We shouldn't rule out anything before we make proper research about certain topics.

We shouldn't rule out anything before we make proper research about certain topics.

Don't rule out or close something out without evidence. This is the golden rule about scientific work. And don't blame any writer, if somebody else has given wrong data. When we are living in the world, where people have unlimited access to the data, what is not classified "secret", that means there is more data in use than ever before.

So if somebody would make bad studies, that means that the writer, who uses that material is not responsible for false or bad information, what bases on the studies, what are published in some other trusted media. When we are talking about things like scientific work, we are facing things like "some student" has been writing an open letter about some other things. When we are starting to create arguments against those texts. We can always say, that they are made by students or send them to the mental hospital.

Even Einstein and Newton were students once

And in that time we forget that every great researcher like Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were students once. When we are trying to analyze the texts, we should concentrate on the product, not the producer. Who cares is some physics theory made by a schizophrenic or person who uses too much alcohol? We must realize that the text, what is written in the thing, what we should estimate. We should not underestimate old masters, but we must realize that modern technology like CCD-cameras and especially supercomputers. The supercomputers can handle numbers with an accuracy of millions of decimal numbers are showing that there are found errors or inaccuracies in the many theories.

The thing is that students are many times really intelligent people. Researches and studies are many times underrated because some students are made those texts. The thing is that research and studies do not always support things that we are learning to believe in schools. And if those researches are not supporting our ideology, we can always turn to refuse to believe them. Science and studies are not democracy. There are no Gallup polls, which are chancing the observations. But otherwise without observations, what made by using trusted equipment, and confirmed by independent groups is not prove. And theories are remaining theories until the observations are falling or prove that thing.

But the problem is that we are facing the thing sometimes only half of the text is handled. When some people are publishing texts what are made by students they are taking the attitude that the text should support their view of the world. That means that they are forgetting the purpose of science and research. The purpose of the research is to bring new data and points of view to the world. The facts or how the facts are taken are things that are making research qualified or not qualified.

The small fact can uncover a huge secret.

The thing is that if we want to make some studies, we should not justify things before we have been searching for the source material. And things like AREA-51 have been shown that careful secrets are opening the secrets, what are guarding the highest class officials. The thing that uncovered the AREA-51 was the thing that there was land, which the government eminently domain twice. And this thing was shown, that there are always people who are telling things, what is not true.

When we are thinking about things like gifting reporters about the freedom of speech, I sometimes wonder the prices affect the freedom of speech? Are they gifts that are given for real and effective journalism, or are they "good boy" and "good girl" gifts, what are given for supporting governments and some other companies? What are the instructions for sharing that kind of money? Are they given for denigrating the competitors, but leaving some actors away from the articles?

The thing is that when we are thinking about things like the laws of nature, we do not always remember that the calculation methods are improving. And there have been found the inaccuracies in many theories and things that are thought to be natural laws.

Could this be the thing, that some people don't want you to know about zombies?

Could this be the thing, that some people don't want you to know about zombies? The simplest way to control zombies, which are made by using tetrodotoxin, which is called "zombie poison" is to use the automatic dispenser, which is normally used in diabetes treatment. In this case, the dispenser would be loaded by using tetrodotoxin. If the level of this poison is right, the person would be totally under the control of other people. And if the system cannot detect this poison there is a possibility to make the laboratory experiment when the staff will follow the decrease of the tetrodotoxin, and then the system can use a simple clock, which will inject poison to the body of a victim after a certain time. This would be an effective tool in the hands of military and counter-terror operators. Those zombies can be captured enemy operators, who will send back, and then they just kill their ex-partners. By using genetically engineered bacteria could be possible to create t...

The cyborg lichen can be one of the most exotic visions of what the high-tech civilization might look like.

. The cyborg lichen can be one of the most exotic visions of what the high-tech civilization might look like. Above is the image of the nano-submarine. There is introduced an idea, that this kind of system would equip with living neurons, which makes it like some kind of artificial bug or mosquito. The idea is that the robot can take the nutrient by using the robot tube, which acts like a proboscis. The neurons can get nutrients and the rest of the machine can use small fuel cells or the energy to that system can deliver by using the radio waves. Futurologists are thinking about the ideas, what the hybridization of the neurons and machine would look like? Could the hyper-technical civilization look like the group of midget submarines? Those submarines might take nutrients for the neurons, what is living in them. The purpose of the midget submarines, which might be size less than a couple of millimeters would maximize the survivability of the neurons. One of the most intere...

Antimatter motor

Antimatter motor Antimatter would be an effective fuel for interstellar spacecraft Antimatter would be the most effective power source in the world. It will be the most suitable motor for interstellar spacecraft, but the problem is that thing is very reactive. And actually one of the biggest problems with this kind of motor is that the gram of antimatter would turn the entire planet to the molecular nebula. So this kind of motor can produce only outside of our solar system. Producing antimatter would need large particle accelerators, and that kind of systems might look like giant donuts, what is floating on the space. There are two ways to create the antimatter motor, one is to store the anti-ions in the magnetic bottle, where the pushing magnetic field will keep those ions away from the wall of the bottle, and then the antimatter would conduct to the water or some other particle. The huge explosion or annihilation reaction would send the rocket to a very high speed. The antimatt...

The networked Internet connects the world under one umbrella.

Search This Blog