Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Follow TIS on Twitter: @Truth_is_Scary & Like TIS of Facebook- facebook.com/TruthisScary
Steve Gilmore/ConsciousLifeNews
The term “science” has grown to be more than an area of study, seeking to hypothesize and theorize about our world. It has become more than a framework for exploration. In its purest form, it has no “limits” and could theoretically embrace non-material, metaphysical aspects of our existence. Yet, in our modern age, science has become corporatized and dogmatic- more worried about pursuing money than about pursuing what makes our universe “tick”.
More than this, many prominent scientists have taken Newtonian “[only] that which can be measured exists” materialism and become as narrow-minded and oppressive as organized religion became during the Middle Ages, the Crusades, and Inquisitions culminating in Salem during the so-called Witch Trials. For instance Maria von Monjou (arguably the inventor of the biological microscope) was drowned as a witch in 1552 (See http://gameo.org/index.php?title=Maria_of_Montjoie_%28d._1552%29). To be sure, the powers behind these oppressive movements were serving their own interests, but they did so under the banner of “religion”. Could the same be said of today’s science? But maybe the intrigue runs deeper?
Just listen to bloggers in partisan debates over vaccines and mandatory vaccination and you will hear vaccine proponents calling for everything from jail time to wishes that their critics are cursed with sickness by redemption, themselves-all covered under the banner of “science”. Listen to talk show hosts who call those with alternative views all sorts of names because they do not take a scientist’s or a doctor’s view as gospel. The illusion is created by scientific laws that have somehow been construed to prove that vaccines and medicines are safe and effective. This is, of course, not true; there are very few scientific “laws” and even some of those “laws” might be proven invalid over time, due to (you’ve guessed it) persuasivescientific exploration.