The establishment has yet to define the word science unambiguously and has no clue regarding the purpose
    of the scientific method. Closer inspection  leads us to the center of the storm: the enigmatic word hypothesis.
    The morons of science have misconstrued the meaning and purpose of the hypothesis, which they somehow
    associate with the ability to make predictions. The worldly wisdom is that if experiment confirms the hunch,
    the hypothesis can now be treated as a theory. And when the theory is approved by a show of hands, it now
    becomes a fact.

    In Science, we do things a bit differently.  First of all Science is not in the business of making predictions. This
    is the stuff of astrologers, charismatic evangelists, and mad scientists. And if we use Mathematics at all, it is
    merely to reinforce a theory; equations are not a requirement of the scientific method. Mathematics describes.
    Mathematics does not explain. Science is about explaining why, not about describing how.

    Then, in Science, we don't test hypotheses. In Science, we formulate them and ask the jurors to take them at
    face value. Assumptions, we formulate. It is theories that we test, if at all, and only after the presentation is
    over. In Science, there is no requirement for an experiment. A hypothesis consists of exhibits, defini-tions,
    and a statements of the facts. There is no provision in a hypothesis for Math or for experiments. The reason
    a contemporary 'scientist' cannot tell you the difference between science and religion is primarily due to the
    establishment's failure to define the term hypothesis 'scientifically' (i.e., in such a way that it can be used

    Of course, when we follow the correct method, an entirely different picture of the Universe emerges and you
    realize that the mathematicians have wasted the last 400 years in worthless pursuits. Once we make the
    correct assumptions regarding the nature of invisible entities and mechanisms -- light, the atom, magnetism,
    space, gravity -- we are finally in a position to explain and understand why things happen. It is not the
    theories which are important in science, but the hypotheses. A genuine scientific theorist should spend 99%
    of his time brainstorming, researching, and developing his hypothesis, and the remaining 1% on his petty


     Home                    Book WGDE                    Glossary                    Extinction   

    Last modified 01/12/08

        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008

This fellow’s crystal
ball is no match for
my opaque ball. My
ball bypasses
theories altogether
and converts
hypotheses directly
into facts.
Should I bother
these great men of
science with my
petty theories?
among the opaque giants at the Relativity Convention
Enlightened Bill
A relativist believes that a
hypothesis is a prediction
Adapted for the Internet from:

Why God Doesn't Exist