Skip navigation

Tag Archives: science

to be, or not to believe

that is the answer

maybe science and religion are mixing their metaphors

like a paradox fighting over the same bloody bone

a fervor leaving all but themselves stone cold

tangible mysticism backed up by the masses

tele-vagelistic physicists and law-locked preachers

all pontificating from their own little book

proclaiming laws

apart from each other yet locked together

forever in bondage to their own circular reasoning

running away from each other

yet forever keeping their distance

there is nothing more closed, mind you

than a mind that refuses to be open


the science of religion,

and the religion of science

a passionate hymn

echoing out from both sides of the sanctuary

either way…

and from any direction

the worship of man

…by man

…for man

and all simultaneously,

but at different times

refusing voluminously to plead the 5th amendment

hubble telescope captures 10, 000 galaxies in one amazing shot


in science we rejoice and boast in seeing 1000’s of other universes, yet we are destroying our very own planet under our feet… we know so many things yet we continue to plummet ever further into chaos…

in religion we have 1000’s of theologies and spiritual orders,  yet by the millions our very own people are dying, slaughtered, starving, dehumanized, rejected, crushed under our own feet… we are so divinely spiritual, yet we act like inanimate, soulless machines…


are science and religion twin, deformed siblings?

We know the mega-Earth is out there – and its massive | Science | The Guardian.

scientific community admits its 1st real “imaginary friend”

‘we know the ‘mega-Earth’ is out there – and it’s massive’

… no one’s actually “seen it” as such, but scientists at Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics have just announced that they know it’s there…

…in a follow-up press release the cosmological high priest of empirical worship, Neil “da-grass-is-greener-on-our-side-of-the-fence” Tyson, was also rumoured to have said that in the light of this he was once again calling on the mystic/paranormal/religious communities to come to their senses and repent over their speculative, intuitive, unsubstantiated insistence on believing in something which cannot be directly and unequivocally, empirically proved …

… afterwards at a celebratory cocktail party he was apparently overheard also saying, “yes, we’re all seasoned spin-doctors, … but come on, for God’s sake let’s at least try to be more realistic, shall we?”

religion is man

preaching to man

of his own perspective

in desperate hope

for  meaning



about the without

from within…


science is exactly the same


… could this be true?
could it really… ‘fade away’?

heaven forbid!

however, ‘fade away’ is a fairly good description I think.

… ‘fade away’ suggests more possibilities than a total disappearance
perhaps it may well fully ‘fade away’ … but it may never disappear…

perhaps it will just change shape…
perhaps it will simply morph into a new identity… slowly, silently, unperceivably, immeasurably

in fact, maybe it has almost achieved this…

a simple facelift
a little mystical Botox…
a little quantum ‘nip&tuck’
a cunning but deceptive ‘knows’ job

what if science itself is the new “Zionism”?

the new exciting world order
bringing definitive order to the previously unexplainable

… the new exciting world order
which at this very moment is seeking to establish its own Holy Land,
… its own “Jerusalem”

perhaps it even already has a new set of high priests… ?

…what does one make of the Richard Dawkins’ and the Neil deGrasse Tyson’s of the new world order?

the new religious world order?

…are these perhaps the new popes and televangelists of the new religion?
fading stealthily in…
after the previous regime ever so clumsily fades out…?

equally fundamentalistic
equally dualistic
equally passionate holy war lobbyists
militant pilgrims and enforcers of their own exclusive doctrine…
holy champions of the new state…
… the mystical mystery of scientific materialism

these new fervent revolutionaries?
encoding their own new holy cannon…
complete with a doctrine…
a new doctrine… like that of the previous religious leaders…
understood by the extreme few
yet enthusiastically liturgically incanted
by a vast body of mostly misinformed and ignorant followers
singing hymns filled with memes
flooding the reverberating halls of the new cathedrals…
the sacred, holy, social networking cathedral halls of the World Wide Web…

these fervent revolutionaries
in search of some hidden celestial cave in the side of some far away holy mountain
sealed for now in some hidden hubblesque probe
sent out there in the vast unknown, mystical wilderness…
faithfully awaiting some mystic goat herder-like space explorers
to hopefully stumble on the silicon scrolls of wisdom and understanding…

….and these new religious leaders too, along with their newly exalted order…
after preaching an unfathomable heaven for all devotees…
will they too,
in time…
also ‘fade away… ‘?

“I Heard It Through The Grapevine” – a song written by Marvin Gaye…

No, it’s not…

“I Heard It Through the Grapevine” is a song written by Norman Whitfield and Barrett Strong for Motown Records in 1966.
It was made famous by Marvin Gaye in a single released in October 1968 on Motown’s Tamla label.

It also helped to make Marvin Gaye famous.

Ooh, I bet you’re wondering how I knew?
well, I took the time to look it up and verify it for myself…

In pop culture (like religion and science), we hear things and they sound good to us for some reason.
If it is something said by someone popular or a statement by some popular or trendy publication we are quick to believe it…

We want to believe it… perhaps because it confirms some convenient reassurance in our minds?
Or maybe because others seem to believe it, and we don’t want to “feel out”?

Influential people influence others.
These people are usually very charismatic and persuasive.
We give them credit in some way or another and a truth is born.
Maybe it’s as simple as that?

Religion is like that.
It sounds good to us, it makes sense, it seems to help us, encourage us… so we believe it and of course, we then go about trying to convince others of our new found revelation.

How many of us really test it out for ourselves diligently, personally, repeatedly?
Hardly any I’d say.
This is a real problem for religion. It seems to be based almost exclusively on “hearsay.”

Its a problem for science as well. … all knowledge and understanding in fact.

Maybe we could even say that science is the new religion?

It sounds good to us, it makes sense, it seems to help us, encourage us… so we believe it and of course, we then go about trying to convince others of our new found revelation.

How many of us really test it out for ourselves diligently, personally, repeatedly?
Hardly any I’d say.
This is a real problem for science these days. It seems to be based almost exclusively on “hearsay.”

If it is something said by someone popular or a statement by some popular or trendy publication we are quick to believe it…

We want to believe it… perhaps because it confirms some convenient reassurance in our minds?
Or maybe because others seem to believe it, and we don’t want to “feel out”?

Influential people influence others.
Leading scientific voices can be very charismatic and persuasive.
We give them credit in some way or another and a truth is born.
Maybe it’s as simple as that?

Back to the song again…

People say, “believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear.”
I can’t help being confused, if it’s true please tell me dear?

hmm, … yes, good sound reasoning applied in the video …
however, near the end the narrative suggests that the case against there being a purpose in the universe is extremely strong to anyone “who sees the universe as it is rather than as they wish it to be.”…
… this causes me to reflect that perhaps if we are willing and able to be as objective and “empirical” as we possibly can we would need to reconsider that in all our so-called advanced cognitive abilities and developed observational and deductive/reasoning faculties we see an extremely minute percentage of the data that is “out there”
also, to “see” vast chunks of that which we regard as scientific knowledge we are presently utilising and operating “empirically” with devices (technological and deductive) that we have created and developed for ourselves in order to “see” the things we cannot see with our own eyes
as a result we conclude causes, events and structures that together serve to build our “empirical” scientific world view….

… is this not exactly what the “religious” or “spiritual” mind does in attempting to make sense of it all … specifically, operating on sensory intuitive techniques and some other devices we have created for ourselves (belief systems, theologies, mythology, metaphor, etc.) in order to “see” and explain the things we cannot fully understand or ‘prove’ empirically? …  thereby concluding about events causes and structures that actively build our “spiritual” worldvview?
… call me a skeptic if you will, but there is many a time where I personally cannot shake the idea that even the most empirically educated and enthusiastically outspoken scientist is as driven and filled by “faith” and hopeful blinkered subjective passion as the most voluminously raving faith filled fundamentalist evangelist out there…

… and for us as participants on both sides of the great divide perhaps it may be wise to consider that to measure only the visible superficially discernible bits of the iceberg is profoundly foolish and very possibly perilous as well?

I personally think that modern science has dealt a harsh, low-blow to mythology and the ancient oral traditions of wisdom and understanding as well as to the inarticulate speech of the heart.  These days it seems to me clearly apparent that myths and ancient oral traditions have virtually been totally discredited, even disqualified and relegated to the irrelevant, irredeemably primitive, uneducated, unsubstantiated, fanciful, even useless ‘old wives tales’, fit only for ignorant children as placatory bed-time stories.

Our modern scientific culture now demands more detail, more qualification, more empirical evidence, more factual substantiation for meaning and truth.  For me this could be seen as a very unscientific process in and of itself.  My reason for saying this is that our scientific era is extremely youthful and a very, very late entry onto the stage of the history of the universe and even that of man.  In terms of man’s history it is only very recently that deductive reasoning has entered into the equation.  Perhaps for this ‘new-kid-on-the-block’ to be standing up and confidently declaring such brazen categorical absolutes is very arrogant and possibly much like a kindergarten child babbling on about their own wisdom in the presence of others more than 10 times their age and experience.  It’s not that the kindergarten child is less than human, disqualified or even in error, but the reality is that at around 6 years of age the average child still has a great number of years of practical testing and application to go through to let experience catch up and test the eternal wisdom thus far acquired.

There is an old saying that goes something like this, “before you criticise someone, walk a mile in their moccasins.”  I’d like us to attempt to walk a mile if we could in the moccasins of Jesus who was not a scientist according to our times or interpretation of scientific and who spoke not in detailed, scientific terms but almost exclusively in parables, ‘dark’ sayings, stories, mystically veiled teachings, even somewhat confusing metaphors and mysteries, and not only that, but in a local language that was very possibly much like that used by a loving  parent honouring the inexperienced, infantile logic and comprehension of the precious but young and naïve offspring and using analogies and subject matter and content easily accessible to the infant.

In his life and conduct he never closed down the teachings of the law or the prophets but instead opened them up.  He seemed to turn the restrictive funnel of the legislated religious code into an open sluice gate of freedom and opportunity.  This served to open and liberate the minds of his hearers to such an extent that they even began to threaten the political grip the religious leaders had in that day.  He never did this by bringing systematic religious definition or empirical detail but instead he unveiled a compassionate, gracious revelation of the ancient sacred traditions in word and deed that was of such magnitude that even the highly educated teachers themselves tried persistently to get him to clarify his meaning and intent over and over again.  He never responded to them to their satisfaction so they relentlessly tried to trap and corner him as to who exactly he was, what exactly he was doing, what exactly he was meaning, by what authority he spoke and why he spoke and lived the way he did.  Eventually they could only trump up fictitious charges against him and use these as the only desperate way they could aim any accusation his way.

Yet amazingly Jesus simply continued to tell stories.  He never took the bait by entering into the fray at their level.  He just continued to speak in parables and veiled sayings, presenting a tapestry for the sincere and humble to enjoy and the less than open to hate.  Yes, he did say many other things as well and some of these were specific and mostly quite revolutionary, but even these seemed to be so veiled to all who heard (including his closest disciples), that they too were like mysterious stories in and of themselves.  He spoke of the kingdom of heaven not being an external thing in accordance with any legislated, ritual, social, political, religious, ethical or even moral code, but rather something that was within each individual person, right there, within easy reach, but yet also so far away.  He also said that if they destroyed the holy temple he would raise it up in 3 days.  This really set them all flapping.  Once when questioned as to his authority he even said most disturbingly that he himself was alive before Abraham was born.  Today we would have mocked and certified him without a moments hesitation and would have felt content with this act of worship.  For this we killed him yet he never even began to respond by explaining what he meant even when his own life hung literally in the balance.  This amazes me and opens up even more questions.  … and so the stories continue to this day.

The way I see it is that empirical science, as much as it thrills and fascinates me, as much as it amazingly answers so many of my  questions, challenges my myopia and rattles my complacency, unwittingly seems to assume that the universe is all completely rational, finite, measurable, comprehensible, and ordered according to our own very linear, deductive way of thinking and in so doing to my mind,  sadly it closes down truth.  In its quest to fully understand and discover the truth, to define, contain, measure and systematise the laws of the universe, to bring order to our thinking, it to my mind seems only to limit, contain and perhaps even deploy at times great faith in order to close down the threatening wonder of the vastness that is all around us.  Science’s passionate quest to uncover the secrets of the universe and thereby comprehend all things fully by way of reasonable research is to my mind very possibly a reaction to the presence of the vast unanswered reaches of the universe we find ourselves in and something the religious order of society had long held the reigns in …  but in light of this all I do have to ask logically if anyone can really open up the truth by closing it down?  For me the only way I can imagine personally standing on the outstretched head of my own shadow at sunrise is to extinguish the sun itself.

And also for me, as frail and as whimsical as they might appear to us all to be, the ancient oral traditions, the parables, the fables, even mythology, theology, the sacred texts, the deep mysticisms, spirituality, the intuitive and the like, all seem in many ways mostly to assume by faith that there are more questions than answers, that there might well even be more than one possible answer or explanation to anything and that the universe is infinite and eternally vast – perhaps even forever beyond our ability to fully comprehend.  They seem to be able in some ways to embrace that the origins, like the ends of the universe are possibly equally beyond our full understanding but that the journey is well worth the taking.  ….  Except perhaps for the fanatically religious fundamentalists, I must add, who sadly to my mind have perhaps unwittingly managed to adopt more of a scientific paradigm to their spirituality than they are prepared to acknowledge, persistently seeking not the truth, but justification for their mostly unexplored beliefs.  They also seem to be preoccupied with trying to quantify, systematise, and codify the sacred texts not necessarily because they have faith, but probably mostly through insecurity and fear.  In my opinion the obsessive quoting of chapter, verse and intellectual reference is not really used because of godly wisdom or humble, righteous respect and accuracy, but primarily as a fear based reaction to the scientific era and strangely, strangely, what can be seen as actually an emulation of the scientific revolutions methodologies that seem to threatens their frail religious and political stability.  To these too I have to ask reasonably if anyone can really open up the truth by closing it down?

But maybe there is a way ahead for the humble and meek, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, the poor in spirit, those who mourn and hunger and thirst for right standing in a universe that persists in spinning like wheels within wheels, even spinning in many directions all at once and filling us with virtually unquenchable wonder?

Maybe a myth is indeed as good as a mile?

String Theory

Design of the Universe

3-D Altas of the Universe

There must be more to all of this!
I have said it many times and I have heard so many say it too.

Well, is there?

Must there be more to all this?

Do we need this to be true for us?
Amazingly there IS more to all of this … at least in terms of scientific exploration and some of the evidence it suggests …. but it’s mostly empty space..

…empty space out there, expanding all the time …… with apparently the (hopeful?) theory as well that it will all shrink back again sometime and compress back into ….. what??

…. and on the other frontier there’s lots of empty space “in” there as well.

Lots and lots more space going on and on and on as we look deeper.

And here we all are trying to fit everything into tight little boxes …..

… is it fear that drives us not to embrace that it might be all far too ‘out there’ for us to ever really comprehend?

…. is it fear that it might be all “in here” that drives us to keep searching elsewhere, outside of ourselves to the vast, expanding beyond?

Perhaps fear closed us down in our quest for meaning and understanding in the adoption of religious dogma?
Perhaps the pursuit of understanding through science and technology is doing the same?
Could it be all a type of Animal Welfare/S.P.C.A./local dog pound cosmic swop-shop? …. one dogma for another?

Has our karma driven over our dogma? …. perhaps that silly old joke is coming back to haunt us?

Could it all be faith and hope but only from two apparently opposing angles?

Could it be all the same? Just faith and hope …. with us faithfully filling in the blanks to hopefully make it mean more to us …. at least till something new pops up as a great idea?

What do we think?

Maybe we think what we would like to think?