back


To my dismay, the peer’s and authorities to whom I should ideally like to have submitted these findings are no longer with us - what in past times was considered measured and reasoned thinking within science, has via the slow process of inculcation, been both gradually and systematically eroded out of peoples minds by the incumbents, their acolytes and their followers. Add to this the increasing obsession with science fiction since the 1950’s and one begins to see how the irrational can indeed become rational, nonsense can indeed become sense, and almost anything may become not only feasible but also believable. And, what’s more, in a throwback to past times, the practitioner’s of this relatively modern science, much like the Church of old, fail to grasp the distinction between verifiable 'subjective truth’ and verifiable 'objective truth’.

Is it any wonder that humanity finds itself in the scientific, cultural and educational cul-de-sac to which we are both wedded and immersed today. Democracy can only work effectively if you have an educated and knowledgeable electorate voting for an intelligent, wise and just elective. The thinking behind much modern science and philosophy since the 1950’s has ensured that we have neither at the moment. The generality of the people have been completely disenfranchised by sophistry, humbug and the belligerent attitude of our present scientific elite to whom past disciplines of thought remain anathema. It remains to be seen just how many more generations must have their innate natural and moral philosophy needlessly corrupted. Black-holes, Big-Bangs, Multi-Universe’s, Dark-Matter, Dark Energy, Anti-Matter, Quantum-this, Quantum-that and other such notions are all very well... but perhaps we really ought to re-enter the earth’s atmosphere, focus on more earthly phenomena and divert some of the seemingly infinite funds that such notions receive and allocate them toward a potentially more useful purpose - the correct, sensible and proper education of young people. If one can achieve that, then at the very least, people should be equipped to discern for themselves the distinction between science fiction, fantasy and fact. Perhaps then, and only then, will the scientific zealot lose the hegemony that empowers, enshrines and enriches their own subjective and deeply shallow understanding at the expense of everyone else. 

The founders and forebears of our academies, institutes, societies and universities must be spinning in their graves at the innevitable consequences of a science which uses statistical 'certainties and probabilities’ in support of 'procrustean solutions’ when trying to make sense of what is effectively an ‘apple-pied’ model. Even the Royal Society itselfthe oldest of them all, has lost sight of its very pertinent motto 'Nullius in Verba'. Euclidean geometry has been neglected for far too long, and I don’t doubt that at some future time science will find the grace to laugh at itself as readily as it has done the ecclesiastical community in the past. The rigorousness, provenance and straightforward common sense of Euclid stretches back many thousands of years and I am confident that such an approach will ultimately retake the helm at some further point in the earth’s future. It is by the rigorous and immutable standards of those peer’s and authorities, both past and future, that I wish this contribution to be ultimately judged.


"Blind folly, though it deceive itself with false names, cannot alter the true merit of things, and, mindful of the precept of Socrates, I do not think it right either to keep truth concealed or allow falsehood to pass. But this, however it may be, I leave to thy judgement and to the verdict of the discerning. Moreover, lest the course of events and the true facts should be hidden from posterity, I have myself committed to writing an account of the transaction.” 

‘The Consolation of Philosophy’ Boethius - book I (iv)


Contextual Quotes