From: Ray Dickenson <ray.dickenson.nul>
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 19:53:00 +0000
Fwd Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:06:32 -0500
Subject: Re: More Jill Tarter - Dickenson


>>From: Larry Hatch <larryhatch.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 08:30:05 -0800
>>Subject: Re: More Jill Tarter

>>>From: Robert Gates <RGates8254.nul>
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:31:57 EST
>>>Subject: Re: More Jill Tarter

>>>>From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul>
>>>>To: - UFO UpDates Subscribers - <UFO-UpDates.nul>
>>>>Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:52:54 -0500
>>>>Subject: More Jill Tarter

>>>>Source: Psychology Today Magazine
>>>>http://www.psychologytoday.com/rss/pto-20051019-000002.html
>>>>Publication Date: Nov/Dec 2005

>><snip>

>>>Some worship at the alter of so-called main stream science

>>Anyone who can say this either doesn't know how science works,
>>or is confusing it with religion.

Trouble with most of "mainstream science" is same as elsewhere -
untalented obsessives being dogmatic soon as they get any
"authority" - as A. C. Clarke once mentioned.

Worst thing I heard was a debate on education when a so-called
"scientist" got the complaint that school science was boring. He
responded that "science is supposed to be boring".

Not so! Boring people like him aren't doing science - they're
doing book-keeping.

A while ago I got roped into instructing fellow rough-tough
squaddies, bigger and badder than me, how to do fairly complex
stuff. So I'd start off say, by drawing a distant mountain with
puff of smoke at top, and a foreground guy in loin-cloth waving
a blanket over a fire. "That's you, and your pal is on that far
mountain - How're you gonna communicate?"

Next minute we're into binary coding theory and Boolean logic -
driven by their questions, not by me. End of lesson we're onto
satellite stuff. And no-one got bored.

Real science isn't dogmatic or boring. However it does seem to
get dominated by anal book-keepers making dogmatic statements
about everything. That's because the real scientists are busy
thinking and don't give dogmatic opinions.

Fred Hoyle wasn't boring or dogmatic. Real scientists know he
actually earned the Nobel three or four times over. But he knew
he'd never get it. He'd upset the boring mainstream by having
too many exciting ideas.

Dogmatism is boring.


Cheers

Ray D


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Perceptions" http://www.perceptions.couk.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~