The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

I think science makes a lot of very good points in many areas, but I dislike how scientists outright dismiss anything they can't explain. I would say Science is 50/50.

This topic reminds me of my favourite philosopher, Rudolf Steiner. In his essay, "The Stages of Higher Knowledge", he posited that Science was the first and most intermediary stage of knowledge that, if harnessed properly, would lead a man to other stages of higher knowledge:

"Even in what is initially called "science" one has only to do with this first stage of knowledge. For this science works only the ordinary recognition of finer, makes it more disciplined. It armed the senses through instruments - microscope, telescope, etc. - to see more precisely what the unarmed senses do not see. But the level of knowledge remains the same, whether you normally see great things with the ordinary eye, Or whether one traces very small objects and processes with the magnifying glass. Even in the application of thought to things and facts, this science remains with what is already being done in everyday life. The objects are arranged, described, compared, they are looked upon for their changes, and so on. The strictest natural scientist, in principle, does nothing more than train the method of observation of everyday life in an artistic manner. His knowledge becomes more comprehensive, more complicated, more logical; But he does not proceed to another mode of knowledge .


I have not heard of this New England phenomena, though. I find it quite scary, considering the time period in which it occurred.

Science, in my view, as to what the philosopher Rudolf Steiner was saying, is that he did not mean Science to be a whole field of technical study; he was merely using the word "science" to denote all sensory observations in general, but, I find it a useful place to start from.

Science is an all-encompassing terminology. If you think about it, there is science in art, believe it or not. So, I guess, it is science for the win, if you are talking about technicalities. :)

The explanation seems to be pretty sound. I doubt they can trace wind patterns that far back, but the story reminded me of Volcanic ash clouds and how they are described.

It's always hard to tell when trying to explain things prior to everything being recorded the way things are now.

I like the scientific method and the approach of testing a hypothesis. Math is pretty awesome too.



However, there are some scientist who claim they actually found their relationship with God through science.

Quantum Activist.

Personally, I like to think it's a bit of both... DO BE DO BE DOOOO

Here is an awesome link to Rudolf Steiner's philosophy on Science:
Science

I believe that science is ever evolving and there are more phenomena happening that cannot be scientifically explained-hence they refuse to see it for the wonder that it is. I would say that scientists need to catch up on their art of "science"

As much as I like science, I do not consider it to be one of the arts.

I find science, to be a great deal of importance. The whole entire medical field for treatment of health. That is all based upon science. I know as well you as you do. Science can be trial and error. That is the only way to get result is through extensive scientific research and experiments. That is how most of the results are founded. I also believe, some of the greatest scientific break through were found accidently.

I salute scientists everywhere, it was not for them we would not have it as good as we do today.

For all the "Science" in the world..... they have yet to release the cure for cancer that they have locked up in their safe's rather than allow the big pharma companies to rule over scientific decisions.

They also have yet to create a vaccine for Funnel web spiders and blue ringed octopus and the man o war jelly fish.... (All that are deadly here in Oz)

I wouldn't say that the bs decisions made by pharmaceutical or insurance companies, or political agendas, or any money or power related motives being the fault of science or scientists directly. This shouldn't have any bearing on if the process itself is right or wrong.

Science isn't some organization or compendium of all knowledge. Science is a way of interrogating the universe, to quote Carl Sagan.

It's the tool we use to understand the world because it relies on proven methods, reason, evidence, and the willingness to question not only the universe but our own assumptions as well.

When we use science we learn things. Just because we learned something doesn't mean that's the end of the road. Newton wasn't wrong because he didn't know about general relativity. His view of the world was accurate with the information he had - he made the best picture of the universe he could at the time. Same with today. Now, that also doesn't mean just because "we don't know everything" that any and everything is real. It just means we have more to learn.

If there's something mysterious or there are remaining questions about some scientific theory (a term that means it's MUCH more than 'just an idea' BTW), then explore. Do proper research and find out. But be prepared to be WRONG as much as you're prepared to be right. Going into something with the mindset you will prove something and exclude/dismiss all legitimate contrary facts (like you still can't turn into a flying vampire just because you think you are one...since, you know, biology), will only lead you and others astray. So much seriously obvious (and less obvious) BS has been foisted upon the world because people refuse to use reason and methodical experimentation.

It's also important to remember that just because everyone is entitled to their own ideas, it doesn't mean those ideas are equal or valid.

Science isn't a matter of "always right" or "naw". It's the only reliable tool in existence to honestly investigate the world around us. I challenge anyone to show me a better way.

Additionally, those who are professional scientists (from the weather guy to the research doctor, to the astronomer, to the people coming up with better forms of agriculture) number in their millions. Blaming "science" for some conspiracy that there's a cancer cure-all, or that "science" is poisoning the world....is total nonsense.

Don't conflate things and don't make wild statements without actual proof. There's a big difference between research and policy. There's a difference between one individual and another (one may be honest, the other crooked). Finally, just because your uncle told you some story about 'Nam, or the conspiracy to kill us all with chemtrails (they're doing a crap job at it if it's true), or just because you read an online article that linked to a thousand others all saying the same thing ---- with no actual evidence in the end ---- doesn't mean it's real.

The Vril Society comes to mind or this topic. Has anyone heard of them? They apparently existed during the Nazi regime/WWII, but were considered out-of-the-way as it was rumored to be magic-driven. Driven by Science or Magic? What do you think?