View single post by Les Harris
 Posted: Jun 22nd, 2010 12:48 AM
PM Quote Reply Full Topic
Les Harris

 

Joined: Feb 7th, 2010
Location:  
Posts: 14
Status: 
Offline
 I am an engineer who worked in R&D for a long time. Conversations with all sorts of people show me that the entire concept of science is only dimly recognized. Scientific principles do not burst upon the world fully formed and to the accepatnce of cheering multitudes. The path to reaching concensus that a hypothesis might be tenable is always littered with many hypotheses that are eventually found to be untenable.
Along the path of progressive refinement, one not infrequently has to employ a balance of probabilities. If one had to wait for absolute proof of every mortal aspect, much engineering developent would stop in its tracks, never to proceed.
This field is now widely researched and much objective material is available for public scrutiny. The significant public record began with the Pye studios research around 1972, of which the top Pye engineers declared that there was no known explanation for what they experienced.
Since that time, the public record has grown almost exponentially.
We are now in a era in which a number of leading thinkers in quantum mechanics are saying that the only way to understand recent observations of particle behaviour is that there must be parallel realities. They are saying that the four dimensions that we can see around us are only part of many that we can't see - yet. These aren't pot-heads, these people are world respected physicists.
I could go on for pages but the message is that serious thinkers are taking a long hard look at concepts that would have been considered crackpot just a decade ago.
I suggest that you don't dismiss this field of research until you have read all of the available literature. Put aside about three months full time because that's what you will need.
Les Harris