99 % (exact data on that one still to be confirmed) of the internet is just a bunch of humans sitting around the global coffee table shooting their mouth off. "I think Kennedy was bumped off by them Martians!" -- "Naaa what yer talkin about ?!" It was the Mobsters cuz Kennedy waz sleepin with Giancana Gal ? -- an if it was the Martians then we-eeeed have a Martian president ! " I think with Donald Trump we already done had a Martian president !?. Yaaaaaa !
A long time ago when My wife and I were riding in a cab we were all talking about the OJ Simpson Trail. (OJ was accused of K-1lling his w1fe). Any hoo the taxi driver said very seriously that he believed injustice was done because the DOG was not put on the stand to woof at OJ or anyone else in the court room. Now with brilliant logic like that I surrendered any more of my ideas to his and wished him well. Of course without laughing I nodded my head wisely and agreed with him that was a brilliant bit of logic.
And my point is, that man is welcome to express his opinion on my internet any time at all. Now, there was a man who truly thought outside the box and I would welcome his unsupported unscientific opinions. In fact if he had a website today I might make a direct beeline to his site as it would all be worth the laughs and giggles that would ensue (on my part)
And further his opinions in no way would have to be censored by the government or tech company. I think I could figure out what was up or down on that one.
Also there are opinions (by some scientific types) that are saying essentially about 50% of the scientific studies that we are informed about are complete nonsense - made up or so poorly done that they are in error. All being jiggered with by pill companies, or companies that are trying to get their products to market, or by scientists wishing to make a mark for themselves thus becoming famous (my speculation there).
Now that could be wild speculation or it could be closer to the truth than we want to admit.
Its all just an opinion that I am expressing about something I saw or read on the internet. The real point is that there seems to be some fakery taking place in scientific papers and studies. How extensive it is, is up for debate.
Someone could argue this is all the opinion of one man. Later someone else could say oh - I found another opinion or possibly an actual study on the subject saying the opposite or confirming your opinion. At the end of the day I am not a scientist and pretty well most everyone else isn't one either - so its all just loud-mouth blather generally. Some times I could be right other times wrong or some where in-between.
But its largely just people sitting around the worlds coffee table spouting off on any old topic.
And There should be access to these papers that you refer to that could give us more sound idea about topics.
BUT and this in very common, when you get to a site with data and scientific studies you usually find you have to pay to join the site. Now at this point we could say well you pay to go on Farsight. This is true however the ability to roam around the internet accessing scientific papers is a bit bogus. Yes if you've paid a huge tuition at a college or university you may have (PAID) to get great access but to
the average person this is not true. Usually you get the briefest blurb about some new study but for that paper alone you must pay for instance $30.
Also if you were to get to the site the study is written for other scientific sorts and the understanding of what is being said is very limited. I need somebody to dumb it down to get the idea of it. Take for instance the video about the two scientific sorts (Penrose and interviewer) discussing consciousness and String Theory.
The only reason I began to understand the ideas was because they were chatting and not going deeply into the theories. These types of topics are like anything else. If we had 2 car mechanics talking about the internal workings of a car with all with the jargon they could use it would prove to be a bit complicated.
Sure we can understand the piston engine but how it all works together and where all the parts are etc would begin to get confusing to most. And the car is not that complicated really. Fuel in piston -ignited - piston driven down then an attached crank shaft- turning wheels. Accelerator injecting more fuel -- and TRANSMISSON -- HELLO ? The transmission thingamabob goes round and round ---round and round -- the wheels on the bus goes round and round all the live long day !!! it can get complicated.
That the data is not readily available at all, and possibly that in it self fuels speculative nonsense because there is a vacuumed of scientific stuff and so speculation fills the void. Another opinion on my part.
And to put an ALIEN slant on it all, there was a NDE - (near death experiencer) who said an Alien told him that all this hiding of ideas, data, papers of any kind was not done on their worlds. It was not done because it was recognize and desired that their offspring to have all the information possible so they could advance. Hiding information on their worlds was seen as stupid. And speculation alert- if there is a Universal war of minds then it would be critical ( I believe) that one race or another get as much information as is possible to compete with the other races- Reptilians -Orians etc.
Now with that point above what could we say what ? How about DAVE--- NDEs have proven to be a mere explosion of chemicals in the brain messing with the circuitry of the mind ! Dave I believe in everything you say oh great POOBA ! Or where is your data on that Dave ?
And of course when pressured (only a little) I would have to say -- you know you're right I have very little scientific proof for these comments. I would defer to the man in the Taxi on those data points !
I'm just blathering away ! And have rarely pretended to be doing otherwise. Sometime though I feel I find some people who really do have reputation of being scientists (say on Covid topic) who expressed some doubts on the matter and that's why I do introduce the videos and not just my opinions alone.
And lo and behold as they say in the bible - a lot of it is turning out to be correct on those points. But again its all opinions on my part.
If one is on this site then they have already thrown a lot of accepted scientific ideas out the window and run into the bushy woods. Because if we talked to any scientific sort (say on a train) about what we believe or the topic of remote viewing I think that person would likely get up and walk down the train to the next car.
I like to bounce ideas around. Sometimes I think I make some good points or I find some videos that seem to make good points. But holding me to the same scientific rigor that should be held to a scientific sort I think is impossible and really a bit unrealistic. This entire site (it could be argued by anyone with a bit of a science background) is complete speculation. Even the idea of the existence of Aliens is rejected by great swaths of humanity. And remote viewing is actually (i believe) seen as some kind of conjuring trick at best. So we are all floating off in another sea of ideas- on our own.
But it is my opinion that there is a lot of truth and even quite a lot of scientific study on these subjects that will eventually be proven correct and accepted as so.
But to your idea-- it is good that you question. Because it forces me/others to look for some supporting ideas or "Facts" to back up some comment. I have been forced to produce some info on the idea of "50% of scientific papers being false ! And that adds to the mix to be sure. Now if the "support" is sufficient or just the "Taxi Driver" level of sufficiency is again up for debate.
On some level, for some, nothing would be suffice. Look at any sceptic magazine or video. EVERYTHING IS DISCOUNTED.
For example in my idea to Remote view there was a request by me to remote view Patience Worth. In that story there seemed to be an entity that wrote a novel in Old English as well as others. Now if you know about Old English - to be able to write a novel in an archaic language is Astounding that it was said even the most adept linguist could not do it. But the sceptics of the day said it was all done by the "channel" who had never left her little town except to go the grocery store (bit of exaggeration) because she had read the bible or similar.
Its like if I sang Frere Jacques song---
Frère Jacques, Frère Jacques
Sonnez le matines, sonnez le matines
Ding ding dong, ding ding dong
and then wrote a French novel - and a good one at that - impossible.
But I have rambled too long and my pillows are calling me - Adieu mon ami till vee meet again !!