Geoff Hunter worked as a mechanical engineer for the aerospace company Rocketdyne. Friend of David de Hilster via their love of samba percussion, David enlisted Geoff who is an mechanical engineer to participate in a gravity experiment that is in the feature-length documentary film Einstein Wrong – The Miracle Year.
Geoff also did boom for the Einstein Wrong Music Video.
You can watch the entertaining and mind-tickling feature documentary by director David de Hilster online. You can either rent it for a few dollars, or buy it for $10 US. If you a science lover or just a lover of great films, the film is for you! It is made for a general audience and has quite a touching story about the de Hilster family as they take on Einstein and find their own miracles along the way.
http://www.naturalphilosophy.org
The John Chappell Natural Philosophy Society (CNPS) is a world-wide think-tank of critical thinkers made up of professors, PHDs, scientists, engineers, and layman who openly criticize mainstream physics and cosmology and who propose alternative theory, philosophy, and models. Members have been together for over two decades using critical thinking to find flaws and failures in mainstream science and propose new directions in natural philosophy.
The group holds annual conferences, weekly Saturday morning video chats, and publishes an annual proceedings. During their annual conference, they award lifetime scientific awards to prominent members. They are also sponsor of the http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org.
A Science Wikipedia that allows for alternative science theories, models, and ideas as well as disputing content in Wikipedia.org. It is in response to the fact that Wikipedia.org is based on consensus and does not allow for alternative science.
The wikipedia current has over 13,000 items.
See the official trailer for the movie and you it makes you curious, you can watch the entire documentary by clicking on this link:
It may be the first time in history that a serious science documentary has a theme song and music video. The video was actually shot years before the theme song was written but it was a match made in heaven!
Theme song by Michael Ruggieri, Vocal solo by Kayla Trindade-Schweitzer, and video by EW (Einstein Wrong) director David de Hilster.
http://youtube.dissidentscience.com
Director and dissident scientist David de Hilster has launched his latest challenge to all those critical thinkers: his Dissident Science YouTube Channel.
David de Hilster, a scientist, artist, and musician takes on the scientific world using something very few people use: critical thinking. Nothing is sacred including the big bang, relativity, plate tectonics, gravity, light, intellectuals AND: the media!
You don’t want to miss his almost daily rants and raves about science.
All moments in life are unique. But some moments are more permanent and poignant than others.
On Saturday, February 18, 2017, at 10:30 am in the morning, I found myself alone with my mom, holding and patting her hand, smiling at her, looking straight into her eyes and talking with her, knowing she was slipping away, but still there. There is nothing more intimate than spending the last minutes of one’s life with someone.
I could have told her how much I loved her, what she meant to everyone, or cried and say I would miss her. But all those things would have made her sad. That is not what I would want if I had only minutes to live.
Looking out past her, I talked about the blue blue sky, the white fluffy clouds – running through grass covered hills in the country with friends and plopping down on our backs from exhaustion. Feeling the cool grass on our skin, feeling the breeze on our faces, hearing the rustling of the leaves, smelling the flowers and the fertile earth, and the warm bright sun shining on our faces. Looking up into the sky and imagining what shapes we saw, sharing them with each other.
Not talking about love or life, but just being. Just feeling what it is to be alive on this earth, in this universe. The gift of life we all share.
You see, I didn’t want sad. I couldn’t do happy. The best I could settle on was melancholy.
Since an early age, I knew what death was. At five, I was crying to my parents but didn’t know how to describe the feeling of my first realization that we all will die someday. As Woody Allen so aptly put it: “It’s not death I’m afraid of. It’s being there when it happens”. And there I was, and it was happening. It was happening to my mom. The ultimate life-giver and protector.
While I sat with her alone, the heart doctor came in and found me talking away about all the great things and times we had as if mom were wide awake. He started to say, “you know she…” and I cut him off with a loud voice: I know! We were talking about those great times at Black Lake”. I waved him off never looking too many seconds away from my mom. Big smiles, kissing her hand, stroking her hair.
Over my many years, I have studied a lot about the brain. We try to understand the brain to get computers to do quote unquote “intelligent” things. I know from near-death experiences in people that people perceive almost everything around them even though they seem gone. There was no way I was going to let my mom be alone without someone there.
Later, the nurse came in and looked at mom’s vital signs and shook her head. Technically she was still alive. Her heart was pumping, and there was very shallow breathing. The nurse whispered “you can leave if you want” as if she had already gone. But I knew better. I was NOT going to leave my mom alone. I said again “I know I know. I want to talk with her some more though”. The nurse who thought she was quote unquote “not there” got the picture and left probably thinking I was there because I couldn’t let go. But that was furthest from the truth.
I actually got angry at the nurse. I screamed inside my head saying “Don’t you know she still sees us? She still hears us? And I would NEVER leave my mom alone???” You should know this! But I kept that inside my head because mom WAS there, listening.
If you don’t believe me, I can prove it to you. I would say the words “Bob”, “David”, “Karan”, “Laurie”, “Mike”, “Doris” and “Luanda” and every time I did, I would look up to see her heart rate go up on the monitor. She even moved her arm once although she was not blinking. I knew she was inside listening and understanding even though the nurse and doctor implied she was no longer there.
Before the nurse came in with Dad and Karan to give mom medicine to ease her pain, I was alone talking with my mom when the lullaby song came over the intercom. At this hospital like many hospitals now, the lullaby song is played when a baby is born.
That hit me hard. My smile faltered. My lip trembled. I choked up. I didn’t want to break the happy mood. But at that point, a new baby came into the world as my mother was slipping away. I imagined the birth of my mom 80 years ago and HER life flashed before MY eyes. That moment was the hardest moment in my life.
Then, the nurse came in with my dad and sister.
As mom was given medicine for her comfort, Dad, Karan, and I talked about all the good times laughing, smiling and remembering all the happy things. And eventually, mom left us. Very quietly and peacefully.
And when she left, I hope, she was not sad. I hope she was not feeling loss. I hope she was feeling loved and more important was happy, with joy in her heart for the great gift of life we all have in this amazing world. I hope, I hope, I hope, I gave the happiest sendoff I could. Always smiling, always loving, and always happy to be alive.
Patricia Anne de Hilster: you didn’t author the very first model of the universe in scientific history. You didn’t direct a feature-length documentary film. You didn’t create some of the most beautiful costumes to ever parade in the Rose Parade. You did work decades as a nurse, giving and caring for those most in need. You didn’t save people daily as a 911 dispatcher. You didn’t spend your time writing amazing words that flowed together like great wine and song. You didn’t sing your way into a role in a middle school musical at the tender age of 11 years old.
You didn’t do any of this.
But you did something even more amazing: you made it possible for ALL of these people to give these great gifts to the world. Your husband, children, grandchildren, in laws, and friends were all loved, nurtured, and supported by you without question and with total love and devotion.
Mom was a producer. No one in the general public really seems to know what a producer does. Sort of like moms. They are not the director, they are not the star or actors, they are not the cameramen or technical team. But on Oscar night, when the last Oscar is given out for best picture, it goes to the producers. The people who are ultimately responsible for everything.
That was mom. That was Patricia. That was Pat.
Goodbye mom. I love you dearly. Rest in peace.
And one more thing: this death thing? I don’t care what anyone says: it sucks…
Sincerely, your first-born son,
David
Into the Underground
Back in 1992, I met a physicist, Dr. Ricardo Carzani of Argentina who wanted me to help him get his idea out into the world. Dr. Carezani had shown Einstein’s theory of special theory of relativity wrong, corrected the problem, and found new equations which told a very different story about the universe. Over 20 years later, I have found more about the dysfunctional state of modern physics and cosmology than I did helping Dr. Carezani.
In 1994, I took Dr. Carezani’s work to 9 mainstream physicists and there I found the first resistance. They asked me about the implications of Dr. Carezani’s work and I said one was that the neutrino does not exist. One scientist said that they proved the neutrino with the 1987 Super nova. I then said “Oh, you are a neutrino scientist”. He said no. I then asked him if he studied the neutrino data and he said no. I then asked, then why do you say it is proved. He said: “I trust my colleagues”. Over twenty years later, I now realize that it is not trust but it is more part faith, part politics, and a lot of emotional neediness.
In 1996, I met up for the first time with a group of scientists who started meeting annually led by John Chappell. I found a group of people who were trying to confront problems in modern physics and cosmology including Einstein’s relativity, the big bang, plate tectonics, and the like. I started to realize there were others out there like Dr. Carezani. Years later, I decided there were enough scientists to attempt to make a documentary about the subject – a journey that would last almost 10 years.
Documentary Film World
I decided to take my mother on a journey to meet the scientists who were challenging mainstream physics and cosmology with the idea that if she was the main character, people wouldn’t feel so intimidated by the subject of the film. Being that almost all documentarian filmmakers had full-time “other” jobs, the process took over 8 years to complete.
In 2005, the 100th year anniversary of the Miracle year of Einstein, I took my mother to meet scientists who were showing Einstein wrong. We frequented a dissident conference and our family decided to do an experiment to see if gravity was a particle. During this entire journey, I was filming our family’s ups and down and in 2011, I finally had the footage to start putting together the film. It took over 2 years to finish the film in post production and in December 2013, we debuted the film in a private screening in Long Beach California on my mother’s birthday.
It was very well received by the general audience and I knew I had an entertaining and informative film. I knew that for such a difficult subject, I had succeeded in making a film for the mass audience. Encouraged, in 2014, I started submitting my documentary to film festivals.
Having made it to several finals, to my great surprise and disappointment, “Einstein Wrong – The Miracle Year” was never picked to screen. I sent it to almost 80 film festivals worldwide. It wasn’t for the lack of human drama, intrigue, or even an interesting topic. Let’s face it: with a name “Einstein Wrong”, how could it not intrigue?
Something else was going on here. And I started to piece together the problem which I had seen glimpses of over the journey in making this film.
Documentarians and film lovers, and especially documentarian film lovers, consider themselves very intelligent. In fact, they feel they are levels above the general public and consider themselves “intellectuals”. They claim to understand things the general public does not understand including science. They feel it is there job to be smart and to use their smarts to enlighten the masses, or worse yet, enlighten each other (other film lovers).
According to my conversations over the years with them on this subject, they claim to be “up-to-date” on all things science. They claim to have read all the latest articles on science and they claim to understand it. And therein lies a second problem.
Repeating Versus Critical Thinking
It is one thing to read articles that theoretical physicists and cosmologists, it is another to really study what these “scientists” are saying and to agree with their conclusions. This normally does not happen. Very few if any of the “social intellects” (those who want to be perceived as intellectual) go beyond simply trying to be able to repeat the arguments of the scientists that are releasing their conclusions. This is a big big problem.
The scientists in my documentary from the John Chappell Natural Philosophy Society (CNPS) who have been together for more than 20 years are full of scientists, professors, engineers, professionals, and laymen who have actually looked at the basis of the theoretical work and almost 3000 scientists from almost 80 countries have come up with very similar conclusions. These conclusions are that there are serious problems with the big bang, relativity, gravity theory, light theory, plate tectonics, and other areas that are not even studied much like structures. This group of people are different from the “social intellects” who make up the vast majority of documentarians.
Keeping Your Job Wins
The scientists in the CNPS are people who have no ties to a peer group, no ties to making a living at their scientific trade, and no ties to some theory. They are usually retired and tired of the “B.S.” they never could swallow easily during their education or careers. Simple questions like “what is the physical reason WHY mass should increase as it goes faster”, one of the tenants of Einstein’s special relativity. Or “how are there more than 3 dimensions, aren’t we simply creating math for things that are not real in the physical world?”.
When a person’s livelihood is at stake, they tend to not rock the boat. If you are a particle physicist who knows Einstein’s increase in mass is not real, you don’t go out and tell the world this if you want to keep your job. If you know the big bang is a bad idea, you keep that to yourself. If you are (like 3 not-to-be-named) theoretical physicists from a university send a private email to a CNPS scientist saying they never found a real black hole, but “come to our talk on black holes in Sydney”, then you obviously fear for your job.
All humanscationsmust find a useful task to for ourselves to justify our existence in this world. Some of these tasks include being a scientist. And if there is an established group of others in your field who all “support” a particular theory or direction, it is much easier to agree with something wrong and obtain that degree or that position in a university or company than it is to rock the boat.
If you don’t believe this, talk with Dr. William Lucas, one of the most promising physics minds in the late 70s who was groomed by the United States to be a physics star along with others. The day he decided to look at Einstein’s relativity and present his findings about it flaws, he was told as he left the podium that his career was done. He said “but I’m right!”. The response of his fellow students was “it doesn’t matter if you are right. You just don’t do that”, and his career ended right then. Since then, Dr. Lucas, a dissident scientist has come up with some very amazing work. But few know it.
During the filming of my documentary, over half the seniors in an advance physics class in high school said they would forgo truth in order to keep their job, or enter a prestigious school.
Nerds Want to be Loved
Having gone on this decade-long journey, I have asked myself: why do the social intellects perpetuate bad science? Why do they do so often knowing it is wrong? It isn’t logic. Logic will quickly lead you to going against what scientists often say is true. And you can lose your job as a professor, scientist, filmmaker, or film festival film screener. What motivates this behavior?
Being a true nerd myself, I didn’t have to look far. Sure, I’m different from a social intellect but I had the same symptoms of this problem before I “saw the light”: nerds want to be loved.
When I was in school, I wore glasses, was a very good student, but was very weak emotionally. I was picked on in school and especially in middle school, kids beat me in the hall knowing I would not hit back. I was very fragile emotionally and until I hit 6 feet 3 inches in high school, this really shaped much of my emotional side of my life.
Nerds are made fun of even today. I watch programs on the Disney channel my 9-year-old daughter watches and the nerd is always being picked on. They show the nerd as awkward, saying the wrong things, but there is always an episode where the nerd saves the day with their brilliant mind.
Put together these nerds who have been socially ostracized and often physically beaten all their lives, and you get a recipe for revenge. They want to get even. One way is to be smarter than everyone around them and for them to elevate themselves as adults to positions of the “extremely smart”. If you were in the advanced physics class in your high school and were picked on an ostracized, it certainly feels good to come back as an “astrophysicist” from MIT. People who are now adults and who are less likely to pick on smart people are now saying “wow, I always knew you were smart!”. The nerd now feels respect and even admired.
Nerds want to be loved.
The Atomic Bomb’s Real Power
Once the atomic bomb exploded in the desert of New Mexico in the 1940s, the world handed ultimate power and money to these nerds. That set up an escape for nerds not only to make good livings, but to be powerful. This power has gone to their heads.
Einstein started a dangerous precedent with statements like “if the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts”. Einstein was the first scientist in the modern era to predict something from theory that was never observed. This gave birth to “theoretical physics” which make experimental physicists cringe.
The quark, dark matter, dark energy, and the higgs particles are just some of the “imaginary” friends that modern physicists have dreamed up in their heads, and then went out looking for it. With countries being afraid that they will not come up with the next “atomic bomb”, they throw billions of dollars into the physicist’s world of unicorns in order not to fall behind. They would rather take the chance than having some other country come up with the “ultimate weapon” and then rule the world.
So theoretical physicist have been able to continue studying the mating habits, the DNA, the digestive tracts, migration patterns, cell structures, and the like of unicorns.
Weee, I’m a Radio
Unicorns don’t exist, so how do these scientists keep up the charade?
When I was in elementary school, there was a joke going around. The joke went like this. A group of kids came up to me (at least 4 or 5), and one kid asked me, “do you want to hear a joke?” With so many of my peers around, even though I knew this could not be good, I said “yes”. The one kid then told the joke: “One polar bear went down a slide and said ‘Weeeee!. A second polar bear when down the slide and said ‘Weeee! I’m a radio!”. The joke teller then said, “get it?” I of course did not get it. But with all my peers around, I decided it was better to say “yes”, so I said “yes”. The joke teller and all around me said “Ha HA! You’re stupid! There’s nothing to get!”. They all walked off to find another victim.
This is very similar to every engineer or science student that hears Einstein’s theory of special relativity for the first time. It seems magical that mass increases, time slows down, and length contracts just because you move. And move in respect to what? These “paradoxes” have been supposively been explained by the physicists yet when you hear the explanations, they don’t pass the “satisfaction” test and you either say “the heck with it” and switch professions to something real like engineering, or you do something much worse: you buy into the peer pressure, pretend you understand the explanations for the paradox, and capitulate.
The difference between the polar bear joke and modern physics and cosmology is that the peer group who pressures students into believing unicorns exists, knows they don’t exist, but are willing to live this lie in order to be respected, get their big titles, and most importantly, be loved.
Where Are They Now?
These nerds all didn’t become astrophysicists. They still live their lives, many of them with the terrible effects of being picked on by other kids when they were growing up just because they had gifted brains. This is not their fault.
They make up some groups as a “majority”, two of which are the documentary film industry, and film festivals. There is an “understanding” among the general public that film festivals and especially documentarian film festivals are run almost exclusively by people who consider themselves smarter than the general public. Therein lies the problem with my film.
Given that ALL nerds, not just the astrophysicists, buy into the lies of modern science and all their wormholes, black holes, mass increasing, big bangs, and unicorn higgs particles, they certainly cannot admit in front of everyone that they are all agreeing to “pretend” that these things are real and that their explanations for the paradoxes in modern physics and cosmology are easily explained and only understood by them.
So when a documentary comes along and tries to reveal this to the public, film festivals, as the physics world in general labels it as “crackpot”. With thousands of documentaries being sent to film festivals today which make heavy use of the internet allowing 10 to 100 times the films to be submitted to any one festival, they have to weed out films faster and faster.
And to be certain, these positions are almost exclusively held by nerds who pretend to understand the latest in science, physics, and cosmology and pretend to be the “stars” of their local peer group in order to avenge their being mistreated at an early age. “Einstein Wrong – They Miracle Year” gets quickly thrown into the “It was a nice story but it says Einstein is wrong. We can’t have that at our festival. It’s a crackpot film.”
Just take the 2014 film “Particle Fever” about the higgs particle on Rotten Tomatoes. The website Rotten Tomatoes is SO run by social intellects that they gave this film a 95% rating whereas the general public has really disliked the film because it was not entertaining. To read the comments on Rotten Tomatoes is to see the little lie that social intellects all perpetuate and that is:
“We nerds are smarter than you. We are not wrong and our theories are not full of problems. You are simply too stupid to get it.”
No, they are just too scared to reveal the lie.
Luckily, I got that joke in the 5th grade and every since, being a nerd does not require me to live the lie.
I almost purposely tripped physics evangelist Neil deGrasse Tyson while attending a gala event at the International Documentary Association (IDA). I attended most all the meetings of the IDA for my documentary film “Einstein Wrong“, but this one was special when I found out that Neil was giving a short speech at this particular event being held at the Director’s Guild in Los Angeles. I wanted to look directly into the eyes of the one of my foes. I was sitting next to my wife who was not too thrilled at being there when I remembered that we had passed Neil on the way down to our seats. He was seated strategically in the aisle waiting to be called.
When they called his name, I turned around and saw him coming. It was a perfect opportunity. It was fairly dark where we were sitting and tripping Tyson was a completely possible scenario given I am tall and my legs often require one foot out in the aisle.
I turned to my wife and said “I’m going to trip him.” She punched me in the arm and said “NO!” She knew very well that I was not only capable, but willing to trip Neil. I whispered to her “they will think it was an innocent accident. Nobody will know but us!” She somehow got me to not do the dirty deed and Neil passed without incident.
After his speech, the host returned the to podium and said the proverbial line: “How can you follow an astrophysicist!”. The audience laughed and I regretted even more not having tripped him.
Sorry dissidents. I failed at my task.
But the reaction from the host and the easy laugh from the audience from her saying “how do you follow an astrophysicist?” brings up our first problem with these physicists evangelists and physicists themselves.
One of the ways physicists keep themselves in power is the “holier-than-thou”, or more appropriately, “smarter-than-thou” attitude. Basically it goes like this: “Do you have an advanced degree in physics from a prestigious university? No? Then let me try to tell you about how the universe works.”
The idea comes from what Margaret Wertheim, author of “Physics on the Fringe” said about the NPA (now the CNPS) , and I am paraphrasing:
“The members for the NPA love science. They simply aren’t capable of understanding the vast complexities of the universe and modern physics. So they construct their own ‘toy’ theories of the universe to satisfy this love of science but lack of ability. The real problem is we need to work harder at teaching them what we know.”
What these physics evangelist’s, self-appointed (and Ms. Wertheim’s) task is, is to impart a simplified explanation to the masses who are not capable of understanding the deep complexities of the universe.
Heaven forbid if the real problem is that scientific theory is in reality, paradoxical and unintelligible so that it is the theory, not the student that is wrong.
Michio Kaku doesn’t hide the fact: he embraces it. He looks like Einstein. The crazy white hair, the silly photos. Einstein’s crazy hair gave birth to the “mad scientist” and physics evangelists has used this to their advantage as power and as marketing tools. Here is Einstein, alive and well today in the form of Michio Kaku:
I will give him credit, Michio Kaku at least plays the part to the fullest.
These physics and science evangelists are very similar to Elvis Impersonators. Some are better than others. Each have their strengths. I’ll call them “Einstein Impersonators”. Some look more like Einstein (Michio Kaku), some try to talk profoundly like him (Neil Tyson), and some act like him or at least like a mad scientist like Bill Nye, the science guy, who often dresses the part by wearing a lab coat or nerdy clothes.
It is after all a show. Teaching science is secondary. It is a show that immediately when you see them, hear them, or notice how they are dressed, you will think: GENIUS.
Whenever some news from the science world comes out whether a new particle is discovered, or some space news hits the airwaves, the media calls on the physics evangelists. They appear on television giving their “easy explanations” to such esoteric topics as the “Higgs Boson” or something as simple as a planet fly-by as with Pluto.
These physics evangelists are now filling auditoriums almost like rock stars. Neil deGrasse even got his own profile on the grandaddy of them all: 60 minutes in a segment they called “Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson’s One-Man Mission“. Neil gives talks around the country evangelizing about the “universe” and is even trying to be the next “Carl Sagan” with a new series on the “Cosmos“.
Neil deGrasse entertaining the crowd – not a rock star for his theory, but for his ability to entertain.
But the difference between Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse is their humbleness. Here is my favorite quote from Carl Sagan that could aptly apply to deGrasse:
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. The bamboozle has captured us. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” — Carl Sagan
It is ironic that Sagan’s prophetic words can be applied to Neil deGrasse who has by his own initiative, taken up the campaign to called the next Carl Sagan.
What Neil talks about in his auditorium shows is the excitement of science and tries to transmit that to the audience. But the audiences are full of “social intellects” who they themselves think as being “smarter than their friends”. They follow Neil’s words as religiously as a physics preacher and for any of them to question Einstein, the big bang, or dark matter, is blasphemous and deserves at best ridicule.
Yet, we know relativity, the big bang, and dark matter to be incorrect but this doesn’t stop deGrasse from filling auditoriums of “believers” and never, ever mentioning the fact that these fundamental scientific “facts” may in fact be wrong.
One of the questions these evangelists hear once in while is “Could Einstein Be Wrong?”. The usually respond something like this:
“You don’t know how many emails I get from people around the world saying they have proved Einstein Wrong or who have a new theory of the universe. I simply don’t have enough time to answer all of them and explain to them where their flaws are.”
There is usually this follow-up observation: “they want to be the next Einstein?”. There is usually laughter, and the physics evangelist says “Yes, they seem to always pick on Einstein. That makes sense since he is the most famous scientist of our time”.
It took me until 2014 to figure out the REASON physicists say that people who want to prove Einstein wrong want to be famous. Psychologists point out that we humans when speculate about other’s motives, we are in reality projecting own desires onto that person. That is, these physics evangelists or professors or writers are actually projecting their own beliefs onto the dissident scientist and revealing that the biggest motivator for proving someone wrong or coming up with a new theory is not to advance science but something much more valuable:
FAME
This means that proving Einstein wrong isn’t a great leap forward to these scientists. It is what will make them or someone else famous. Fame before scientific discovery. It’s part of their DNA. Every physicist’s goal is to win a Nobel Prize, even if it is for something that is completely wrong and invented like the neutrino or the Higgs, or dark matter.
Instead of actually reading counter arguments, they simply accept that mainstream science as correct, and no one from the outside or who hasn’t got a degree at a prestigious university can challenge mainstream science.
But wait, wasn’t Einstein a patent clerk? Ok, but that doesn’t count because the physics evangelists know that Einstein’s “mad scientist” image puts food on the table and in a nerd’s world, that is gold! So don’t bite the hand that feeds you!
These physics evangelists “impart” their “wisdom” to the masses – masses who cannot understand the complexities of the universe, let alone the theories the “physicists” have come up with.
This is the part of this physics evangelist game that is very dangerous, hidden, and subversive, whether these evangelists know this or not. In “teaching” of the universe and its mysteries to the masses, these preachers are in essence telling us what truth is. They do give lip service that this is all theory and could be disputed, but they often say that older theories are not thrown away, but that they are built upon.
But telling someone what is truth, is not teaching critical thinking. It is teaching science as a religion. Religion teaches us what god’s truths are. They are unquestionable. If they are questioned, the person questioning will go on a journey that will lead them back to the truth that they were told in the first place. They are in effect, allowed to take the journey knowing that either they will come to agree with the truth given them, or they will be guided by those who are “enlightened” and they will get to believe the truth they were taught.
That is what science evangelists and science teachers and science professors do today: they teach us the answers. This is the biggest problem we face in science: the failure to teach “critical thinking” or to think and judge things ourselves. That is why all change in science comes from the outside. The insiders teach themselves the truth, only enhancing the truths they know, and guiding the new followers to the correct truths. This guarantees that eventually, mainstream science will get stuck, and that someone from the outside will come along and change it all, religating the mainstream to obscurity.
The outsiders when confronting problems with mainstream science are beholden to no one and are free to think outside the box. The CNPS has hundreds of scientists from around the world who are free to fix paradoxes, bad math, bad language, bad models and create new ones on more solid ground.
These scientists are not children who are incapable of understanding the universe. They are quite capable. Of the almost 3000 scientists catalogued in our database, almost 20% have PHDs.
The CNPS scientists however, possess a quality that mainstream scientists and physics evangelists do not have. The most important skill for doing science: critical thinking, self judgement, and the absence of fear to start completely over from scratch.
All you have to do is look at the word evangelist as I am using it, you will see why these people are not furthering science knowledge to the masses, but are hindering it:
“EVANGELIST: any zealous (enthusiastic) advocate of a cause”
Notice it does not say “teacher” but instead says “advocate” or supporter. Also notice it is advocate of a “cause”. A cause is:
“CAUSE: a principle, ideal, goal, or movement to which a person or group is dedicated”
Cause is something to support, to spread, to convince others of. It has nothing to do with teaching students how to learn and think and be critical.
But if these physics evangelists where true “science teachers”, the definition should read:
“SCIENCE TEACHER: people who help impart to others, the ability to look at the universe and current theory, and to unbiasedly critique both in order to improve, disprove, or rework current theory and to encourage the creation new theories.”
Now that is a science teacher I would follow!
There should never be physics evangelists. Just science teachers.