regarding Scientific bias

Forrest Fulkerson ( ffmon@axiom.net )
Sun, 2 Jun 1996 16:45:55 -0600

Simeon and Maia,

I value your responses about scientists and scientific method, but not
all of us are looking to maintain old paradigms. Some of us have listened.
Stephen Hawking said something like the next great scientific discoveries
were going to come from a quantum leap of faith. We will look for evidence
of a theory or phenomena that is so radical or seemingly impossible and
then find it.
Why should it be a such a surprise that scientists are willing to go
places where no one has gone before? I think that we all have to step back
from our mental filters and just listen to the other. One can maintain a
since of detachment while experimenting (listening to our intuition without
filtering with the ego). But, however, if something does not vibrate with
the truth then would you not know it? The same with the analysis of EG
that was presented. There were some anomolies, therefore, it did not
resonate with truth for me and others (especially scientists); and when
people that did not understand the tests tried to explain them, the water
got muddied.
I see your use of the words "naturally occuring powders" being used as
if to lay the ground for Etherium Gold to be organic and non toxic. Please
let me say that there are things on this planet that are toxic! Heavy
metal ores are found naturally occurring, would they be considered edible?

We live on the planet earth and at the same time we are part of the
universe with all the dimensions. We still maintain a body here (planet
earth) for the time being, so don't you think that we should honor this
material world and keep our body healthy? And, why not use our resources
to the best that we can? If the etherium gold and other products are what
we are looking for, then let truth be known.

Forrest
ffmon@axiom.net