The Religion of $cientism
The rampant corruption of scientism restricts our knowledge, impairs our intelligence and degrades our future.
$cientism is the corruption of science, scientific processes and output and very importantly, the distortion and manipulation of all associated data, by technology and money, to further self-seeking objectives and goals. The inimical plans by those who hold power, namely governments both national and trans-national, and their corporate allies, are hidden under the guise of paternalistic science, a process it is declaimed of objectivity and deep concern for truth. The opposite is true. The Nazis and Communists also based their fascism on ‘science’.
Corona
In March 2020 many of us knew that Corona was a scam. We knew it, could feel it, and could intuit the awful reality of what was being done. We marched for free speech in Hyde Park London, we organised local park meets of the like-minded, we networked, we informed, we asked questions, we demanded proof, we wanted accountability and transparency. We didn’t believe any of the ‘trusted sources’ or any of the institutions from the fake media, to pharma-ment (formerly parliament), to ‘science’, to health ‘professionals’, to the police. They were all paid to obey.
Many of us refused to participate in any of the anti-science dictums by the totalitarians, which ‘miraculously’ after years of meticulous planning, were enforced in lockstep across the G20. We were all threatened, abused, scorned and debased. For that we never forgive, and we never forget. Why should we. They will be back with something similar in the near future and the sheeple by then will have forgotten the terror of 2020-2022 and allow themselves to be rounded up and penned again. By ‘they’ we can say the WEF-Davos-Bilderberger New World Order and its attendant capital, control of the fake news media, finance, medicine, universities, research, pharmaceuticals and the endless-war-industry.
The Corona episode, in which a 0.3% death rate, average age of death at 84, fuelled by fake tests never proven to detect a virus strain from within the 300.000 Corona virus family (and disproved in 6 courts of law), resulting in lockdowns, midazolam and morphine used on old people behind closed doors, illegal stabs and face nappies, all propelled by a cascade of propaganda, fake data and false models. The data corruption was simply astounding and few people understand either its extent or its purpose. Data and ‘science’ were used to justify the imprisonment of the planet, endless rollouts of experimental drugs for some U$100 billion in total profits; and even the murder of the old and sick. All for money, power and to enact the New World Order. For the record the survival rate from Rona was 99.7% - the same as that of any other flu.
Climate Nonsense
The Climate fraud is another example of $cientism. A U$ Trillion p.a. industry, based on non-science. For the record fossils cannot make abiotic self-regenerating and clean hydrocarbon energy; plant food is 0.04% gas by weight and necessary for life; Gaia emits 95% of plant food; 96% of plant food is recycled and plant food falls out of climate processes much like hydrogen or nitrogen. There is no climate crisis. But it is a good philosophy to transact fascist governance and completely control the population.
$cientism’s abstract hand-waving
$cientism has always been pushed by celebrity scientists who state the most inane things:
· The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be. – Carl Sagan, Cosmos
· The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless. –Stephen Weinburg, The First Three Minutes
· We can be proud as a species because, having discovered that we are alone, we owe the gods very little. –E.O. Wilson, Consilience
What do these people actually know? Stephen Hawking was a celebrity in a wheelchair and an ardent atheist who became famous for his ‘law of entropy in black holes’. Whoa, easy on the relevancy Steve. You can almost prove that. Or not. His theory has no proof and has been thoroughly ‘debunked’. And further, what is the value of such a claim and theological position? None. There is no benefit or relevancy, or output from Hawking’s (or whoever did the work for him) claim on such a fatuous and improvable concept. Further, how does someone in a wheelchair who cannot talk or communicate that well, possibly write books? Was Hawking not simply a front man, the lead singer for a larger band on the stage? From blackhole-entropy, which is as much abstract mathematical theory as it is just philosophy, Hawking seamlessly rolls into multi-verses, claiming that a new universe-copy is being made on a regular basis – like a photocopy machine.
By whom, or how, he does not say. It happens by magic he claims, a natural process. Again, no science here. He couldn’t articulate or describe the universe he lived in. He provided no proofs for the ‘big bang’, or how an explosion which normally and only leads to chaos, magically led to perfect order, design and a 70 trillion celled organism called homo sapiens on a planet designed for life - and the only one in the universe thus constructed. Nothing. Yet he firmly believed in ET, Chewbaca and multi-verses. No proof needed. Just add abstract maths, some long equations and lots of big words. The sheeple will believe. After all who wants to be ‘anti-science’?
Hawking, Dawkins, Darwin et al are not scientists. They don’t provide replicable, transparent, objective proof, or processes, where anyone can follow, repeat and get the same results. Nothing. They provide opinions distributed by industries who want to sell and profit, and who are run by people with a selfish interest in their success. That does not make their opinions ‘science’. Our popular science literature blurs the line between solid, evidence-based science, and rampant philosophical speculation. It is a criminal and serious problem, since scientific research relies heavily upon public support for its funding. Rampant fraud in science and ‘research’ is a well known problem.
Physicist Ian Hutchinson offers an insightful metaphor for the current controversies over science:
· The health of science is in fact jeopardized by scientism, not promoted by it. At the very least, scientism provokes a defensive, immunological, aggressive response from other intellectual communities, in return for its own arrogance and intellectual bullyism. It taints science itself by association.1
There is a difference between applied technology, a better phone, car, or application for example, and ‘science’. Hutchinson is suggesting that most of us will reject a worldview that closely aligns itself with science, which is called $cientism.2 By disentangling these two concepts, we have a much better chance for enlisting public support for scientific research than we would by trying to convince millions of people to embrace a materialistic, godless universe in which science is our only remaining hope.
Distinguishing science from scientism
Science is indeed distinct from scientism.
Science is an activity that seeks to explore the natural world using well-established, clearly-delineated methods. Given the complexity of the universe, from the very big to very small, from inorganic to organic, there is a vast array of scientific disciplines, each with its own specific techniques. The number of different specializations is constantly increasing, leading to more questions and areas of exploration than ever before. Science expands our understanding, rather than limiting it.
$cientism, on the other hand, is a speculative worldview about the ultimate reality of the universe and its meaning, or a speculative view about the reality of events within a specialisation such as virology, climate, the genome, or rockets. With scientism, you will regularly hear explanations that rely on words like, “consensus”, “all experts agree”, “this could have”, “this probably”, “it is merely,” “only,” “simply,” or “nothing more than.” Scientism through its abstract world-view, based on pre-determined conclusions (the quacksines are 100% safe and effective….) restricts human inquiry, free speech and ultimately freedom itself since it does not tolerate dissent or disputation.
It is one thing to celebrate science for its achievements and remarkable ability to explain a wide variety of phenomena in the natural world. But to claim there is nothing knowable outside the scope of science would be similar to a successful fisherman saying that whatever he can’t catch in his nets does not exist.3 Once you accept that science is the only source of human knowledge, you have adopted a philosophical position (scientism) that cannot be verified, or falsified, by science itself. It is, in a word, unscientific.
Notes and references
1-Hutchinson, p143, Hutchinson, Ian. Monopolizing Knowledge: A Scientist Refutes Religion-Denying, Reason-Destroying Scientism. Belmont, MA: Fias Publishing, 2011
2-Hutchinson, p109.
3-Giberson, Karl, and Mariano Artigas. Oracles of Science: Celebrity Scientists Versus God and Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.