In the last few years, we have begun to see genuine cracks in mainstream science being openly published in mainstream media. Before, all we had to go on were immensely crazy articles about even more absurd concepts that left most of the critical thinkers and engineers shaking their heads and saying, “wake me up when you find something real”.
Recently, two articles came out in mainstream media – one in the New York Times, and one in Scientific American – that illustrate the two types of articles we critical thinkers see as strong indications that Big Physics and Cosmology are in need of a major overhaul.
Published Craziness
Before these public cracks started appearing in mainstream media in recent years, the only indication that Big Physics and Big Cosmology were lost were from the crazy headlines talking of multi-verses, history erasing quantum mechanics, and time travel.
In a recent article in the New York Times, it was claimed that quantum mechanics, for a millionth of a second, made history go backwards. This is a very sensational headline purposely made to entice the average science lover. But for we critical thinkers, it demonstrates decades of Big Science’s craziness to attract attention to a profession that many of we critical thinkers question at a fundamental level.
Here is a quote from the article:
Using an IBM quantum computer, they managed to undo the aging of a single, simulated elementary particle by one millionth of a second. But it was a Pyrrhic victory at best, requiring manipulations so unlikely to occur naturally that it only reinforced the notion that we are helplessly trapped in the flow of time.
Dennis Overbye, New York Times, May 8, 2019
The headline reads: “For a Split Second, a Quantum Computer Made History go Backwards”. It is pure sensationalism which the public has come accustomed to. There is no real particle. It is all simulated. In truth, it is the most real reflection of what Big Physics has become during the last 100 years: all theory, all math, and all science with very little physical anything.
A photo from the article uses a beautiful public Getty Image with a statement that seems reasonable, but to any critical thinker, it drives us nuts. Here is the caption:
So why do they write these articles? The answer: they write them for sensationalism. In today’s mainstream news where ratings cause news stations to cover empty podiums of sensational politicians, mainstream science writers try to bring “clicks” to their articles by finding the most outrageous work in order to make a living or a profit. Writers today are paid by how many people read their articles and not by trying to teach the public anything worth while.
What is remarkable isn’t that there are writers selling out for ratings, but that there are actually scientists wasting time and money on these outrageous endeavors that these so-called journalists can write about. The scientists themselves are more interested in fame than truth in science and therein lies the problem.
But to the critical thinker, all this is apparent and although we know why bad science is done and publicized, it still makes us screaming mad that this continues today in the 21st century.
That fact that billions of dollars have been spent on colliders and the resulting theories for the next model of the universe are completely insane, we are finally getting some indication that Big Science is starting to question itself at a fundamental level.
As I have pointed out many times before, this is apparent in Sabine Hoffenfelder’s book “Lost in Math” where she abandoned her position at the Large Hadron Collider to point out to the world that particle physics is in fact, very very lost.
Cracks Appearing
More and more writings like hers are starting to appear demonstrating how real cracks are forming in Big Physics and Cosmology. Take a recent article in Scientific American entitled: “Cosmology Has Some Big Problems“. More often than not, these types of articles conclude that current theory may be wrong, but the article ends up suggesting other “absurd” solutions to these problems instead of any fundamental change. Yet, the fact remains that they are now questioning the fundamental foundations of modern physics and cosmology and they are declaring this in a very public way.
Each new discrepancy between observation and theory can of course in and of itself be considered an exciting promise of more research, a progressive refinement toward the truth. But when it adds up, it could also suggest a more confounding problem that is not resolved by tweaking parameters or adding new variables.
Bjørn Ekeberg, Scientific American, April 30, 2019
We are seeing more and more science writers and scientists starting to say that perhaps we have reached the point where tweaking or refining existing theory is simply not possible. That we have reached a dead end in science.
Luckily for everyone, some ten thousand scientists, professors, engineers, and layman have been working for decades outside the mainstream to identify these problems, fix those problems and have been proposing new theories and models.
And for those not familiar with this work, these people, their struggles, and their possible solutions, now have a public website Science Woke dot org. The site is dedicated to teaching everyone how to become science woke and what is happening the world of critical thinkers.
The cracks in mainstream science have been appearing for over 100 years but only a few thousand critical thinkers have seen it and acted upon it. We are now however starting to see these cracks being recognized by those in mainstream science and by articles like these.
It is my hope that via YouTube channels like Dissident Science and our new website Science Woke, that when you read articles like the ones I am pointing out today, that you start to see that maybe, just maybe, the foundations are crumbling and we need to build a new foundation.
About the Author
