Have you guys ever tried using the scientific method to see if

It doesn't usually get so far as to require experimentation.

Most of this shit is debunked with simple logic and pre-established observations. Or just asking questions, right there in the first step.

File: fedora.webm (3MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x281px

>>18946041
OP dreams of sucking off Bill Nye

>>18946047
If correcting people who are wrong makes them a "plaid knight."

What do you call people who are happy being wrong and living a lie?

>>18946060
Christians.

>>18946060
republicans

Haha this thread.
To answer your question op, the scientific process doesn't really apply to most of it. I don't know own much about the occult so I won't speak for that, but as far as conspiracy theories go.. Construct a hypothesis, OK, conduct an experiment. Um..? I don't know how you would experiment about the Gulf of Tonkin, but lack of evidence is not evidence itself

File: Michael-Maier_Symbola-aurea_e_p5_detail_c_375kb.jpg (77KB, 500x398px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 500x398px

>scientific method

>>18946041
Look into UVAs department of perceptual studies. There is plenty of peer reviewed evidence of psi phenomena, but most people don't like it.

File: IMG_3725.jpg (215KB, 1500x1144px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1500x1144px

>>18946041
Your going to find what you look for, if your of average intelligence. Things aren't this black and white, for anything complex enough to require real thought.

>>18946549
It becomes about proof, even if you accomplish it once, it's never enough. Should be called the ego based approach to discovery.

>>18946041
no but you can always try buttercup

>>18946060
Straight edge

>>18946555
Do you think modern science does this? What do you think is the percentage of peer-reviewed studies that get repeated? Unfortunately I'm off to work so I'll just give you the answer:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/henrymiller/2014/01/08/the-trouble-with-scientific-research-today-a-lot-thats-published-is-junk/#1c827c947674
>After a series of failed attempts to extend basic research findings (from academic labs), two large drug companies, Bayer and Amgen, carefully reviewed their own experience and found that only 25 and 11 percent, respectively, of the claims in the scientific literature could be replicated in a way that was sufficiently robust to be useful as the basis for drug development projects.
>A number of empirical studies show that 80-90% of the claims coming from supposedly scientific studies in major journals fail to replicate.

science doesn't always work when the universe is fundamentally irrational.

>>18946041
I conducted research relating to a popular topic here and posted my findings, but I got shitposted. Pearls before swine.

>>18946041
>scientific method
>requires experimentation and peer reviews of such experiments

you fuckers here on /x/ will deny and use science when its convenient.

>>18946047
People who make images like this are a far bigger threat to a board than people who complain. Fuck you autistic meme-reply making faggots

Nothing OP said was inflammatory and yet look how many trolls and idiots bite the bait anyways

File: eqcover.gif (63KB, 332x472px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 332x472px

>>18946041
>>18946046
>>18946047
Pic related.

>>18946714
I sorta agree with this. On both sides.
Flat Earth fags claim to have valid observations but refuse to do shadow tests.
Hard atheist science fans will tell the Flat Earthers to do a shadow test but flip the fuck out of an occultist asks them to do a religious experiment.

>>18946750
>butthurt plaid knight detected

>>18946633
Replication of an experiment is only called for if the claims of the paper are strange or outlandish or controversial or have a reason to be doubted.

Most scientific papers are over incredibly mundane things, so there's no reason, or desire, to replicate them. That doesn't mean they're wrong.

>>18946754
>do a religious experiment

What the fuck is a religious experiment?

>>18946041
Mate, you should refrain from judging people, if you don't agree with them let them be.(in case they are not harming anyone) Observations, precise data and science are a crucial part of human history/development, but so is spirituality

>>18946754
im pretty sure all scientists would love to do any kind of experiments. Its not about who is right or wrong, its about just knowing more and using it. Thats what science is you dipshits.
Also, its all about money. If no one is funding it, then no one really gives two shits

>>18946763
Replicating that historical rite while annotating variables compared against that historical rite while annotating for variables. That's not even getting into Neurosci, just basic stats.

>>18946786
This just indicates to me that nobody who comes into /omg/ looking for proof but whines when we request them carry out a rite replication is actually a scientist interested in experimentation.

>>18946798
>Replicating that historical rite while annotating variables compared against that historical rite while annotating for variables. That's not even getting into Neurosci, just basic stats.


Wut?

>>18946800
What's hard to understand about using Lemegeton against Grimorium Verum to see which, if any, is more efficacious?

>>18946804
Is that like using Clefairy against Beedrill?

>>18946798
>This just indicates to me that nobody who comes into /omg/ looking for proof but whines when we request them carry out a rite replication is actually a scientist interested in experimentation.

what? It seems like you have a tenuous grasp of the English language or something...

>>18946800

>>18946804
>I smart I use big words.
>Mate, you make no sense and we all know it.
>Maybe calculate intransical variables some time n00b!

Stop name fagging. Leave x. You could argue the op anf defeat him easily but your too busy stroking your not-even-impressive ego.

I did with Astral Projection and Lucid dreaming

I read and researched a lot of material about both so I tried the methods for Astral Projection and eventually they worked, but of course a lot if it didn't or was the same as lucid dreaming techniques. But then the question became "what if I'm just Lucid Dreaming"

I would test different things to see if I was dreaming or projecting and eventually I became able to tell the difference, though they are very similar. I had AP'd with people I knew in the waking world, and then was able to meet up afterwards and exchange details. I also was able to go from a lucid dream into an astral projection.

I was scientific more in the sense that I didnt believe or disbelieve anything until I experienced I had experienced it first hand. I still could be delusional, but I havent seen much evidence to support that.

>>18946821
?

>>18946811
Not really.

>>18946821
How so?

>>18946822
>Stop name fagging. Leave x
Been here for six years.
I'm sorry you think the names of historical grimoires are "big words'.

>>18946041
Scientists usually flat out refuse to do experiments as related to Consciousness because it's entirely subjective. It is how the mind interprets whats going on.

The method requires objectivity and Empirical data. The Paranormal require Subjectivity. As for actual evidence it gets dumped in literally every thread as Eye Witness accounts and footage. Any objective person would truly weigh the evidence and say "Yes, something really really weird is going on." Instead we get shitty responses like this.

TL;DR what things are you talking about? Lots of the stuff talked about here relates to theories in development. You can tie lots of whats discussed here to undercover groups and cabals.

Any person actually invested in knowing anything about this, first looks to the elites connections to the Esoteric of which the connections are many.

>>18946800
>>18946821
I think maybe he's trying to say: "So called 'scientists' are annoying when they show up, ask for proof, are given specific instructions for how to conduct some ritual or another, and then get indignant and refuse to do so. Like bitch niggers, if you don't want to attempt to replicate the experiment you can suck my dick."

>>18946881
>Scientists usually flat out refuse to do experiments as related to Consciousness because it's entirely subjective. It is how the mind interprets whats going on.
But that's wrong.
See:
>Neurotheology
>Shamanism: A Biopsychophysical Paradigm
>Kabbalah: A Neurocognitive Approach to Mystical Experiences
>Kabbalah and Psychoanalysis
>A Felt Sense: More Explorations of Psychoanalysis and Kabbalah
>Making Sense of Things: Archaeology of Sense Perception.
>Memes, Genes, and Human History: Darwinian Archaeology

>>18946881
thats because measurements usually leads to consistent results. If experiments keeps leading to inconsistent results, who is going to keep funding these experiments? They aren't free to do. I bet you even the paranormal people wouldn't fund these experiments due it inconclusive results. Its just a waste of time on both ends.

>>18946714
Stop even suggesting slightly that this is either not meant to or not a use.

File: 1434040101349.jpg (62KB, 665x598px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 665x598px

>>18946897

>>18946883
>Like bitch niggers, if you don't want to attempt to replicate the experiment you can suck my dick."
Sorta, I mostly only have this perspective because I see the same science ""fans"" BEGGING flat earth fucks to do simple experiments but then flat out refuse to do simple mystical experiments when they are given the opportunity to.

This shit's a two way street. If you're gonna ask some FE tard to do some simple sky observations, why get butthurt and indignant when you ask for proof of mystical effects and I offer this or that planetary rite.

I dunno who or what killed the spirit of curiosity among the layfolks, mystical or secular, but it's really annoying as shit.

File: 1484348772068.jpg (718KB, 1071x1068px) Image search: [Google]

718KB, 1071x1068px

>>18946889
That is wrong. If any scientists touches that stuff they are immediately discredited and are no longer "real" scientists. Don't get me wrong, I do believe in the Scientific Method and the Spiritual. The Modern Scientists will usually reject such experiments as nonsense without looking at it.

>>18946907
>I dunno who or what killed the spirit of curiosity among the layfolks, mystical or secular, but it's really annoying as shit.
I feel you on that one man.

>>18946896
see
>>18946889

And I do indeed donate to interesting research if I have the money and opportunity.

>>18946896
That's partly why paranormal experiments are done independently. It's subjective because every neural pattern is different as regards to interpretation of Consciousness and the Greater Universe. It's also cheaper.

As far as consistency goes, as we dig deeper into the hole that is the Microcosm it only makes less and less objective sense. So, I can offhand throw that out the window. I won't though. Consistency is only important for natural events. Studying the paranormal is the study of the Mind/Consciousness as relates to that which is beyond time and the veil of space.

>>18946910
No scientist will dismiss anything. The only time they will dismiss it, is when they aren't getting paid to do it. Its all about money. Who will fund them and pay them to do it, why is it important to them and the rest of the world? Scientists pick and choose what they research into. They aren't going to be stupid enough to do something for free, they need money too.

>>18946910
>If any scientists touches that stuff they are immediately discredited and are no longer "real" scientists.
Then why did I reference you to a number of academic texts on exactly that? Every text I listed did get some pushback, but none were discredited, career nuking, or refused publication from reputable outlets.

>>18946926
Well, consistent results leads to the ability to manipulate. With that, comes money. Being a scientist is a job. It's not a hobby.

>>18946928
>Scientists pick and choose what they research into.
Imagine that, people who dedicate their lives to study one specific facet of [thing] are only interested in one specific facet of [thing].

Amazing.

>>18946931
You gave me 7 texts, of which the research done was surely impressive based on the titles alone. BUT it's a grain of sand in the desert of science.
>>18946928
The worlds greatest minds invented regardless of wealth.

>>18946934
It actually used to be a lifestyle choice and a noble pursuit.

>>18946936
I'm not sure what you are getting at but I said that because they can't just study anything. They need to eat too, they require money. It's not that they are denying anything, they are choosing things that will give them money. Its like picking and choosing a job that will give you the most money.

>>18946949
It can be if you have the money. Do you just go out and do things without worrying about money? Or do you have a job and give up a lifestyle so that you can use the internet to come to /x/?

>>18946943
Sorry I'm not a walking science of mysticism bibliography machine.

I've got editions of Aries (Brill's journal on Magick) in the library, along with fuckloads of ethnography and neurosci of mysticism and religion.

The field is there. It exists. It has a strong academic publishing basis. Just because you're not particularly familiar with it doesn't mean it's not there.

>>18946889
>>Memes
nice
epic
i like it

>>18947182
?
Care to refute the contents of any single one (1) of said texts?

The scientific method isn't even used by all scientists. Biology (Zoology) in particular being one of the most glaring examples.
Similarly, as far as ghosts, spirits, cryptozoology, and xenobiology go, they'd be fields more geared towards observation than experimentation. Conspiracy theories are right out for experimentation, much like History/Archeology. And claims of supernatural powers can have such asinine qualifiers to make duplication of experiments impossible.

>>18946854
>Been here for six years.
I hadn't thought it's been that long. I still remember when you first started tripping, didn't seem that long ago. Christ I'm getting old.

>>18947236
Really the only reason I even started tripping is because Team Illuminati threatened me that if I kept doing it he'd ruin my life.

>>18947222

>zoology
>hypothesis: there are likely undiscovered species somewhere in remotely explored places in the world
>experiment: go look in remote places
>observation: new species discovered
>conclusion: hypothesis was correct

>hypothesis: I believe that organism Y is related to both organisms X and Z
>experiment:map genomes
>observation: genetically X,Y and Z are genetically related and shared a common ancestor very recently in the past
>conclusion: hypothesis was correct

Just because zoologists don't break down their work into bite-size explanations for junior high students to understand, it doesn't mean they don't do science.

>>18946910
If a scientists touches this stuff, they're looked at skeptically, and with good reason.

If they're able to produce reproducible results of any meaning, they'd win a Nobel prize and be the most famous scientist ever.

>>18947245
I only started tripping because I'm a huge faggot (and at the time an attentionwhore teenager), and felt left out of the circlejerks. Now I do it because I feel obligated to swing by /x/ every now and then as a legacy character.
So I take it Team succeeded, I mean you're still here, on 4chan.

File: IMG_3394.jpg (80KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 500x280px

>>18946633
I just think replication is where we fail. Why not use what we've found progressively. I mean, if it's good science, then why spend so much time arguing about who is right? I feel it's time wasted, anymore. Probably exponentially better concepts waiting, when two like minds come together. Drop their respective bullshit.

>>18947252
You guys don't seem to understand how the science of mysticism and religion actually works.

There are multiple academic texts substantiating irrefutably the positive organic and conceptual psychological benefits and phenomenology of the mystical experience, down to identifying mechanisms.

Again, I challenge anyone to undermine and/or refute any of the peer reviewed university published texts on mysticism, religion, and ritual.

>>18947192
The burden on you is to prove they're correct, not to refute them.

>>18947290
The burden of proof is not on me to prove they're correct. That burden was on their academic and university publishers, who deemed them correct and published them.

I'm not making the claim they're correct. Their publishers are.

The burden of proof rests on the claimant. I'm only claiming that scientists work on this without nuking their careers. The very existence of the books validates this claim.

Your claim is that they're "memes" and have yet to offer anything in the way of substantiation.

So, if you can undermine their contents as "memes" rather than science rooted and peer reviewed or academic publications, I'll be lurking.

>>18947280
>You guys don't seem to understand how the science of mysticism and religion actually works.


It doesn't, no.

It's been looked into. It's shit.

>>18947322
Yes, all these academic publications just don't exist or are shit despite getting the stamp of approval from juried journals or universities.

>>18946903
Best guess: "Science and occultism are not mutually exclusive."

>>18947415
I repeat; method of science, aim of religion

https://youtu.be/rjCjwZfyyBM?t=134

>>18946060
transgendered

>>18946041
>have you guys ever tried using the scientific method
yes. but even that is not enough to sway the ignorance of the blind. i even provided video evidence people just claimed it was fake, i explain in terms of forces and the interactions there of, but they claim its all just pseudoscience even with supporting math and proof through existing phenomina

>>18947338
Exactly.

>>18946041
Nope, I come here to fuck with peoples heads and my own to see what I can convince others and myself of, no matter how crazy.

>>18946060
Human

>>18946758
>Replication of an experiment is only called for if the claims of the paper are strange or outlandish or controversial or have a reason to be doubted.
>have a reason to be doubted

>A number of empirical studies show that 80-90% of the claims coming from supposedly scientific studies in major journals fail to replicate.

>Most scientific papers are over incredibly mundane things, so THERE'S NO REASON, or desire, to replicate them.

>A number of empirical studies show that 80-90% of the claims coming from supposedly scientific studies in major journals fail to replicate.

>That doesn't mean they're wrong.

>A number of empirical studies show that 80-90% of the claims coming from supposedly scientific studies in major journals fail to replicate.

So fucking blind.

>>18947263
>I just think replication is where we fail.
So you're advocating that the scientific method NOT repeat experiments to see if results are consistent?

>I mean, if it's good science, then why spend so much time arguing about who is right?
Because experiments that cannot be repeated or whose results cannot be replicated is BAD SCIENCE.

File: 1487455273226.jpg (37KB, 620x400px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 620x400px

>>18946041
Science doesn't real, Op.

>>18947730
Not an argument.

>>18947798
You'll have to be more specific; I'm addressing two different posts there.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

>>18947798
Nothing further to say? Discarded.

File: 16708673_1808812652711988_2286688195197235996_n.jpg (10KB, 430x275px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 430x275px

>not being enlightened

File: 1493269732384.jpg (48KB, 736x481px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 736x481px

>>18946636

>the universe is fundamentally irrational

please elaborate

>>18946041
If someone defends flat earth tier shit, basically there are two possibilities.

1) They are trolling. There's not much you can do, except to shot them at sight.

2) They are believing. Then any reason, argument, proof, scientific fact etc. pp. simply won't reach them. It's a lost cause. Even if they had the chance to see for themselves, they won't take it, because it could endanger their deeply engrained believes.

They won't buy a telescope and learn some basic math. They won't travel to Antarctica, to be the first one who took some photos of the guard towers and down the edge.

It's easier and more comfortable to believe than to prove.

>>18948177
Not him, but this (humorous) vid is about as close to a logical argument for this as you can get.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVGAxMo-kiw

Prove to me that science exists, smart boy.

>>18946041
this "does science count???" bs doesn't belong in /x/ fuck off

>>18946060
Leftists.

>>18948340
post some ghosts
or get off /x/
and go back to /pol/

>>18948344
Found the leftist.

>>18948177
mckenna was a good map, aye?

>>18948348
i just want my spooks. what are you trying to prove?

>>18948355
That everything you believe is based on your inability to handle the truth.

>>18948359
what do i believe?

>>18948361
Probably that real communism has never been tried, or something.

>>18948363
holy shit. ive suddenly realized my whole life is a lie. it took this anon 4chan to make me see it. i guess you've proved me wrong!

>>18948368
Wew. You don't actually believe that, do you? I was just messing around.
Holy shit, guys. This goober thinks communism can work!

File: hev.png (537KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

537KB, 600x900px

>>18946066

>>18946041

I always found the scientific method strange when I learned it. To me it just seemed obvious steps you would take to learn about the world around you. They are steps we all do naturally. We use the scientific method, for instance, when trying to find out what's wrong with our car

>>18948509
>we all do naturally
Anon... the subset of people who instinctually employ the scientific method is preciously small.

>>18946047
>being butthurt someone debunked your alien rape fantasy

>>18946549
>Black and white
It is though.
The evidence supports or it doesn't.

>>18946636
Ok. It's a concept made by humans and a method so it does exist literally because I can show a definition or define it myself.

>>18946046
>I dismiss this without looking at it, with my superior knowledge given by my indoctrination officers.

>>18949971
More like

>I dismiss this after looking at it, because it's so stupid nobody should have believed it in the first place

>>18949971
>Guise there is totally a succubus in my room
>N-No WAIT LISTEN TO ME