Double Standard

I do not like double standards. I suppose part of that is my experience that every time somebody bent or changed the rules it was always so that they could screw me. But – personal history aside – I find it particularly hard to tolerate when used by people in science. Do you think they don’t? I have mentioned before that The Prophet Einstein’s theories have been found to explain 5% to at most 15% of the observable universe. There have been many studies of paranormal phenomena such as ESP and precognition that have had a much greater success rate than that, and yet they are dismissed as irrelevant by “serious” scientists who spend their entire careers trying to justify their unshakeable belief in The Prophet Einstein.

For instance, can you tell me what the difference is between dark matter/dark energy and ghosts, UFOs, and Sasquatch? The answer is that there exists tangible evidence for the latter three. One can debate the evidence’s interpretation, validity, and relevance, but not its existence. So far the only evidence of dark matter/dark energy is formulas on a blackboard representing hypotheses that support the infallible theories of The Prophet Einstein. This is apparently considered by some to be adequate “proof,” while for anything else they insist on solid, incontrovertible, and material evidence. I will posit that those chalk marks are rationalizations and justifications and not proof. (I don’t know, maybe his acolytes believe that the blackboard itself must be made of “dark” matter.) I realize I have probably just caused some physicists’ heads to explode. Sorry about that.

In the earlier days of the ghost-hunting TV shows (before just anybody would grab an electronic meter and run out to “investigate”) I read a column by a science commentator who said that they were some of the purest “science” being pursued at that time. His position was that the investigators were not sure that anything was there and they were not sure that they had the right equipment to detect it or were even asking the right questions; but they were out there trying to find out what was happening. I have to agree with that line of thought.

On esoteric subjects, the “scientific community” is fond of forming a Greek chorus chanting, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” (I would consider the claim that 95% of the universe consists of undetectable dark matter/dark energy to be pretty extraordinary and lacking any proof, but maybe that’s just me.) Let me propose a couple of hypothetical situations. Suppose a 200-meter-wide UFO perched for two days on the tip of the Washington Monument then departed by accelerating instantly to 10,000 MPH straight up, all while being filmed and tracked on radar. Or suppose a group of ghosts materialized before security cameras in the offices of Scientific American, rearranged the furniture, and then waited around to be interviewed on camera by a reputable TV news crew before fading away. These would be explained by the aforementioned Greek chorus to show the possibility of a tentative indication for a theory that something may have happened that might warrant an investigation someday by someone else. On the other hand, dark matter and dark energy are established facts that require an investment of billions of dollars for equipment today for their own pet projects, based on chalk symbols scratched on blackboards that are consistent with the dictates of The Prophet Einstein.

I will close with another example of the double standard. I have read that there is another pattern that has been noted for nearly 200 years, since the advent of mass transportation by train and then later by plane. It is based purely on numbers (oooh, math!) and yet could support an otherwise paranormal hypothesis. The pattern has indicated that those trains and planes that are involved in fatal accidents often are carrying fewer passengers than that particular train or flight would typically carry. (I have also read that the exception is those occasions such as holidays when there is always someone else waiting for any empty seat, especially once the airlines instituted standby lists.) This would seem to be evidence that a significant percentage of the human race subconsciously avoids such incidents, perhaps even through some latent precognitive ability. It would seem to me that this is a topic and potential evidence in cold, hard figures that would warrant study, and yet I am not aware of any serious attempt by recognized authorities to do so. Perhaps if they would theorize that the apparently empty seats are actually occupied by “dark passengers” that paid for their “dark tickets” with “dark coinage” so that there is no evidence of them on the accounting sheets then they could take it seriously. Of course, they would insist on billions of real dollars to build a Large Train and Plane Collider to then search futilely for them.

By the way, if it seems that I make snide references to the Large Hadron Collider, please understand that I do not disapprove of it or the expense to support it, nor do I lightly dismiss the discoveries it seems to have accomplished. But at the same time I do keep in mind that many of those “discoveries” consist of a blip in the numbers.

Gort, berenga.