Correlation, causality, and mainstream pseudo-scientific quackery

Most of the “science” that is widely promoted (like in schools) is not highly credible. Lots of correlations are presented as causality “irresponsibly,” like cholesterol (which every animal produces in huge amounts) being villified as dangerous.

(Cholesterol rises in response to problems, not as a source of problems. Impairing the production and utilization of cholesterol, which is one of the primary targets of certain medications, is highly effective at dramatically increasing chronic illness.)

Yes, the quackery of mainstream “science” is highly effective as an instrument of influence, but it is also filled with absurd theories. Further, the absurd theories are often defended with a remarkable lack of logic.

I have seen enough documentation of children completely cured of autism to completely disregard all the emotional hysteria and psychological warfare of organizations like PETA. (I created this commentary in response to someone’s posting of some “science” from PETA.) Other mainstream superstitions that are religiously defended include theories about the sun, global warming, plate tectonics, and even gravity itself.

Data from space exploration has conclusively demonstrated that the theory of gravity as we know it does not correspond to interplanetary interactions. The plasma “theory” of the electric universe (with gravity as an attractive electromagnetic effect) has, to my knowledge, 100% support from data while the conventional theories of gravity have 100% failure (in regard to recent data from space). However, the “gravity” lobby keeps getting funded to search for ways to salvage their disproven theory, scratching around for speculated potential salvations for their theory, like the alleged existence of “dark matter” and a small variety of other creative forms of denial.

It reminds me of the “flat earth” idea. If you live in central Florida like I did for so long, then it is “close enough” to say that the earth is flat. If you live at 9,000 feet elevation, then you can clearly see the curvature of the earth away from you.

The theory of gravity taught in school is “close enough” for most terrestial applications. However, it is absolutely and completely inaccurate from a scientific point of view. It is not just imprecise. It is totally false.

However, some of the equations developed in association with that erroneous theory are very useful. If people revise their way of labeling natural phenomenon to correspond with the facts that are now clear, then the superstititious (presumptive) throwing around of a term like “gravity” may rapidly decrease or be superseded.

I still can use the term sunset or sunrise even though we know the actual labels are scientifically false. The earth spins, bringing one portion of the earth’s surface in to the field of visible light from the sun, and we call that PLACE “the day time.” The term “sunrise” is a reasonable label and quite useful, but just scientifically inaccurate.

Gravity is the same. It literally does not exist (except as a mislabeling of natural patterns). What we do know exists is attraction (as well as repulsion).


Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: