Page Content (OCR)
personal or pathological reasons to do so. Our knowledge of neuro- physiology, neurobiology and sociobiology must be updated so we can learn how to validate human testimonies. Someone whose neuronal outline differs too much from the one he is offered will reject it, often violently and regardless of the nature of the evidence...so one single question remains: how much truth can we take?” This verbal violence often translates in lawsuits against the witness. Many censors fall into this fear trap because of what Jean-Pierre Petit” called the ‘immunolog- ical reflex’. Similar to relations between bacteria and cells in nature, social groups reject ideological aggressions (new ideas) that may lead to change. This highly unstable homeostasis resembles a protection of the social group. Curiously, since 1973 the poll of the American survey research institute Gallup observed a priori no significant differences between those who have and who have not seen UFOs “in terms of profession, religion, political attitudes and educational level.’’* Considering the intrinsic frailty of our scientific research methods, compared to the scope and complexity of reality, and of testimonies, what is left? Statistics! In my opinion, statistics inspire us most to ask questions. A phenomenon is true up to a certain percentage of values. This “small” percentage goes up as other variables are introduced in the “mechanics” of a phenomenon. It is the core of the science of com- plexity. The life of the simplest in its most complex state. What do we really know about the final levels? Would they not equal the parame- ters of cosmic consciousness? We see that complexity increases just like the freedom to do and evolve. In other words, the more freedom a crea- ture possesses, the less it is confined and the more the “small” percent- age of uncertainty goes up. Far from stating the obvious, it so happens that the synchronicity of phenomena is directly related to the “intent” discussed earlier — as demonstrated in experiments’ — because the prevalence of the intent grows just like the scientific uncertainty. This detour via the basics should clarify a great deal of information. 3D Time solves the dilemma of the probabilistic nature of events. Coincidence is essentially a spatio-temporal scale problem in the framework of absolute relativity, i.e., “the more there is space, the less there is time, and conversely.” Coincidence is the translation of the place of time in phenomenology. Time dominates the microscopic world. In the macroscopic world space is the authority. The chair we sit on remains stable and keeps us from having a painful encounter with the floor because the influence of chance is very weak on our macro- scopic scale. It is even weaker on the galactic scale. That is why stars Time versus materialism 55