'My practice as a scientist is atheistic. That is to say, when I set up an experiment I assume that no god, angel or devil is going to interfere with its course; and this assumption has been justified by such success as I have achieved in my professional career. I should therefore be intellectually dishonest if I were not also atheistic in the affairs of the world.' -- J.B.S. Haldane
This is a
famous quote justifying that scientists should be atheists. The problem
for me is that although I admire the scientific method, I'd really like
to see it used WHILST invoking god, or angels (you can leave out
devils!) to assist with an experiment. The scientific method should
study whether those who are truly tuned into I AM, The One, The Source
(or whatever) are able to heal, find water, prophesy (whatever). In my
studies, I see that the scientific testing of these things has holes in it – HUGE HOLES!
once set out a good scientifically designed 'test' to see whether you
could prove that auras are real. The trouble is that when I submitted it
for scrutiny by a bunch of skeptics they simply fell over laughing! The
problem with my 'test' was that it needed to be with people who
ACTUALLY see auras. I think this is quite scientifically secure – what
scientist would test frogs for something by using – say – cats instead!?
So to test whether Reiki works (which it has shown to
do in a controlled double blinded trials with people after breast
cancer surgery) you actually have to use GOOD Reiki practitioners! The
hole in this test which was done in the UK here, is that they might have
used 'pretend' Reiki Practitioners for the control – and all of US know
that the minute you come near someone 'pretending' – its not
pretending, it's doing it! So the control group in a double blinded
trial of this sort is bunkum.
Take light. I have seen
double blinded clinical trials testing different light frequencies. The
control group has 'sham light' – now I ask you – have you EVER seen sham
anycolour light? You cannot 'sham' light! Its either light – or its not
light. If a control group is having blue light the results will be the
same as the test group having blue light. There are some things that
make the scientific method ridiculous!
or dowsing does not work – it's been scientifically PROVED! This is how
you prove it. You get a bunch of students, bury some plastic bottles of
water in plastic buckets, give the students some divining rods and count
how many times they find the bucket with the water in it. Any idea that
some people are more gifted in the art of dowsing than others, that
'tuning in' in natural places finding the secret ways of Gaia is a
unique human property is simply not even considered by skeptics. If
anyoldstudent can't find water in a bucket – it's proved not to work.
Likewise, if anyoldstudent can't see auras – there are none. And, thus,
having been scientifically PROVED, the results are repeated and repeated
Thank goodness there are a whole bunch of
what you would call 'frontier scientists' who know differently. They are
designing really good proper scientifically secure experiments and lots
of them are really tuned in. These scientists are very courageous. They
put themselves up for derision and ostracism by mainstream scientists.
Unfortunately Mainstream shouts the loudest, gets all the press,
belittles those who do silly things like 'healing' as delusional because
THEIR tests have shown it doesn't work. In the UK here, I find this
attitude very pronounced. Our television would rather show Richard
Dawkins telling us he has come to save us from the superstition of the
dark ages than show us any sensible investigation into any kind of 'woo'
I am a sceptic – someone who questions – but I
am not a skeptic which is an emerging modern religion with all its own
dogma and language.