Knowledge changes over time. Ptolemaic cosmology gave way to the Copernican view of the universe. Quantum mechanics has superseded Newton’s classical mechanics. The cognitive revolution in psychology has left the behaviorists in the dust. Every time, a new model, offering more intension, control, predictability and falsifiability replaces the old, less scientific one. At the heart of these revolutions is anomalistics.
Anomalistics has two central parts. First, its concerns are purely scientific. It deals only with empirical claims of the extraordinary and is not concerned with alleged metaphysical, theological or supernatural phenomena. As such, it insists on the testability of claims (including both verifiability and falsifiability), seeks parsimonious explanations, places the burden of proof on the claimant, and expects evidence of a claim to be commensurate with its degree of extra ordinariness (anomalousness). Though it recognizes that unexplained phenomena exist, it does not presume these are unexplainable but seeks to discover old or to develop new appropriate scientific explanations.
As a scientific enterprise, anomalistics is normatively skeptical and demands inquiry prior to judgment, but skepticism means doubt rather than denial (which is itself a claim, a negative one, for which science also demands proof). Though claims without adequate evidence are usually unproved, this is not confused with evidence of disproof. As meteorologists have noted, an absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence. Since science must remain an open system capable of modification with new evidence, anomalistics seeks to keep the door ajar even for the most radical claimants willing to engage in scientific discourse. is approach recognizes the need to avoid both the Type I error – thinking something special is happening when it really is not – and the Type II error – thinking nothing special is happening when something special, perhaps rare, actually occurs. While recognizing that a legitimate anomaly may constitute a crisis for conventional theories in science, anomalistics also sees them as an opportunity for progressive change in science. Thus, anomalies are viewed not as nuisances but as welcome discoveries that may lead to the expansion of our scientific understanding.
Anomalists search for patterns in the acceptance and rejection of new scientific ideas, and this may involve the history, sociology, and psychology of science as well as the scientific fields themselves. (Truzzi 1998)
In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new “fact.” Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of “conventional science” as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis –saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact–he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.(Truzzi 1987, 3-4)
This echoes Wittgenstein’s admonishment that “[w]hereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.” Sadly, today new ideas (perhaps revolutionary ones) are often subject to ridicule, ad hominem attacks, and scientism, instead of being granted a respectful agnostic silence. Type I errors are commonly debunked (which is great), while Type II errors are mostly ignored or ridiculed, ultimately remaining uninvestigated (which is not so great).
Select contemporary issues of theology, philosophy and cosmology seem conflicting to pros and ordinary people alike. How can Bibli…
Instant New York Times Bestseller“Clear, elegant…a whirlwind tour of some of the biggest ideas in physics.”—The New York T…
Written in simple and accessible language, this non-technical introduction to cosmology, or the creation and development of the un…
Cosmology: The Science of the Universe is a broad introduction to the science of modern cosmology, with emphasis on its historical…
The Fourth Edition ofIntroduction to Cosmology provides a concise, authoritative study of cosmology at an introductory level. Star…
Imagine if what we presently call “the universe” was nothing more than the equivalent of a star in a bigger universe. Imagine that…
* FACT = THE GLOBE GOES HAND IN HAND WITH WORLD RELIGIOUS RULE!!! If you want the truth about our Ancient Egyptian / Kemetic cosmology of the Sky Goddess Nut & the Earth God Geb then this video is for you (please share)!!!!!! This is just part 1 to a 3 part series. I will be discussing everything about the cosmology from the lay out, etymology, the cosmic journey, the Mother Goddesses & MORE! You think you know about kemetic cosmology? Trust me you know NOTHING until you’ve seen this!
https://youtu.be/oMLFcxFnzk0 – NASA DECEPTION! Ancient Cosmology! Sirius Lies! Eternity?
https://youtu.be/eXLC6SLvdDA – NASA DECEPTION vs FLAT EARTH! MORE TRUTH REVEALED!
***Join me on FACEBOOK GROUP! https://www.facebook.com/groups/knowledgeispowerfreeyourmind/
***The Mother Goddess (Matriarch Cosmology & The Dogon) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmUJzhQaeZeh4PaOO_BL3p2zzmpVH1Wqi
***The True Shape Of Our Cosmos (Planisphere Series) FLAT EARTH https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmUJzhQaeZegue1QFVdvSqzaiTffSxrcQ
KEMETIC COSMOLOGY 1: NUT & GEB (Cosmic Mother) #MUSTWATCH