Science 2.0

Let's coin this phrase.

This came to me, listening to the interview between Courtney and Aziz on the recent easter island project.

It fits better than the "new age movement" to me.

Science 2.0 is simply the idea that we pursue the truth with the same philosophy of Science 1.0. Let the evidence speak for itself. Let the socratic method of synthesis of information arise from the argument of opposing points.

There is no difference between Science 1.0 and Science 2.0 except for the following.

Science 1.0 is corrupted by corporate greed and fascist bullying, which you don't have to relate to anything like a reptilian order pervading over the planet. You can easily relegate Science 1.0 as an echoe of the vestiges of the "dark ages" - making its way all the way up to the Salem witch trials of 1692.

The obsession with vaccinating everyone comes from the same institutions which obsessed over bleeding everyone that was sick, and even quite recently electro-shocking the brains of just about anyone considered mentally ill. Science 1.0 insists that the pyramids and statues were all elaborately built by slaves, and that bo ancient advanced civilizations could be a competing theory. Science 2.0 adopts that ancient advanced civilizations is an acceptable competing theory. Science 1.0 rejects that the human body in an improved mental state could ever heal mortal wounds primarily by its thoughts. Science 2.0 accepts that thoughts having a principal role in genetics and health is an acceptable competing theory.

Science 1.0, even in law, accepts that evidence can only come from measurable articulable reason using the physical instruments we access on the same spectrum. Science 2.0 adopts that at the very least: instrumentation of data could in theory be procured by objects that are difficult (but still possible) to detect by the naked eye. Such as if we were to put gamna ray detection across a myriad of objects and see if there are things operating on this spectrum that we normally don't see.

But more to the point - Science 2.0 adopts the idea that ignorance is, unfortunately, alive and well in much of our moat respected institutions. Not because Science 2.0 wants to look beyond physical evidence, but because Science 2.0 can see the motivations and fallacies in the lies that institutions push, in an ever growing climate of any of the following 3: centralizing one-world totalitarianism (WEF, UN, etc), emotional trigger biases (eg: gender escapism as a backlash to the homophobic evils of the past), and monetary gain: the fact that institutions and media platforms must survive an ever more competing environment and the "competition" is not for the truth. It's for sponsors, and entertained students, rhetoric-obsessed "old money" organizations.

We can perhaps fight this war with a very simple catch-phrase that , like your average commercial jingle, is so catchy it life-long infects every mind that hears it whether the target likes it or not.

It doesn't matter what your political lean or your scientific opinion. The moment you hear the word "science 2.0" you are bound to repeat it to others by default even if you thought it was a ridiculous phrase. You become agent for the concept, even by shear resistance. If you spam across your Facebook: "science 2.0 - a new term for all those new age idiot quack jobs" you have already served your purpose so thanks in advance.

Science 2.0

So simple, and yet, potentially so insanely powerful. And all you have to do is occasionally repeat it. What say you.

JUST TRUST IN SCIENCE™!!! You can TRUST™ the SCIENCE™ because...SCIENCE™ is ALWAYS RIGHT, will ALWAYS be RIGHT & has NEVER BEEN WRONG! =O Well... except for that time when...

SCIENCE™ insisted that heavier-than-air flying machines were impossible, and that other time when SCIENCE™ insisted that continents cannot and do not float, and let's not forget about that other time when SCIENCE™ insisted that rocks do not fall from the sky, nor that other time when SCIENCE™ insisted that faster-than-horse courrier was impossible, not to mention that other time when SCIENCE™ also insisted that sound could not be reproduced without a ventriloquist, and we definitely shouldn't leave out that time when SCIENCE™ insisted that pictures cannot and do not move, then there is also that other time when science insisted that instantaneous-communication across continents was also impossible, plus that time when SCIENCE™ insisted that sentient-behaviour from phenomena such as Ball-Lightning cannot happen, and of course it's also important to mention that time when SCIENCE™ insisted that all sickness-and-disease was due to blood-poisoning which required the «state-of-the-art» medical-treatment known as blood-letting rather than many sicknesses and diseases being due to so-called «invisible forces that the (naked) eye could not see» (vindicated later on by the microscope), and how about that other time when SCIENCE™ also insisted that it is impossible to store a library worth of books of information into a box the size of one's thumb, and then also...

Ahem, err, anyway, the POINT that I am making here is that... SCIENCE™! You can TRUST™ it for ALL of those aforementioned reasons that I went over in the previous paragraph... (puts on sun-glasses)😎

"Science 1.0 is corrupted by corporate greed and fascist bullying"

There's also the term "Scientism" to describe that. I think Mark Passio coined that term, or at least that's where I learned it.

Science 2.0 is actually already happening, not only with remote viewing, but also with people like Nassim Haramein, who founded the Resonance Science Foundation, now called International Space Federation:

➡️ https://spacefed.com