Subject: Tigers in the closet
    Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:56:14 +0100
    From: Ray Dickenson
      To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net

 `Tiger in the closet' = fatal assumption that stops discovery.
 `Baby thrown out with bath water' = rejection of data as folk-lore or superstition.

  These mistakes are supposedly prevented by use of the scientific method. I.e.
  "hold no assumptions but take all data as equal worth."
  ( go "power_of_zero.txt" in Google )

  But science never used the scientific method and doesn't now. Take Galileo Galilei, he
  was a genius thinker, inventor & experimenter who defied authority to spend a lifetime
  assembling all the data (with no instruments except of his own making, using his pulse
  as clock) for a breakthrough "Gravitational Cosmology".

  But he never made it. Instead, some years later, Newton merely summarized Galilei's
  data (using Halley's logic and (maybe) Leibniz's calculus), and got awarded all the
  credit. [note below]

  Galileo's tiger? He assumed the phenomena of gravity that he was measuring happened
  "because they did". The baby? He refused to accept folk-lore associating the Moon
  and sea-tides (and plant / animal life) - as `superstition' (despite his own
  daughter recounting and using it - go < fertility maria celeste >), and so he spent
  years trying to account for sea-tides solely by the rotation of the Earth.

  Are we guilty of same thing? Of course we are! Self-satisfied fools' assumptions are
  deemed "right" merely because they hold paper qualifications or belong to "Royal
  Societies" or suchlike - while rejection of data is rampant, because deemed `non-
  respectable' or otherwise disapproved of (go "badsci.txt") Remember `old wives tales'
  of herbal uses of carrots, opium, curare, quinine, marijuana, nicotine and many more?
  All once dismissed but now valuable medicines.

  Today's tigers and babies?

  Tiger #1 - science clings to `Darwinian evolution' even though basic math tells us it
  can't have created the species we see, especially humans (and bonobos & superants)
  in the time available. Hiding the implication that some sort of external influence
  (or even intervention) may be responsible.
  (go "magic or mass")

  Tiger #2 - science assumes that matter (protons & suchlike) coheres simply "because
  it does". Ignoring implication that a `non-material' force allows or compels matter
  to cohere, and that most other activity in the universe is also `non-material' and
  probably enabling of (`non-material') life and consciousness.
  (go "friend-foe.txt")

  Baby #1 - rejecting as `folk-lore' any associations of Moon with mating rituals
  (yes - humans' too), and `magic' rites etc.
  (go < fertility estrus rut >

  Baby #2 - rejecting as `folk-stories' anything to do with interference by entities,
  `time-control', abduction, or non-material `flying vehicles'; from ancient past to
  the present day.
  (go "psyche storms")

  (Interestingly, those `tigers' maybe linked to those `babies')

  The scientists' behavior is un-scientific! 

  Big question is - errors of the past were maybe unconscious, but what's happening
  now? And why?

  cheers
  Ray D

--------------------------------------------------

 later note: - Newton was not only accused of stealing the work of Galileo and Leibniz.

 Robert Hooke was an `inventive young experimenter' and a paid curator and demonstrator
 of the Royal Society. This made him subservient to Newton - a member of the `elite'.

 It is said that Hooke first worked-out that Kepler's elliptical planetary orbits would
 fit an inverse-square law - and that Newton then used his R.S. authority and social
 standing to claim Hooke's idea for his own, suppressing Hooke's complaint.

 (It seems Hooke got little protection against the "gentlemen" of the Royal Society
 stealing not only his ideas but also his inventions of equipment and experiments.)   

 Also - evidence that "Newton not only illicitly published the star catalogue that
 Flamsteed (Astronomer Royal) had compiled at his own expense, but also drastically
 altered its contents"   

 [From  "Newton - the making of genius" 2002 by Patricia Fara]

 But Newton had royal favor and high social standing and contacts. He used all these
 to ruthlessly suppress the complaints of distant isolated Leibniz, socially-inferior
 Hooke and the dying Flamsteed.

 (He didn't have to worry about Galileo, whose work was freely available in England
 long before Galileo died. Galileo had been effectively gagged, and therefore prevented
 from staking any rights, by the Inquisition.)


--------------------------------------------------

              FURTHER REFERENCES

  GO - "search perceptions" - in SEARCH-ENGINE


file-ID www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/ueftigers.txt