Page Content (OCR)
theory, the history of mankind might have turned out differently. This significant example is far from being an exception. It is a rule. The media are trying very hard to turn this into a law. Today this applies to the Big Bang theory. In the same way, the superstrings of the allegedly unitary M (Mother) theory do not even seem to exist. One of the most important promoters of superstrings, Nima Arkani-Hamed, said: “‘it is certain that all we do is consider a concept as mathematical. Up until now, it has just proven a wonderful dream.” It is easy to understand that this law — the power of promotion — is not the truth, just like the Keynesian economic model is not the truth, but an excuse used by the rich who sustain it. This model promotes the principle of scarcity of a good or service; hence the existence of “regulating” mechanisms antic- ipating and even creating this scarcity. If we changed this scarcity into abundance, the model would immediately disintegrate. We need to acknowledge that scientific rigor is banished more often than it should. As I quoted before, “the fact that so many people are wrong does not mean they are right.”’ Indeed, credit and discredit are often the prod- ucts of propaganda. “Against experience, what good are all the rea- sons?” asked Jessica Riskin in La Recherche. Perhaps to understand the conditions of the experience before drawing preformatted conclusions. It is reassuring to read from this Stanford history professor that “gen- eral truths are founded in particular facts, not because of the facts’ places in general theories, but on the contrary, because of their irre- ducible particularity. The facts are factual since they are not dependent on theories. Therefore, they do not require expertise and are accessible to anyone with common sense.” At the risk of this common sense being disturbed, I should add. A fact, permanent or otherwise, suggests the presence of eyewitness accounts, collective or otherwise. This covers the entire matter of the supernatural. There are numerous examples in the history of science suggesting that proof is fragile. This vulnerability is inherent in the complexity of reality, of its approximations, its exceptions and above all of the condi- tions in which the facts take place. We can therefore just as easily trans- late this discipline of the analysis of proof and apply it to telepathy, clairvoyance, remote viewing, poltergeists, precognition and telekine- sis, which would gain official recognition if a minimum of intellectual honesty remained in the minds of rebellious scientists. The purpose of proof may not be as transparent as it seems. There are countless examples in the history of science where the person pro- ducing a fact is not asked to prove its existence, but on the contrary, its non-existence. Neurogenesis, for example, is a caricature in this 90 The Science of Extraterrestrials: UFOs Explained at Last ° Eric Julien