[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Misc]
[Home]>[The Man-Made Church]>[73. The so-called scientists]
Previous webpage: 72. Next webpage: 74.
This is the 73. Chapter of "The Man-Made Church"
by Frank L. Preuss
The above picture has the title "C Der Temperatur- und Druckverlauf in der Chromosphäre und Korona" (C Temperature and pressure course in the chromosphere and corona) and comes from page 110 of the book "dtv-Atlas zur Astronomie, Tafeln und Texte, Mit Sternatlas" (dtv atlas to astronomy, tables and texts, with star atlas) by Joachim Herrmann, 1973.
On the left side it says "Abstand vom Sonnenmittelpunkt in 1000 km" (Distance from sun centre in 1000 km) and on the right side it says "Abstand vom Sonnenmittelpunkt in Sonnenradien" (Distance from sun centre in sun radiuses).
At the top "Temperatur," temperature is given in oK and at the bottom "Dichte," density in g/cm3.
In the corner at the top to the right the red temperature line starts and it goes through the "Korona," corona, and the "Chromosphäre," chromosphere, and ends at the bottom to the left, but then has an unnatural keen sharp bend, and suddenly reverses direction, to the right, and then proceeds to the right, weakly lowered down, and shortly afterwards ends in an arrow.
The temperature scale is a logarithmic scale, and it makes it possible to present a very large difference in temperature. The high temperature at the very right on top is 1 million oK and at the left at the bottom the temperature is only a few thousand degrees.
The natural course of this temperature line would therefore carry on showing smaller temperatures, the further the line runs from the surface of the sun, the "Photosphäre," photosphere, downwards and penetrates into the interior of the sun.
The upper part of the surface of the sun is described as "Wasserstoff-Konvektionszone," hydrogen convection zone.
That this temperature line ends at the bottom, but then has an unnatural keen sharp bend, and proceeds to the right, suddenly reverses direction, to then goes to the right, weakly lowered down, and shortly afterwards ends in an arrow, very nicely shows the problem scientists have.
The direction of the arrow shows that, according to their opinion, the temperature at the surface of the sun should be very high, since it, the high temperature, is produced by the interior of the sun.
The line is therefore broken off and the arrow is the sign of their dilemma, which shows that they do not know what is going on.
Following I now bring extracts from an article which give information, why our so-called scientists have a problem.
The article has the heading "Sonne," Sun, and comes from "Encarta 99 Enzyklopädie, 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation."
1814 Joseph von Fraunhofer investigated the sun radiation with the help of the spectroscope. The spectrum of the sun light had already 1666 been the object of research of the English mathematician and physicist Isaac Newton. But only the exactness of Fraunhofer’s work made the first beginnings of the explanation of the atmosphere of the sun possible.
A part of the radiation emitted by the visible sun surface (the photosphere) is absorbed through gas, which is directly above it and is somewhat cooler. But with that only certain wavelengths are absorbed, according to which elements are present in the sun atmosphere. 1859 Gustav Kirchhoff discovered that some black lines (missing wavelengths) in the Fraunhofer sun spectrum are to be attributed to the absorption of radiation through the atoms of certain elements. As a result it was recognized that certain information about heavenly bodies can be derived from the properties of the light emitted by them. That was the hour of birth of astrophysics.
The development of the spectroheliograph contributed to the advances of sun physics, with which the sun surface can be taken photographically in a chosen narrow spectrum area. The coronagraph allows the investigation of the sun corona. With the magnetograph, 1948 invented by the astronomer Horace W. Babcock, the magnet field strength over the sun surface is measured. The development of rockets and satellites makes it possible to investigate radiations out of the orbits around the earth, which are absorbed as a result of their wavelengths in the earth atmosphere, therefore do not reach the observation on the earth surface. To the instruments used in space today belong coronagraphs, telescope and spectrographs, which work in the areas of ultraviolet radiation and X ray radiation.
This is now a nice description of the origin of astrophysics and there it is also described how and with what means the results were observed.
Then immediately after that follows a nice description that the energy of the sun is apparently produced in its interior. Only that now, in contrast to the preceding explanation, it is not described how and by which means the results were obtained.
The so-called scientists have imagined something there and have tinkered with something with good words and particularly much theory and with the use of the newly discovered knowledge about nuclear processes, what perhaps can be called the Sun’s energy-producing fusion reactions.
And these energy-producing fusion reactions of the sun have now become that what widely determines astrophysics. From the beginning they were just an idea and nothing else and it also crumbles more and more, but to admit the senselessness, would dedicate decade long theorizing to the wastepaper basket.
The article therefore brings no evidence for this idea.
Somewhere further on, the article then brings something about the corona:
The corona is the outer sun atmosphere, which stretches some sun radii far into space. All its characteristics are fundamentally determined by the magnetic field. The largest part of the corona contains gigantic gas arches. With it are smaller arches in the active regions and larger between them.
In the forties it was established that the corona is much hotter than the photosphere. The photosphere (the visible surface of the sun) has a temperature of almost 6 000 Kelvin. In the chromosphere, which stretches some thousands kilometre above the photosphere, the temperature is just under 30 000 Kelvin and rises in its upper edges even to above 100 000 Kelvin. In the corona however, which stretches far into space from the upper edge of the chromosphere, is a temperature of several million Kelvin. For the maintenance of this high temperature, energy has to be supplied to the corona.
To explain the mechanism of this energy supply is one of the classic problems of astrophysics. It could not be solved up to now, but only many possibilities were considered. In the youngest time observations with the help of space probes resulted in, that the corona represents a collection of magnetic loops. How these are heated up, still needs clarification.
Then follows a section about sun wind, and in there exists this paragraph:
In January 1998 scientists of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory (England) published the discovery of a new sun activity. With the help of a spectrometer on board of the satellite SOHO the researchers observed short bright light lightning, which covers the whole surface of the sun. To all appearances a connection exists between these lightning and the rhythm, with which the activity of the sun increases and decreases. The scientists expect from the closer research of this phenomenon amongst other things an explanation for the forming of the sun wind or why the outer sun atmosphere is several million degrees hot, while the surface temperature is about 5 500 oC.
They observed short bright light lightning, which covers the whole surface of the sun. To all appearances there exists a connection between this lightning – and then comes the wrong conclusion for this lightning and after that comes the right one. And the right conclusion is that it is this lightning which causes the outer sun atmosphere to be several million degrees hot, while the surface temperature is about 5 500 oC.
It is this lightening where the heat is coming from. It does not come from the interior of the sun, but from this lightning.
So the scientists know where the heat of the sun comes from.
It is known and published, but their claim that the energy of the sun comes from the interior of the sun, they have already supported for so long, that they now believe it, and are no longer able to free themselves from it.
What an embarrassing matter for the whole of astrophysics. The whole pride of their branch - the Sun’s energy-producing fusion reactions - has proved to be a great illusion and so also all assumptions based on it.
And this assumption of theirs influences many fields of astrophysics, almost all of them. It causes them to assume that cosmic radiation comes from celestial bodies and they are desperate to prove that this is really so, but all their efforts, like for example the IceCube detector experiment inside the ice of the Antarctic, just prove the opposite, cosmic radiaton does not come from stars or gamma ray bursts.
There is hardly a field of science that is more misleading and fuller of misconceptions than the field of astrophysics.
Here comes a description how it is this lightning, which produces the sun light. It is not only 20 years old, but more than 150 years old.
A statement follows, which was dictated to Jakob Lorber, and he wrote it down in his work "The great Gospel of John," 02.08.1851-19.07.1864, in Volume 10 and there in chapter 159, verse 6:
06] But the Sun is actually no fire, but that what you see as light is the radiation of its atmospheric surface, which is caused by the revolution of the sun itself again around its own axis und even more so by its extraordinary fast move around a middle sun, which is still much further away from it. Through such movements of the Sun in the wide ether space an extraordinary great electric effect is achieved on its atmospheric surface, and its light gleam is therefore in a very heightened degree (the same) as it is the shine of your lightning, only with the difference that the extraordinary development of the lightning on the air surface of the Sun is an uninterrupted one, while the lightning on this Earth only develops here and there through greater friction of the air parts in a very little degree and that is why it always only shines an extremely short time.
Here we therefore have the description. The energy of the sun is not produced in its inner core, but by this lightning, quite at the outside of the atmosphere.
And this description exists already for more than one and a half centuries.
And our scientists, our so-called scientists, do not know this knowledge.
It is not known to them. They do not have this knowledge. They call themselves the knowing ones, but do not know anything of that what is known as knowledge.
A real scientist does not limit his knowledge to one branch of life, but includes all branches of knowledge when he pursues research.
But our so-called scientists are members of that group of people, who do not pursue science, but in reality belong to that group of people, whose whole life is based on religious, wrong religious, activity, who indulge in materialism. They are worldly. And so are also all the members of other religious communities, as the so-called Christian communities, denominations, worldly minded people, who pretend to be Christians, but live a completely worldly life.
These so-called scientists behave exactly the same way as religious fanatics, who belong to a denomination, a sect, and who are not allowed to read that what is on the Index, what is prohibited, and when they read it, then they get excommunicated and expelled and chucked out of their church and their church is exactly that community, which is led and dominated by atheists, and who then make the decision that such an excommunicated one gets no job anymore, his works are no longer published, he loses the basis for his living.
They are simply sectarians, religionists.
And now we still want to have a look at some extracts from another article. The article has the title "Stern," Star, and also comes from "Encarta 99 Enzyklopädie, 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation."
First the first two sentences from this article:
Star, large heavenly body, which is made of gases, which are kept together through gravitation. On the basis of nuclear reactions in its interior a star sends out light and other electromagnetic radiation.
Right at the beginning their main idea of a star is therefore here also repeated: The light of a star comes from nuclear reactions in its interior. What is important for such so-called scientists, is their religious conviction. That it is what they want to propagate. They have no proof, but that does not matter.
Then comes in the course of descriptions this sentence:
The inner build-up of the sun and of the other stars cannot be observed directly.
They have no access to information, but that does not matter, their ideas replace that.
And then still one sentence:
Also dwarf stars have been discovered, which are too small that nuclear reactions go off in them.
So there are therefore stars, in which no nuclear reaction can go off, which therefore can produce no energy in their interior, and they are still stars. This fact alone should already be enough to give up their idea of nuclear reactions.
Now a quote from "Star, Physical Description" from "Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia Standard 2006:"
The internal structure of the Sun and other stars cannot be directly observed, but studies indicate convection currents and density and temperature that increase until the core is reached, where thermonuclear reactions take place.
So they keep up their ideas, they call it studies, and that knowledge, which explains to them, how something really works, that they do not have and is unknown to them und is also not sought.
The light now, which comes to us from stars, that comes from our sun, that they call visible light.
And the proofs for it, that light is visible, are their claims, which they repeat all the time, that light is visible.
When one looks up information about electromagnetic radiation, then there is often a diagram of the electromagnetic spectrum and there is that tiny area of that, what they call visible light.
Now follows an example of such diagram of the electromagnetic spectrum and also this their claim that light is visible:
Figure 1: Electromagnetic spectrum. The small visible range (shaded) is shown enlarged at the right.
This picture shows three vertical scales.
All three are actually endless and can be continued upwards and downwards.
All three, frequency v (in hertz), wavelength λ (in centimetres), and photon energy hv (in electron volts), show a uniformity and that means that the waves have in principle the same properties over the whole area, including the so-called visible light.
And all of these electromagnetic waves are not perceptible for the bodily senses of man, also not for the eye, also not the narrow so-called visible bandwidth.
The proof for it, that light is not visible, needs no effort; one just has to remember that when one looks up at night with a clear sky, everything, excluding the moon and the planets and the stars, is black.
The whole space in the solar system is illuminated by the light of the sun, is therefore filled with light, and it is still black.
Ligth is not visible.
This is a simple observation that one can only be surprised, that scientist, so-called scientists, declare it to be visible:
It is such a simple observation, like one can observe that the theory of evolution of Darwin is just nonsense, because one knows from experience that something like a thing between a monkey and a man does not exist and that therefore the development of monkey to man does not exist and has never existed.
A schoolboy, whom one wants to serve up with the theory of evolution of Darwin, makes this simple consideration and rejects such teaching and classifies it as one of such things, which grown-ups tell him and which are exactly as stupid, as several others.
And this schoolboy also immediately senses that the sole purpose of this theory is to discredit God and his word.
Exactly the same way, every schoolboy can think over the thing with the so-called visible light and also file it away as nonsense.
But our so-called scientists tell us, light is visible. And the proof for it is the fact that they repeat it again and again, and since they already do this for decades, it is therefore proven.
And then there is still another proof for it, that light is visible. And that is the following picture, it comes from page 10 of the book "Knowledge through color – Stars, planets and galaxies" by Sune Engelbrektson, 1975:
On this picture one can very clearly see that light is visible.
It is not so that Newton’s room is full of dust and of cigar smog and that the light now hits these dust and smog molecules and makes them visible.
It is the power of imagination of the representing artist. He is so convinced by the claims of the so-called scientists, repeated again and again, that his highly talented artistic portray ability has no problems to also make this convincingly clear to the observer.
When one presents the shades of grey a little lighter, then light becomes immediately visible.
And our scientists see this picture and have the proof that light is visible. One can see it quite clearly. The proof is there.
Now follow four extracts from spiritual works, which tell us that light is not visible. This knowledge that light is not visible, is an old story, but for our scientists it does not exist:
Die Erde (The Earth), 1846-1847
11] Spirit is therefore equal to light, which indeed in itself remains light for ever, but as light cannot appear so long observable, as long as there are no objects, which it illuminates.
12] Light comes, as you for example can see also already with the Sun, continuously regularly from it; but without object no eye can notice its existence. A moonless night has equally much light from the Sun as a moon-bright one; but in the first case light has got no object up there in the high ether, and that is why no-one notices that it exists. But if the Moon stands as an efficient body at night in the high ether, there the out coming sunlight is immediately very mightily perceived, and everyone who is somewhat familiar with star tidings will easily notice how and from where the Moon is shone upon.
Licht der Sonne. Wechselwirkung (Light of the sun. Interaction), 30. May 1948
B.D. NR. 4318
So the positive and the negative powers produce life continuously; their fight is visible through the light of the Sun, but it is no earthly explainable fire power, which produces the exceptional radiation, but the light of the Sun is actually only visible in the region of Earth, when it touches the earthly material sphere, as well as the spheres of those celestial bodies, which are in the region of the Sun and are fed with its illuminating power.
A P Shepherd
Rudolf Steiner - Scientist of the Invisible, 1954
Meanwhile his scientific studies presented him with a new line of approach to his problem. We have already referred to his attitude to the wave-theory of light. A deeper study of the science of optics now led him to a conclusion contrary to the teaching of recognised science, viz. that though light is a reality which plays an overwhelming part in the phenomena of the physical world, yet it is itself not perceivable by the senses. It manifests itself on physical objects in the appearance of colours, but it is itself invisible. It appears therefore to be an object of a "sensible-supersensible" kind. It stands between ordinary sense-perceptible objects and supersensible reality, manifesting itself in its relation to the physical, but itself unperceivable by the physical senses.
When he spoke of this to Professor Schröer, the latter pointed out to him the similarity between his ideas and Goethe's theory of colour, in which Goethe had disputed the generally-accepted theory of Newton.
Unsichtbare Welten - Gemeinsames in Natur- und Geisteswissenschaft (Invisible worlds - Mutual things in natural and spirit science), 1997
At night, with complete darkness, we do not see the things of the outer world, even when they stand close before our eyes. The material world, taken by itself, is invisible. To recognize it, light is needed. But also light itself, as paradoxical as it may also sound, is invisible. We never see the light itself with material eyes. The whole universe, the night sky, is filled by light, and still it appears to us, apart from the shining stars, completely dark, almost black. We do not see the light, but always only shining or illuminated things.
We do not see the light, but always only shining or illuminated things. We see the light source and the objects, which are illuminated by such a light source.
Now follows an extract from the article "university" from the "Encyclopaedia Britannica," 2007:
The modern university evolved from the medieval schools known as studia generalia (singular, studium generale); they were generally recognized places of study open to students from all parts of Europe. The earliest studia arose out of efforts to educate clerks and monks beyond the level of the cathedral and monastic schools. The inclusion of scholars from foreign countries constituted the primary difference between the studia and the schools from which they grew.
The university is an invention of Orthodoxy, of the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church was established directly by Antichrist as a counter movement against the real church of Christ, we have discussed this in various previous chapters of this book "The Man-Made Church."
Now the main aim of Orthodoxy, of the Catholic Church, was right from the beginning to be against everything that is of a spiritual, of a prophetic nature.
This theology is best described with three words: God is dead.
So our sciences as they are dealt with in our universities are direct outflows of this theology, a theology that has the fight against God as its aim.
We have again and again said that a scientist, a so-called scientist, is just a religious person as a member of a denomination is.
They all, the religious as well as the scientific guys, have one ideology in common and that is worldliness and materialism and anti-spirituality and anti-prophecy.
What are other things they have in common?
They want to be important people. They want to be first. They want to dominate the meetings, the worship service, the lecture, stand in front as pastor, as lecturer.
They want titles, that is a very important issue.
They want to be paid. A Christian who goes into "full time ministry" becomes carnal the moment he does so, and with a scientist it is not much different. Albert Einstein was employed, but probably not as a scientist doing scientific research, but did the development of his famous theories after hours, sitting at the kitchen table, and when he got the position of a professor, then he lost his spirituality and became carnal. Albert Einstein had a job as examiner from 1902 to 1907 in the Swiss patent office in Bern. 1905 he published his work for which he received the 1921 Nobel Prize.
They want to have organizations that they can control and where they can be the boss and where they can get worshipped, like churches and theological seminaries and bible schools and the scientists want educational facilities like schools of all kind, and colleges and universities.
And now something very dear to them and that are robes. A priestly robe accompanied by, if possible, some head gear and a ring and a shepherd’s crook and with the scientists it is exactly the same, the graduation ceremonies and pictures of them in their robe are very nice and important to them and all around them. I knew a professor who came to me and told me how many honorary professor titles he had and later I met a person who did his doctorate in his institution and he told me that this professor had a huge wardrobe in his office housing all the honorary robes he had received.
The most outstanding similarity and equality between a man of religion and a man of science can be found at university. There is basically no difference between a professor of theology and one of science. A professor of theology is actually a receiver of a scientific title of a scientific institution. And so is a professor of science a receiver of a religious title and a religious institution, because, as we have seen above, the whole background of scientific universities is that of religion, of Orthodoxy, of the Catholic Church.
So what is the common denominator of the religious guys and the scientific guys?
They are against everything spiritual and against everything prophetic.
And that is best expressed in the Index. Both have basically the same works on their Index, the same works that are scorned by them, works of spiritual nature and works coming from prophets: The works of Jakob Lorber and Bertha Dudde.
In connection with the atomic bomb there are now three interesting scientists.
There is Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, the son of Ernst von Weizsäcker. He, Ernst, was the inventor of the Second World War or of the Hitler Stalin Pact or of the Ribbentrop Molotov Pact and because of that became SS brigade leader and belonged to the personal staff of Himmler. His son, Carl Friedrich, made an effort to obtain a patent, which dealt with the building of the atomic bomb and tried to sell the atomic bomb to Hitler. The patent application was found in Moscow in the 1990th. He was a member of Hitler’s uranium club.
Then there was Albert Einstein. Upon his initiative the first atomic bombs were built
And then there was Hans Albrecht Bethe. During the Second World War he worked at the Manhatten Project and helped to develop the atomic bomb. During World War II, he was head of the Theoretical Division at the secret Los Alamos laboratory which developed the first atomic bombs.
There exists the Bethe Weizsäcker Cycle; it is the description of a series of alleged atom nucleus transformation processes in the sun and in other stars. Stars allegedly change hydrogen in helium under energy emission. And Bethe and Weizsäcker have allegedly discovered this. Or the nuclear process was "found" by them or "postulated" as it is also said. Or it is said that the cycle probably presents the main energy sources in the interior of mass rich stars. This comes already a little closer to truth, but most of the descriptions of this cycles give no indication that they are just an idea, but describe them so as if they are scientific facts.
Here a nice example: "Today we know that the energies of a star radiated outwards are released in its interior through fusing of atom nuclei."
And another one: "Today it is known better: In the sun a controlled nuclear fusion of hydrogen to helium takes place. With 107 Kelvin four hydrogen atoms fuse to one helium nucleus. In addition 2 positrons and 2 neutrinos are formed on that occasion."
There we also have immediately the "knowledge" where neutrinos come from.
As I’ve said, the astrophysicists, the majority of them, seem to be figures out of the world of fairy tale, full of magnificent fantasies.
Bethe later campaigned with Albert Einstein and the Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists against nuclear testing and the nuclear arms race. So he became one of the useful idiots of Stalin. Just like Einstein. Now the only reason that Bethe and Einstein did not become useful idiots of Hitler was their Jewish background. This was not the case with Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker, he served Hitler fully and immediately after that Stalin. But Bethe and Einstein were for that reason opposed to Hitler and when Hitler came to power they got out of Germany.
Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker was father-in-law of the former General Secretary of the World Council of Churches Konrad Raiser. In 1957, he was one of the Göttinger 18, a group of prominent German physicists who protested against the idea that the Bundeswehr (West German armed forces) should be equipped with tactical nuclear weapons. So he really was a useful idiot of Stalin and promoted the political aims of the Soviet Union. And he was a leader of protestant Christians, the Kirchentag movement; so also there he was a servant of Satan.
So Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker is a nice example of both, he is the religious type and he is also the scientific type, and shows that there is really no difference between them, they both work against everything spiritual and everything prophetic.
So the school of thought of Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker was 1937, when he came out with his idea of "the Sun’s energy-producing fusion reactions," the following SS inspired idea: black uniforms with skull and crossbones.
We want to give another example of the naivety of scientists. Normally when one wants to find out why the sky at night is black they come up with the Olbers’ paradox, but that does not explain why the sky at night is black in the first place.
Olbers’ paradox goes something like this: If the universe is populated by an almost infinite number of stars, any sight line from Earth must end at the (very bright) surface of a star, so the night sky should be completely bright. This contradicts the observed darkness of the night.
So one day I found an explanation why the night sky is black. It comes from the article "Black" in the English Wikipedia. It goes like this:
The nighttime sky seen from earth is black because the part of earth experiencing night is facing away from the sun, the light of the sun is blocked by the earth, and there is no other bright nighttime source of light in the vicinity.
It says that the light of the sun is blocked by the earth. Now that part of the night sky that is blocked by the earth is just that part of the sky that is directly opposite to the sun, but all other space is not blocked at all, for example not the space between the earth and the moon.
Now this explanation of the writer of the article "Black" in the English Wikipedia is actually hardly to be beaten in naïve thinking. But it is definitely not an isolated case, because whenever this subject is discussed, the Olbers’ Paradox is brought up and that alone already shows that our scientists have a problem with the basics, because the Olbers’ Paradox does not explain at all why the night sky is black in principle. But that they do not grasp.
So the solution to a simple problem that cannot be explained is to come up with something highly complicated that can keep the minds of so-called scientists busy and if possible can involve a lot of theory and preferably also a lot of mathematics.
And why do they come with the Olbers’ Paradox? Because they do not know the answer and so they sidestep it to distract themselves and the enquirer.
And why do they not know the answer?
I once asked a man involved in the study of electrical engineering this question, why the night sky is black and he immediately started to give me an answer, but before the first word came out of his mouth, he stopped and walked away. He later came back to me and told me that he will make this subject a subject of an essay. I then told him that light is not visible, but that he did not really hear or wanted to hear.
That is what happens, they think of light filling the whole universe, particularly the light of the sun filling the whole solar system, and then they come to their "knowledge" that light is visible and have immediately the problem that the one thing does not agree with the other. So they shut up.
So that would now be nice that they have a contradiction. But instead of thinking the subject over, it is pushed aside, because it does suit their religious convictions. Truth is not of high priority at all.
In this 73rd Chapter of our book "The Man-Made Church," which we have called "The so-called scientists," we only dealt with one field of science, astrophysics. But in other areas of science it often does not look much different. Just have a look at medicine, there are already in this book "The Man-Made Church" alone several chapters, which deal with the problems the man of medicine have.
And in this field of astrophysics we have dealt with "the Sun’s energy-producing fusion reactions" and secondly with "visible" light, but these are just examples.
There is for example Chapter 64, "The all-embracing field of energy" and there again is one circumstance again one of many, which is caused by this field of energy, and that is that it is used for communication, and that particularly animals use it, and men, with few exceptions, have no awareness of it at all. This alone is something what is completely unknown to our so-called scientists.
This problem of communication is particularly clear with the Seti project, where one thinks, one would have to communicate with beings on other celestial bodies with methods, as they are done by us with our outer, material senses.
And that also brings us immediately to the view that heavenly bodies are only very rarely, perhaps, populated by life.
That all stars and planets are populated, is unimaginable to so-called scientists, because they do not deal with the key problem of science, consciousness, and with the existence of different states of consciousness, and that despite their knowledge of quantum theory, that everything depends on consciousness.
Then they have the idea that all laws of earth are also applicable to other celestial bodies, and therefore also to other states of consciousness. This alone lets most of their assumption, which they assume in astrophysics, appear as pure assumptions.
One of the laws is that of time and space; they simply assume that this law also applies to other heavenly bodies; they can only imagine that it perhaps is not valid with things in other universes.
With the idea of past, presence and future it is similar. Also this they can only imagine to be different in universes, which are different than ours.
But the most important thing of these so-called scientists is of course that they reject the existence of the spiritual side of life. Their fight against God always has priority.
This is the end of "The so-called scientists"
Go to the German version of this chapter: Die sogenannten Wissenschaftler
Previous webpage: 72. Next webpage: 74.
Go to the next part of this website:
Miscellaneous > [My Confessions]
[Home]>[The Man-Made Church]>[73. The so-called scientists]
[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Misc]
The address of this page is: