Gentle Wind School Newsletters
 Summer 1991 REBOUND Volume 2 

"Science" And The Fictitious World Of Educators

Educators believe that science is the investigation of only some "obscure" subject area. They believe that scientists are people who take accurate measurements, ponder great thoughts and who, in many cases, wear white lab jackets. Unless you are doing some pioneering investigative work in some little known area, you are not a real scientist.

In reality, science is, by definition, knowledge of the physical world. The scientific method is a natural, logical thinking process that is used by all kinds of people in all walks of life. Auto mechanics, engineers, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, appliance repair people, airplane mechanics, dentists, sheet metal workers, farmers, lawyers, boat builders, physicians, etc., etc., all use science and employ the scientific method in their work every day. What educators call "scientists" are people who would more accurately be called "record keepers." Most of the time, the work of the record keepers does not involve the use of the scientific method at all. If the record keepers are honest, in the end these people realize that they have nothing to show for their efforts, they have found nothing of consequence, and they have contributed nothing to humanity. More often, the work of the record keepers involves cooking their data and pumping up their statistics in order to present falsified results to a gullible public and to government officials who control the purse strings on various government grants. "Scientists" as defined by educators are, for the most part, self-promoting, self-congratulating, opportunistic school success stories who are trying to get to the top of the heap at any cost.

Because educators have no skills or knowledge of physical reality, they do not understand the scientific method and how this method is used in practical, everyday life. The scientific method involves the careful examination of everything you already know about a situation. Based on your previous knowledge, you then come up with a possible solution or conclusion known as your hypothesis. You test your hypothesis in physical reality. if you are correct, the problem is solved. If not, you must go back and re-examine everything you already know and arrive at another hypothetical solution, testing each solution until the problem is solved. Now, educators think that a hypothesis is the same thing as a theory, but it is not. A hypothesis is a good guess about why some thing is happening or how to solve a problem that exists. A hypothesis, by definition, implies an inadequacy of evidence in support of an explanation or a conclusion. A theory, on the other hand, is a formulated general principle explaining the operation of a certain phenomenon which is supported by considerable existing evidence.

A hypothesis is what you have when you are on the way to forming a theory. Let's say, for example, that you buy a lot of land on which you plan to build a home. The first thing that you must do is clear the land. You have a row of 14 trees, that stand almost perfectly straight, that you must remove. You check the wind and discover that the wind is blowing at a speed of approximately 23 miles per hour and that it is coming from the west. Your hypothesis is that if you use your usual procedure for cutting, when you cut down the trees, they are going to fall to the east. This is your best guess, and it is based on what you have already observed about how trees fall and how falling trees are influenced by the wind. You are on your way to forming a theory. You cut down all 14 trees and sure enough, they all fall to the east. Now you have sufficient evidence to make up a theory. You conclude that when the wind is blowing at 23 m.p.h. from the west, that the trees, when cut properly, will fall to the east.

Educators do not know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. Educators think that any formation of ideas about how something works (no matter how loose or incoherent those ideas might be) constitutes a theory. This is why when astronomers find out a new piece of information about some celestial body and then form some new ideas about the nature of this galaxy, educators call these loose ideas theories. "Scientists" (astronomers, archaeologists, etc.), under the influence of educators, make the same mistake. Astronomers are arriving at new "theories" all the time. In reality, these so-called theories are nothing more than loose collections of ideas about the nature of our solar system. These loose collections of ideas are written down in textbooks and are memorized by students of astronomy. Then, some new development causes astronomers to re-examine their loose collections of ideas and the textbooks get rewritten. After re-examining the evidence sent back to earth from a satellite probe designed to record information about a distant planet, astronomers on a public television special said, "Now, we'll have to rewrite the textbooks." This means, "now we'll have to rewrite our loose idea collections so that we can continue to be important (and to be funded); and the next generation of astronomy students will have a whole new collection of partially correct, semi-coherent and possibly misleading ideas about our solar system to MEMORIZE."

These astronomers, these "scientists," who are ready to "rewrite the textbooks" did not design or build any of the measurement devices (such as spectrum analyzers and other electronic measurement devices) that were used to gather the new information via the satellite probe. These astronomers did not design or build any of the equipment (such as the rocket, the fuel, monitoring devices, etc.) that made it possible for the satellite to be launched in the first place. All these astronomers did was use the equipment and devices designed and built by other people to record data that is of absolutely no significance to humanity. The entire project reflects only the latest fad in so-called "scientific" endeavors. The millions of dollars that were poured into this useless project could have fed, clothed and housed a lot of desperate people here in America and in other nations throughout the world.

Yet, educators think that people like astronomers and archaeologists and geologists are the real scientists. Educators think that looking up at the sky through an expensive telescope is real science. In reality, there is much more science--much more knowledge of the physical world--used in designing and manufacturing a telescope than there is in gazing at the stars or even in naming a new celestial body. In fact, there is much more science used in repairing an automatic washer than there is in the study of astronomy. Astronomers would more accurately be called hobbyists than scientists. Most astronomers are not capable of building or making a telescope, or grinding their own lenses and mirrors. Most astronomers do not know how to do anything except observe and describe heavenly bodies, and then arrive at false conclusions about the nature of our planetary systems--conclusions which they must alter every few years as new information is gathered. While we have nothing against hobbies like astronomy, it is important to realize that astronomy and archaeology are only hobbies. Astronomers and archaeologists have as a group contributed about as much to the improvement of humanity as stamp collectors and bird watchers.

The real scientists in our society are the engineers, auto mechanics, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, biologists, appliance repair people, airplane mechanics, sheet metal workers, farmers, lawyers, boat builders, physicians, etc. These are all people who absolutely must employ the scientific method in their work or our cars will not run and our televisions, radios, vacuum cleaners, refrigerators, washers, dryers, lawn mowers, blenders, toasters, microwave ovens, trucks, airplanes, elevators, escalators, helicopters, oil burners, calculators, handguns, rifles, bridges, ships, diesel engines, yachts, etc., etc. will not work right. These are all people who make contributions to humanity every day. They are also the inventors of our society. Some repair people come up with a new invention every day. These are people who invent a special tool to fix something or redesign an old bracket or come up with a whole new design for a part in order to solve a problem and fix something in need of repair. Educators cannot see this reality because their low opinions of service and repair people prevent them from doing so. Educators think that service and repair people are the scum of the earth because these people usually do not waste their time in college and are, therefore, "uneducated." Educators do not understand that a society must be re-invented every day in order for it to survive.

Educators are unable to see the science involved in practical things and in things requiring manual skills. Educators believe that people with manual skills, such as auto mechanics, are inferior people. Carpentry, plumbing, welding and auto mechanics are all skills that must be learned in a shop. They are not skills that a person can learn from reading a book and memorizing isolated data bits. But to educators, shop classes are reserved for the low-lifes. Shop classes are usually held in the far corners of the high schools and junior high schools so that the low-lifes will remain confined and the real serious students will not be contaminated by the activities of the low-life shop students. In reality, the low-lifes in the shops are the ones who are learning to apply the scientific method. Conversely, the high-lifes, the serious students, who desperately need the kinds of connections to physical world reality that can be gained only through the practical, hands-on experiences found in shop classes, go without ever learning these things. The low-lifes who work in the shop and employ the scientific method all day long are lucky if they get a passing grade in science, while the high-lifes with the good memories, who rarely use the scientific method and often do not know what it is, are rewarded with high grades and honors.

Furthermore, educators place no value on the work that is being done by the low-lifes in the shop classes. The rewards and honors that are passed out at high school graduations are given to academic superstars, the valedictorians, salutatorians and other "torians," and to the school athletic stars, none of whom have done anything of real value. The rewards and honors are never given to the low-lifes for doing a perfect job of rebuilding a car engine or making a beautiful and useful piece of furniture. Educators act as if these things that require real skill are of no value. Educators act as if all the important tasks and services that the low-lifes from the shop will one day do in the community do not exist. Educators do not realize that a well-done repair job on a boat or the roof of a house is every bit as good as winning the Boston Marathon or getting all "A's" on a report card. In fact, winning the Boston Marathon or being an honor student has no value and does nothing for anyone. On the other hand, an auto mechanic, shipwright or welder who does a good job is going to save your life.

The reason educators have developed these fictitious ideas about science and the scientific method is that educators have absolutely no knowledge of the physical world. Educators are some of the most debilitated, unskilled people in the world. They do not know how to make anything, build anything or fix anything. Therefore, educators cannot understand the nature of science or how the scientific method is used every day in practical reality. Science teachers ask children to memorize facts about the weather when they themselves know nothing about thermometers, barometers, hygrometers, psychrometers or wind indicators. Science teachers cannot make or fix any of these things. Most teachers have never used weather instruments and most schools do not have even the most minimal weather station available to students. Science teachers ask children to memorize the parts of a diesel engine or a steam engine when they themselves are incapable of building, fixing or even properly maintaining such engines. Science teachers ask children to memorize facts about electricity, while they themselves are incapable of repairing the most simple electrical problems in their own homes. Many science teachers do not know where the main electrical panel is located in the school.

Educators have developed fictitious ideas about physical reality and science because they do not know where real knowledge comes from. Educators think that real knowledge can be gathered by reading books and memorizing facts about a subject. In reality, real knowledge about any subject can only be gathered through personal, practical, direct experiences. Reading about a subject is only useful if you have had practical, hands-on experiences in that subject area. Memorizing facts about any subject only breaks down the human mental apparatus, except in cases where matters of survival are concerned. The Japanese have discovered the survival factor as others have and now threaten the children's lives. The more a person memorizes facts about a subject without having any direct experiences involving that subject, the less the person actually knows about the subject. For example, in recent years school children have been introduced to subjects like history and geography at earlier and earlier ages. Children today are required to memorize history and geography facts for two to four more years than children of past decades. As children have been required to memorize more facts about history and geography, studies (done by the educational system on itself) show that high school graduates now know less history and less geography than they did even a few decades ago.

Because educators do not know where real knowledge comes from, they think that if a person has done a lot of reading about a subject and has the ability to memorize some facts about that subject then the person is qualified to teach that subject. Educators think that a person who took a few courses in history and civics is qualified to teach children about civics. In reality, however, the only people who can effectively teach children about town government, for example, are people who have served in the town government for many years and have gathered a body of knowledge about town government through years of personal, practical, direct experiences. (Even then, children would also have to be able to get involved in the government of the town if they were going to gather any significant knowledge about how town governments work.) Educators who have never been involved themselves in town government or state government, or in government in any way, are not qualified to teach children anything about government. This is why millions of teenagers graduate or leave high school every year in this country without knowing anything about how town governments work. Many high school graduates do not know where to go to register to vote or how to vote in an election.

There was a time before the introduction of compulsory education when people knew where real knowledge came from. People knew that if they wanted to learn about shoeing horses that they would have to go to work with a blacksmith. People knew that if they wanted to learn how to make furniture, they would have to learn these things from an accomplished cabinetmaker. They knew that if they wanted to know about politics and government, they would have to spend time with an experienced statesman. Now, educators believe that people can learn about shoeing horses by reading books about shoeing horses, and by taking courses from people who have read books about shoeing horses, but who have never been blacksmiths. Educators think that people can become knowledge able in world affairs and politics simply by taking courses in political science offered by teachers who themselves have read books and taken courses in political science, but have had no direct involvement in world affairs.

The current system works like this. Let's say that Henry Kissinger agrees to teach political science at Cornell University. Political science students take his courses. When they graduate from college, they advertise themselves as being knowledgeable about political science because they took a course from Henry Kissinger. They have overlooked the fact that Henry Kissinger spent years in government and politics, and has gathered an enormous body of knowledge about world affairs through personal, practical experiences, and they, the students, have done nothing but read books, memorize political science facts and listen to lectures. Yet, these graduates, who have had no direct experiences in politics and government, will be hired to fill positions in military think-tanks, political advisory groups, and in colleges and universities as teaching professors. Those who teach will attract a following of students who will want to take a course from a professor who "studied" under Henry Kissinger (which means took a course taught by Henry Kissinger). When these students graduate from college, they will go out and advertise themselves as qualified political scientists because they took a course from someone who took a course from someone who took a course from Henry Kissinger. These graduates also will get jobs in government, in military think-tanks, and will be accepted to teach political science on college campuses, even though they have never taken the time to become directly involved in government or politics in any way. Now we are two generations away from Henry Kissinger who is the only one qualified as a statesman and the only real political scientist. Some of these second generation of "political scientists" will write books and teach courses to third, fourth and fifth generations of political scientists, but each generation gets further away from acquiring any real knowledge about government and politics. This is exactly what has happened in this country. We are five, six, seven, eight or more generations away from the people who actually had real knowledge not only about political science but of many other subject areas. This is why none of our military or political experts were able to predict the outcome of the Persian Gulf War. None of the experts could predict back in August of 1990 that in August of 1991 the Kuwaitis would be murdering, imprisoning and deporting Palestinians, most of whom had nothing to do with the invasion of Kuwait. Nor could any of these so-called political "experts" foresee that Saddam Hussein would still be in power and that the U.S. would be contemplating further attacks on Iraq in order to eliminate Iraqi nuclear capability. None of these things could be foreseen because so few of the so-called experts have any real knowledge of world politics and world affairs.

Imagine what would happen in this country if we decided to use the same system for educating electricians, plumbers, auto mechanics, carpenters and service repair people that we now use for educating our so-called political experts. Electricians would only be required to take courses from people who took courses from people who took courses from people who knew something about electricity. Plumbers would only be required to read books and take courses from people who took courses from people who took courses from people who knew something about plumbing. Imagine what our world would be like if our homes were wired and plumbed by electricians and plumbers who were educated in this system and who had no real knowledge about electricity and plumbing. Imagine what our cars would be like if we took them to be serviced by mechanics educated in this system.

Educators are ignorant. They have no knowledge of the physical world. They do not know where knowledge comes from or how human beings gather real knowledge. Since science is knowledge of the physical world, educators do not know what science is. They cannot see that vacuum cleaner repair people use more "science" in a day than most people wearing white lab coats use in a year. They do not see that auto mechanics have and use more genuine knowledge of the physical world in a day than most of the archaeologists, astronomers and other so-called "scientists" as defined by educators will gather in a year, and maybe even in a lifetime.

Because educators are so ignorant of physical reality, children exposed to the existing educational system are being denied this important and essential information about themselves and the world around them. Worse than that, our children are being contaminated with false ideas about the nature of physical reality. Science is everywhere and it is in everything. Educators have attempted to extract a subject as vast as the knowledge of the universe and reduce it to a series of isolated data bits. These unrelated, isolated data bits are then fed to children under conditions of extreme psychological duress. Children are forced to accept these false, perverted ideas about the nature of reality. Once this happens to children, they permanently lose their ability to perceive physical reality as it actually exists. They are mentally and emotionally shredded by this experience. They perceive the world as nothing more than a series of flat, disconnected, unrelated data bits. The more involved with the physical world one becomes, the more one realizes that flat, text-book explanations of how things work become useless when confronted with problems. In-depth, hands-on experience with the physical world causes one to realize the uselessness of non-contextual data and its long-term detrimental effects on the human consciousness.

A Science Test For Educators

Directions: Answer "yes" or "no" to the following questions.

1. Ten-year-old Susie loves to ride her bicycle. One day when she was bicycling down a long hill, she noticed that as she picked up speed, her bicycle began to vibrate a little. That night Susie's father gave her a speedometer for her bicycle which he then helped her install. The next day Susie rode her bicycle up to the top of the long hill and then began riding down. This time, she noticed that her bicycle began to vibrate when her speedometer read 24 mph, but not before. Susie went back up the hill and rode down several more times and each time she saw that her bicycle began to vibrate as soon as she hit the 24 mph mark. Susie concluded that in order to prevent her bicycle from vibrating she would have to keep her speed below 24 mph.

  1. Has Susie employed any science?
  2. Has Susie used the scientific method?
  3. Can a person under the age of eighteen who is not wearing a white lab coat employ the scientific method?

2. Harriet Hill works for the National Weather Service at their national laboratory just outside of Washington, D.C.. Harriet, like all the laboratory employees, always wears a white lab coat and she carries a clipboard everywhere she goes. Each hour, Harriet is required to take a barometric pressure reading off the laboratory barometer and to record that reading in the laboratory log book.

  1. Is Harriet using the scientific method?
  2. Is Harriet simply keeping records?

3. Ben Wilson is a carpenter and builder. Ben installs over 200 windows a year in the various homes which he constructs. A few years ago, Ben was using a product called "Sid's Silicon Sealant" to seal every window. However, over half of his customers called him to complain that their windows were leaking, all within 10 to 12 months after Ben had installed them. Ben investigated the leaking windows and discovered that the silicon sealant had separated from the walls around each of the leaking windows. So Ben changed brands and began using a different silicon sealant. Almost three years have passed since Ben switched brands of silicon sealant and he has not had a single complaint from any of his customers about the windows which he installed with the new brand of sealant.

  1. Has Ben employed any science in his work?
  2. Has Ben used the scientific method?

4. Tom Thompson, M.D. is a pediatrician and a researcher who works at the National Health Laboratory Children's Center. The National Health Laboratory is responsible for establishing and maintaining the national average weights and lengths of young infants at various stages after birth and up to one year of age. Every Tuesday the Center holds a special post-natal clinic which is open to the public. Dr. Thompson works at the clinic where he sees the young infants who come to the clinic. Dr. Thompson carefully weighs and measures the length of each baby. He then records his measurements both in the clinic log book and in the infant's chart. Later, Dr. Thompson looks at his recordings and compares his recordings to the national average weight and length of young infants of various ages up to one year after birth.

  1. Has Dr. Thompson used the scientific method in this aspect of his work?
  2. Is Dr. Thompson simply keeping records and gathering statistics?

5. When Mrs. Brooks went to do a load of laundry this morning, she discovered that her washing machine would not function. So, she called Ace Appliance Repairs and talked with the owner, Ace, herself. Ace went out to Mrs. Brooks' house to look at the washer. Ace pushed the start button, but, sure enough, Mrs. Brooks' washer would not run. Then, Ace went over to the plug at the wall outlet and saw that the plug had been pulled out of the socket. Ace plugged in the machine, pushed the "start" button and bingo!, it worked. Mrs. Brooks paid Ace the $25 required fee and Ace went on to her next job.

  1. Now, did Ace employ any science in her work?
  2. Did Ace use the scientific method? Is it possible for an appliance repair woman in a drab grey uniform to use the scientific method?

Ace went on to her next job at the Mitchell's house. It seems that the Mitchell's refrigerator was not keeping the food cold. The first thing that Ace did was to open the door of the refrigerator. Right away she noticed that the inside light was on. Ace, after checking the temperature setting, then went to check the compressor in the refrigerator. However, she did not check to see if the plug was still in the wall.

  1. Now, is Ace still employing science?
  2. Is she still using the scientific method?

6. Jill Jones works at the National Fish and Wildlife Laboratory in the state of Alaska. Jill has been hired as a member of a team of scientists whose job it is to determine the approximate number of birds that were lost in a small region damaged by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Jill's job has been to talk with local veterinarians and clean-up workers to get some idea of how many birds were found dead, and then to take estimates of the existing bird population in order to determine approximately how many birds were lost. Jill and her colleagues keep meticulous records and they record their findings every day. They then go on to discuss their findings every week during their day-long staff meetings.

  1. Is Jill using science?
  2. Have Jill and her colleagues used the scientific method?
  3. Are Jill and her colleagues keeping records?

7. Jeffrey Smith is a fourteen-year-old homeschooler who loves to build and fly radio-controlled model airplanes. Last winter he built himself a beautiful scale Piper Cub. When the spring came, he took his plane out to the field for a test flight. Shortly after take-off, Jeffrey lost throttle control temporarily and then he got it back. A few minutes later he lost rudder control, but then he got it back. Luckily, Jeffrey was able to land the plane without a crash.

At first, he thought that he might have experienced radio interference, possibly from other radio control flyers at a nearby field. So, he went home and decided to try flying again the next day. The next day, he went back to the field and put his plane in the air. This time, the same thing happened. Jeffrey concluded that he might have a problem with his own radio. He went home and carefully went over the entire plane. He took out his old receiver and put in a new one, which he had previously tested in another plane and which he knew was working. However, when he checked the plane (this time, on the ground) the problem was still there. Then, he decided to try a new battery, which he also had previously tested and knew was working. When he did, the problem in his throttle and rudder control disappeared. Jeffrey tested his old battery and discovered that his battery connections were loose and he was intermittently losing battery power, causing him to intermittently lose throttle and rudder control.

  1. Now, did Jeffrey use any science?
  2. Can science be used with a hobby?
  3. Did Jeffrey use the scientific method?

If Jeffrey were a student in your science class, and he got a "D" on your science test, would you have considered his work on his model airplane and given him a higher grade? Or, would you have concluded that Jeffrey's hobby has nothing to do with your science test and Jeffrey deserves a "D" for not studying and for spending too much time fooling around with his hobbies?

Oh, by the way... Do you even know who Jeffrey Smith is?

8. Henry Mitchell, Ph.D. works at the NASA laboratories at Cape Canaveral, Florida. During a recent space mission, 100 white mice and 1,000 jellyfish were sent into space. The craft has just returned with these animals on board. Over the next 10 days, Henry, along with several other NASA scientists, will be observing the mice at various intervals throughout the day and will be recording his observations in a log book.

  1. Are Henry and his colleagues using the scientific method?
  2. Are Henry and his colleagues simply keeping records of their observations?

9. Mr. Smith is sitting in his living room reading the morning newspaper when he detects the sound of water running in his pipes. Mr. Smith goes around the house and carefully checks to make sure that everything is turned off, and it is. He calls his plumber and reports the situation to her. She knows Mr. Smith's house and knows that the house is well over 40 years old. She tells Mr. Smith that, based on what he has told her, it will cost him between $600 and $800 to fix his problem. Mr. Smith, of course, wants to know why this job is going to be so expensive. The plumber tells him that her fee will be around $50 to $100, but that he is going to have to get someone with a backhoe to come in and dig up his yard because he has a break in the water main at the place where the water comes into his house. She tells him that his house has settled over the last 40 years which put too much strain on the water lines, finally causing the line to break.

  1. Now, has this plumber used the scientific method?
  2. Has she used the Dow Jones Average to arrive at her conclusions?
  3. Has she used a hot tip from her bookie to arrive at her conclusions?

10. Martha Newton has a Ph.D. in nuclear physics and she is employed by the National Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Martha's job is to visit various nuclear power plants in the eastern United States and to record the core temperatures of each nuclear reactor to make sure that these temperatures comply with Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards. Martha visits each power plant for two weeks. Over that fourteen-day period, she observes the core temperature of each reactor on an hourly basis and records those temperatures in her log book.

  1. Is Martha using the scientific method?
  2. Is Martha simply taking readings and recording that information in her log book?