through the history and philosophy of cosmology -- the Copernicus/Brahe/Michelson/Einstein tour. But I can't recommend the book, largely because it's not readily available for sale or loan.
I'm curious whether you would be interested in the following kind of skepticism, which for now I'll briefly summarize with this claim:
The “more is better” relationship with knowledge which is the foundation of science and our modern civilization is simplistic, outdated and increasingly dangerous. Put another way, we are trying to navigate the 21st century using a 19th century knowledge philosophy.
Great list! I'll be interested in them all. Two things that came to mind that could be part of your investigations are: 1) Michael Crichton's non-fiction book, Travels. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7665.Travels; and 2) Rupert Sheldrake's theory of 'morphic resonance'. Can't wait to follow where your investigations take you. Thank you for your substack!
Why grope in the fog at the edges of science when there is so much that is clear and solid that I haven't learned? The odds are against learning that something I've believed a long time is wrong, but it's a sure thing that my knowledge of conventional science is deeper and more solid if I challenge it from all angles.
Godspeed and happy new year!
Since you're asking for recommendations, check out Tom Campbell and his quantum physics experiments designed to test his claim that consciousness is fundamental and the physical universe is actually a virtual reality. The experiments are funded and are now being prepped. Details at CUSAC.ORG. This could turn out to be the most important development since the original double-slit experiments.
This looks like a fascinating list and I can’t wait for your analysis of these many topics! I also have a strong hobby interest in alternative science. Eric Dollard is well worth a look and James DeMeo (expert in Reich) too. I’ve Arp’s red shift book on the bookshelf so interested in what you have to say.
If everybody knew what a virus was, a tiny dead particle with zero agency, then nobody would believe that they could be pathogenic. And everyone would drive Geert Van Den Bossche to the stocks as well. If everyone knew the history of germs (as they were mostly previously called) and viruses (as they have been latterly called) then it would be pitchfork time.
As you’re a skeptic I guess the above makes me mainstream. But you could have fooled me.
I appreciate your mention of Wilhelm Reich; I have occasionally referred to him as the original "tin foil hat" -- maybe you've read him more recently and thoroughly; is my assertion even close?
Cowan, Baily, et al are an interesting bunch. The "Virus Mania" series is worth watching; the book "Vanishing Illusions" is even better -- it's a fascinating tour through the history of microbes. Cowan's presentations are marred by his careless articulation of concepts, as if he were arguing downhill from an endowed university chair.
I'm glad you mentioned Dane Wiggington. And the book "Angels Don't Play this HAARP" by Nick Begich is a masterpiece of presentation of atmospheric, or astrophysics for a lay audience -- I, for one, know nothing of physics.
"Galileo Was Wrong", volume one, by Robert A. Sungenis and Robert J. Bennett is, like "Vanishing Illusions", a wonderful tour through the history and philosophy of cosmology -- the Copernicus/Brahe/Michelson/Einstein tour. But I can't recommend the book, largely because it's not readily available for sale or loan.
Interesting blog, just subscribed.
I'm curious whether you would be interested in the following kind of skepticism, which for now I'll briefly summarize with this claim:
The “more is better” relationship with knowledge which is the foundation of science and our modern civilization is simplistic, outdated and increasingly dangerous. Put another way, we are trying to navigate the 21st century using a 19th century knowledge philosophy.
Great list! I'll be interested in them all. Two things that came to mind that could be part of your investigations are: 1) Michael Crichton's non-fiction book, Travels. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7665.Travels; and 2) Rupert Sheldrake's theory of 'morphic resonance'. Can't wait to follow where your investigations take you. Thank you for your substack!
Happy new year, Josh! Good luck with your investigation - looking forward to your insights!
Most probably you have seen it already, but I would be very curious to hear your opinion on this evidence for intelligent design:
https://theethicalskeptic.com/2021/02/24/the-peculiar-schema-of-dna-codons-second-letter/
It is an interesting point that in my opinion withstands anthropic principle arguments.
Cheers!