• Complain

Marden Kathleen - Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible

Here you can read online Marden Kathleen - Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. City: Pompton Plains;NJ, year: 2010, publisher: Career Press;New Page Books, genre: Art. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

No cover
  • Book:
    Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible
  • Author:
  • Publisher:
    Career Press;New Page Books
  • Genre:
  • Year:
    2010
  • City:
    Pompton Plains;NJ
  • Rating:
    5 / 5
  • Favourites:
    Add to favourites
  • Your mark:
    • 100
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5

Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

Two months before the Wright brothers historic flight at Kitty Hawk, a top scientist declared that no possible combination of known substances, known forces of machinery and known forms of force can be united in a practical [flying] machine... Germ theory was first advanced in ancient Sanskrit texts thousands of years ago, but wasnt widely accepted until late in the 19th century. Space travel was declared utter bilge in 1956 by the British astronomer Royal, one of a long line of scientists who proved it was impossible.

Throughout history, it has been difficult, even impossible, to promote the acceptance of new discoveries. Yet during the last two centuries, there has been a veritable explosion of new cures, theories, techniques, and inventions that have revolutionized aviation, space travel, communications, medicine, and warfare. Most of them, of course, were deemed impossible. Science Was Wrong is a fascinating collection of stories about the pioneers who created...

Marden Kathleen: author's other books


Who wrote Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Table of Contents Praise for Science Was Wrong Stanton Friedman and - photo 1

Table of Contents

Praise for Science Was Wrong
Stanton Friedman and Kathleen Marden, nuclear physicist and
educator, have collaborated to show how often evolving scientific dogmas
have been wrong and data that contradicted those dogmas was
deliberately ignored. Science has been wrong about Jupiter, smallpox,
medicines, food contaminationsand is wrong in its dismissal of the
UFO phenomena that the authors show in Chapter 13 is a government-controlled
policy of denial to make lies official truths.
Linda Moulton Howe, Emmy Award-winning
TV producer and investigative journalist

An excellent reference for errors in conventional science fields as
diverse as astronomy, medicine, environmental science, psychic phenomena
and UFOs.
Dr. Bruce Maccabee, retired Navy physicist

Its another hit for Friedman and Marden! The duo focuses their
attention on outrageous scientific proclamations of the last 150 years,
while highlighting potential knowledge breakthroughs Science refuses
to consider and shunts asideto the collective detriment of humanity.
Rob Swiatek, physicist, UFO researcher

This book is dedicated to our loving spouses Marilyn and Charles We wish to - photo 2

This book is dedicated to our loving spouses, Marilyn and Charles.
We wish to acknowledge the brilliant people who have voiced misguided proclamations of impossibility. Without them, this book would not have been possible.
Special thanks to Catherine Marden for her proofreading assistance and suggestions throughout the writing process and to Rob Belyea for preparing our photos for publication.
To our literary agent, John White, for successfully pursuing a publisher for our books.
To our editors at New Page Books, Kirsten Dalley and Diana Ghazzawi, for their expert assistance in this books production.
And finally, to the individuals, too numerous to mention, who contributed to the successful completion of Science Was Wrong by providing expert opinions, releases, comments, and conference space. Your assistance is very much appreciated.
Introduction
The history of science and technology is rife with authoritative claims by reputable scientists that have impeded progress. Many of the claims seem humorous with the benefits of hindsight. There have also been a number of compilations of silly claims of impossibility made by smart people. But no book, until now, goes into the serious implications for society of blindly rejecting new scientific discoveries simply because they fail to conform to the preconceived paradigms of the scientific establishment. This book critically examines historical proclamations of impossibility in the areas of aerospace, technology, medicine, and politics that were later refuted, and investigates the frontiers of science.
The history of aerospace technology is loaded with well-connected scientists who resisted change. There were prominent experts who thought flight was not to be. Had they been supportive of progress in this field, there could have been real benefits to humanity. Could World War II have ended sooner if jet engines had been implemented earlier in England, where a patent had been granted in 1930? How many lives would have been saved if space travel had been pursued sooner, providing better advance information about natural disasters, such as tornadoes and hurricanes, and early warning of attacks from enemies?
Communication techniques didnt start changing until less than 200 years ago. The telegraph, telephone, television, Internet, and cell phone were all targets for the impossibilists. Sometimes it required true persistence to overcome the inertia of these traditionalists. Why would one want to sit in front of a box watching pictures? Of what use is a telephone if there is nobody to call? Their lack of imagination and foresight is obvious. Did they not think of the benefits of rapid, long-distance communication in medical situations or when ships at sea run into serious problems? Can we allow societal regulations to be established in response to pressures from people with a vested interest in continuing the status quo?
Germ theory was first advanced in ancient Sanskrit texts and later proposed in 36 BC. Despite observational and experimental data, it was not widely accepted until late in the 19th century, when Louis Pasteur discovered that microorganisms, not miasmas (the poisonous atmosphere arising from swamps and putrid matter), cause disease. Unfortunately, his discovery was not immediately accepted. Many influential opponents from the scientific establishment clung to their archaic beliefs and were slow to acknowledge that his germ theory of disease was valid. Attempts by his predecessors to impart evidence of the transmission of microscopic organisms as a cause of disease were largely unsuccessful. As a result, careers were ruined, and many people died because of a failure to implement new treatments and new understanding of various diseases. Even in our day, experts have often dismissed the dangers of new treatments long after the data was available. How many contracted HIV/AIDS because of the failure of governments to take appropriate measures? It is clear that innovative scientists have a long history of facing harsh rebukes by the medical establishment.
Worse, highly regarded but politically influenced scientists have promoted ideas that have led to human suffering. For example, social Darwinism fueled the Eugenics Movements in America and Germany and led to sterilization and extermination programs. The dark underbelly of corruption has reared its head in environmental science, causing thousands to die or be maimed due to methylmercury poisoning. Additionally, we are faced with environmental concerns about global warming. Should hundreds of billions of dollars be spent to attack evil carbon dioxide, or is this another example of vested interests triumphing over the real needs of society?
This book explores the frontiers of science, such as psychic phenomena and extraterrestrial visitation. A small group of vocal arch-skeptics claims a hundred years of research has failed to produce convincing evidence for psi phenomena. Parapsychologists disagree, arguing that hundreds of scientific studies have produced evidence that some psi phenomena are real. Each group accuses the other of confirmation bias. But what is the truth? Do parapsychologists selectively report evidence that supports psi phenomena? Or do arch-skeptics automatically reject statistically significant experimental replications?
For more than 60 years, strong attacks have been made on all aspects of the UFO question. Impossibilists have claimed that travel from other stars is impossible, there is no evidence for flying saucer reality, aliens could not possibly look humanoid, governments could not cover up the truth, aliens wouldnt behave the way they are supposedly observed to behave, eyewitness testimony is not part of the scientific method, there is no reason to abduct Earthlings, and so on. These claims are not derived from a serious review of the evidence, but rather are created by armchair theorizing without relation to the vast amount of evidence available for those who seek it out. False attempts have been made to show that Occams razor supposedly rules out saucer reality, and that scientists in generaland astronomers in particulardo not observe UFOs. It turns out that the primary attacks on UFO reality by supposed professionals can generally be described as pseudoscientific. The attackers have inordinate confidence in themselves plus an almost religious faith in their feelings, intuition, and hunches. They simply dont need to investigate because they know the answers. That is not science, but pseudoscience.
Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible»

Look at similar books to Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible»

Discussion, reviews of the book Science was wrong: startling truths about cures, theories, and inventions they declared impossible and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.