A short tale about pseudoscience

A short tale about pseudoscience

What if there is no right answer?

One very good example of the question, where is not answer is the tale about scientists and boys. In this tale, the boy shows the brown and white horse on the plant, and then that boy asked the scientist "what is the name of that thing?". The scientist answered that "I don't know" and then the boy said, "it's a brown and white horse".  Here we must understand that the question was about the name of that thing. And how a scientist should know that name? The right form of the question would be "what is that thing?". And then the scientist would answer "horse", and then the real answer would be "brown and white horse".

Or if the scientist would answer that way, the boy could say "brown and white horse, what name is XXX", and then the answer would be longer and longer. The thing is that this tale is one of the best examples of things, where we cannot even give the right answer. This is one of the versions, where the form of the answer would also change all the time, and we cannot ask the hose, what its name is.  And who knows, how other horses are calling that horse, and could we even say its name? The name what the owners of that horse use of it, or the name what other horses call that horse?

There are two types of pseudoscience, harmless and harmful.

A harmless version of pseudosciences are things like horoscopes or some other things. Most of us don't believe them, and that thing makes them look quite harmless. Of course, some horoscope could be coded messages to intelligence or some other things, but there is quite a small possibility, that this kind of thing concerns the normal people.

Also, things like the mass of the photon or some case near the black holes, where the black holes extreme gravity field would cause the situation, that the speed of light could be crossed have no mean to people. We must say that for proving that thing, we must fly to the black hole, and meter our speed beyond the singularity. That is the thing, that gives answers to us, and before that everything, what we say about that thing is pure theory.

But the harmful pseudoscience is things like playing with medicals and homeopathy. This kind of thing can cause even death. And also things like carelessness while testing medicals and other kinds of things are serious things.

We should not justify everything, what we see in the world of quantum physics as pseudoscience. But the thing is that some pseudoscience makers are good speakers, and they can make even the very dangerous things looking good. They use good-looking arguments for supporting their way to see things, and sometimes they are an appeal to religious opinions. When the motivated followers are standing in the next of those people, there are only a few persons, who can resist those quite charismatic people, and that will boost their way to say things.

Image:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/dd/RWS_Tarot_20_Judgement.jpg/220px-RWS_Tarot_20_Judgement.jpg

The things what difference science and pseudoscience

The things what difference science and pseudoscience

The thing what makes difference in science is that scientist uses the existent material for making the conclusions about some things, and here I must say, that if the source is faked, the thing is is that the conclusions, what the scientist makes are wrong. The scientist uses the material, what is given to that person, or what has been found on the Internet. And if the material somehow manipulated, the scientist can also make mistakes. Or even the best of scientists can be tired or in fewer when they do their work, which means that even the best researchers are human beings.

If the scientist tries to give wrong conclusions, that would be very difficult, because that person must show, that the evidence or source material is used, and it's polite for ordinary people and other researchers to show, what is the used material. This means that if the researcher uses a photograph or painting, it's nice to show other people.  And the place, where the picture is taken or downloaded is polite to mark in the source list. The thing about the pseudoscience is that thing is always trustable, and it's hard to show faked.

One of the things about the pseudoscience is that it seems very nice, but something seems to be wrong in the research. The thing what is wrong is that the sources, what are used are not shown to the audience. And this is the weakness in the research. The thing is that the evidence must be something, what shows the claiming true or false. One of the remarkable thing in the pseudoscience is that used money for that research is very big, and this is the very big problem in scientific work.

If somebody gives money for the research, the members of the research team have a need to please those profiteers, and that means that there is a big risk, that somebody would write lies in that report. When we are talking about theories and another kind of conclusions, the thing is that the pictures and exotic merchandises are a very good thing, how to make people blind. Also telling some exciting stories about the sacrifices would be an effective way to make people be silent.

And stories about escaping the guerillas and erupting volcanoes are very impressive things. Those stories are a good way to make people impressed, what would be a good way to get publicity. If the reporters are confessed and impressed about the stories how this explorer escapes the hostile villains in the jungle and swims away from the great tsunamis, they might not ask anything, what might cause an embarrassing situation. And if the story is placed another side of the or in an exotic place like in the river Congo, would that confess many people.

The thing about the writing was it scientific or art

The thing about the writing was it scientific or art

The thing is that every person in the world should know that we are all supporting freedom of speech, but when somebody has different opinions, what we have, we would become very angry against those persons. This is an interesting thing when we are thinking about our relationship with media and democracy. Those things seem and feel nice when they are supporting our personal opinions. But when somebody has a different opinion, the thing would cause the anger movement against those persons, who dare to think against the normal people.

On the internet, you might hear about the blood types, like RH-, what is claimed not belonging on the Earth, and that kind of things would justify the persecution against those people, and this kind of things are dangerous. There are things, what we hear, but what we don't actually think about. Is there really people, who have the most exotic RH- blood type in the world? I think that some blood types are really extraordinary.  And when we are thinking about the thing, called "blue blood" in the case of the noblemen, we must ask, has some noblemen got blue blood? Were they so isolated, that they did not even have similar blood, what normal people have?

Then we must realize, that if we are thinking about the Genesis, and creation of the human, we must realize that those stories are actually made for supporting the power of the priests and other noblemen in the Sumerian civilization. When we are talking about the blue blood, we must say that the legend of the blue blood of the noblemen was created to make sure that the persons who are standing in the front of the people were not same, who gave orders. And as we know, some of the members of the ruling class would play the game, that the orders came from somebody else.

The test of the person would be easy. The real rulers would have blue blood, and that would protect the priests from the hate of people when they were walking at the market place. There is also a similar test in Romania. The test of the vampires will go that the person, who is suspected as the vampire would just need to eat the food, where is white onion. That kind of test was safe and trusted way to uncover the vampires, who are hiding in some taverna. But the white onion uncovers if a person has just eaten, before coming in the house, and in the case, that quest smells the white onion and claims to go to eat, would that uncover the lie.

And the blood of the Moluccan crayfish is blue. That animal is a very old species. If the test of the being priest was that this blood was injected to the body of the candidate, that thing would be very dangerous. Because if the blood has the Rhesus actor, the blood cells would be rough, which means that the blue blood of the crayfish would kill that RH+ person because the antigens of the blue blood would seize to the core of the blood cells. And this can cause the immune reaction in blood veins, what makes own immune cells to destroy the blood.

If a person is RH- the thing would be that the blood cells will be smooth, and the other antigens would not seize so easily. RH+ blood would seize the oxygen more effectively than RH- blood. And that's why this kind of blood type is a little bit more common than RH- blood. But in the first time, I have faced the people, who are claiming, that some persons are mentioned that they are not belonging on earth because they have certain blood types. This kind of things is very sad disinformation and dangerous pseudoscience.