||| Logics Home || Logics Site Info |||
(PD) John William Waterhouse 'The Mermaid'
And the Spirit moved upon the waters,
creating all things that the Spirit made,
but it was man who gave to man errors,
of filling gaps of thought, with a mermaid.
Copyright©2017 December 02, 2017
Links to Sections on This Page
Causes and Effects
A very strong hurricane hit an Asian coast in the 1700s (as illustrated within a recently made video of how villagers and fishermen had recorded the event), and the hurricane occurred after a very specific event that humans did. The fishermen knew that hurricanes always occurred after humans committed the act. Humans had recently committed the act, which was quickly followed by a strong hurricane causing much damage to the village. Through group consensus and peer review, the villagers and fishermen were scientifically right in their judgment that a mermaid had caused the hurricane so as to get her revenge on humans because some humans had harmed the mermaid.
Was the villagers' and fishermen's logic wrong? Why? It was scientifically proven through peer review, and agreed to by all observers that [a] hurricanes happen, [b] hurricanes come from the ocean, [c] mermaids live in the ocean, [d] hurricanes always occurred when a human harmed a mermaid, [e] someone had harmed a mermaid, [f] the hurricane occurred shortly after the mermaid was harmed, and so, therefore, [g] mermaids cause hurricanes. The sequencing of evidence is how religions and sciences form theories today, and so if the scientific theory about mermaids was incorrect, then why was it incorrect?
Some people who live on land, and who know nothing of fishing, they say that mermaids do not exist, but all of the fishermen said that mermaids are real, and fishermen from all over the world throughout known history have said that mermaids exist. Who is to be believed? Either? Neither? Whose science is true? Both? Neither? Maybe space aliens had spliced genes with humans and dolphins to create mermaids similarly as how the space aliens made the centaurs, echidnas, gorgons, harpies, satyrs, and a living sphinx? Yes? No? Why? Maybe an advanced human civilization 50,000 years ago did the gene splicing to create the creatures before destroying their civilization with nuclear wars? Yes? No? Why? It has been said that some scientists today are splicing human genes with animal genes to produce organs and who knows what else, so why would the idea of mermaids not be realistic? I am not claiming that mermaids are real or not real, I am merely pointing to a question that each individual must answer by themselves without help from anyone else.
Is it possible to prove that mermaids do not exist? Is it possible to prove that mermaids do not cause hurricanes? The 'argument from silence' fallacy is when an individual argues that a thing cannot exist if the thing is not recorded by a human: just because humans have not taken a photograph of a
In recent months many individuals have said that it was scientifically proven that [a] hurricanes happen, [b] hurricanes come from the ocean, [c] someone harmed
Seriously, many scientists, academicians, politicians, pro-science protesters, and the news media are in fact claiming that climate change is causing hurricanes. The normal human 'fills in the gaps' with whatsoever s/he wants to believe, and if many people believe the same thing — peer review and group consensus — then the invented belief becomes true scientific fact.
The act of filling in the gaps is what I term to be the mermaid syndrome, of inserting beliefs of causes in-between events.
The Normal Human Belief of Causes and Effects
What causes hurricanes? What caused the hurricane named Irma? Many people sincerely do believe that they know the answer.
Six easy facts that healthy humans can observe themselves:  oceans exist,  fish and other living beings exist in the oceans,  hurricanes come to land from oceans,  something causes hurricanes to occur,  hurricanes cause damage to man-made structures, and  all hurricanes known to humans have always occurred after an event that humans did (humans must first exist before humans can know that hurricanes exist).
It is normal for humans to mentally assemble observed facts, to then mentally compare the facts, and to then form a judgment of what causes a thing to happen. Humans could not make clothing nor dwellings without the ability to mentally assemble different groups of observed things and to then judge how the things behave together, even if humans do not understand the things themselves. An individual can create a cotton shirt without knowing how cotton grows, nor knowing of cotton seed, nor knowing of atoms, molecules, kinetics, resistances, photosynthesis, electricity, nor anything else about the cotton plant itself. A human can manipulate things to make other things, but when a human attempts to explain the how and why of a thing, mermaid events occur.
All humans are different, all humans have different abilities and different limitations within each person's own ability to observe and to think, which results in different humans assembling different quantities and qualities of observed facts. No two humans can think the same thoughts, nor process thoughts the same, nor observe identically the same, nor assemble thoughts identically the same.
Regardless of what academia and popular science might claim, it is physically and biologically impossible for two or more humans to have the same thoughts. Utterly and eternally impossible.
Example: when measuring the field strength of electromagnetic radiation, most individuals will use an electronic device that measures and displays electromagnetic field strengths numerically and/or by two-dimensional lines and/or two-dimensional graphs. The device's readings become a shared experience amongst the observers. The shared experience is accepted as true fact because the experience is repeatable by all of the individuals individually — peer review. The repeatable experience and measurements become true and factual science. But when a different individual who can feel electromagnetic fields is also present during the field measurements, the individual feels the fields' three-dimensional patterns, intensities, fluxes, directional flows, and decay rates, and the different individual is aware that the measuring device is only measuring a single and imaginary surface feature of the electromagnetic radiation that does not really exist — a Flat Land-like two-dimensional measurement. The different individual is aware that although the science might be 'right' relative to group consensus, the different individual is also aware that the science is incorrect and false relative to what is real.
It is physically impossible for a field of an atom, an electron, or any other field to begin and to end at one specific point. Always is there a waxing and waning of the fields. The electronic measuring device displays a two-dimensional measurement, a measurement that is as if claiming that the measured electromagnetic field has a beginning and an end at one specific point; the measuring device's measurements are Flat Land-like measurements of measuring widths and lengths while possessing no concept of depths and motions. It is physically impossible for any man-made measuring device to accurately measure anything.
When the normal group applies mathematics to the electromagnetic fields, the group concludes that their conclusions are true fact because the mathematics always sum the same identical sums. A million normal humans can add the same numbers and always sum the identical same sum, which then becomes true and factual science. However, when the different person observes the math, he may see that the math is the same math that was used to create the measuring device, as well as being the same math that the measuring device made use of when displaying measurements. The measuring of electromagnetic fields is circular reasoning, of applying a math to create a thing that displays the same math, and then man claiming that the created thing proved his math to be true. To the different individual, however, the math itself is still only an imaginary Flat Land-like two-dimensional surface measurement that does not relate to what is real. To the different individual, mathematics does not and cannot measure Reality beyond what the median human can observe.
(©2017 Larry Gowdy) Mermaid Syndrome
The normal mind can connect points A and B, but cannot simultaneously connect any other points of C, D, and an almost infinity of others, especially not those that are in motion. The normal mind simply possesses no capacity to know that it is unaware of the other points: there is no mental connection, no linear duration connections beyond the two points; the normal mind lives in a Flat Land-like world that believes it perceives three dimensions by connecting three sets of two points of A and B, and names each set of points with different names of height, width, and depth, but the measurements were still only points A to B. It is easily illustrated and verified that mathematics and science are structured solely within the normal 'point A and B' mind. All minds that are limited to points A and B are normal minds, regardless of whether the individuals might be popularly believed to be academic prodigies: if a prodigy is judged as a prodigy because of his/her use of man's mathematics, then the so-called prodigy is not a prodigy at all, he/she is a very normal human.
(©2017 Larry Gowdy) Natural Calculus
Individuals who can connect several points simultaneously can almost instantly describe the decay rate of point D relative to the cavity structural effect of point C, and explain the variables occurring at and in-between all other points. Mathematics cannot, not even after weeks of summing numbers. What is the simultaneous relationship of points A, E, and F? Man's science does not so much as know what F is, else he would not have invented so many absurd mermaid events to explain things like animal migration and the ether.
"Michelson's Interference Experiment ...while the Earth is moving, the ether does not remain at rest. ...There would be this same difference if the translation had no influence and the arm P were longer than the arm Q..." (The Principle of Relativity, A Collection of Original Memoirs of the Special and General Theory of Relativity, H. A. Lorentz, A. Einstein, H. Minkowski, H. Weyl, translated by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery, Dover Publications, Inc. edition first published in 1952, originally published in 1923 by Methuen and Company, Ltd.)
Man's greatest science and scientists swim within mermaid events. There does not exist a single scientific 'fact' that does not include a mermaid event. Scientists are not gods, scientists are humans, and they make mistakes too. Science is not the flawless true truth that many people have been told to believe.
Mathematics must progress from one point to another, mathematics cannot progress along several points simultaneously, which forces all mathematics to include mermaid events.
Measure the height of a wall. The mathematical measurement will always be the same. The mathematical measurement is scientifically right. The mathematical measurement is academically right. Academicians and sciencians will forever dogmatically insist that the measurement is scientifically correct and is scientific proof that their mathematics is real and perfect. But, what happened in-between the measurement? Something else happened that was not measured. Life happened. Motion happened. Durations happened. Some form of mental activity happened. Some form of mental duration occurred that was able to retain the linear connection between point A and point B. If the linear connection did not exist, then the mind would not have known (remembered) to connect point A with point B.
Observe how man's mathematics and man's mind connects the dots without knowing what exists in-between the dots. The mathematical measurement was made unconsciously, without being conscious of one's own thoughts, of not being conscious of one's own feelings, of not being conscious of the thing being measured, and in every way except for the two points, mathematics is 'filling in the gaps' with beliefs that are not true. The things that occur in-between 'cause and effect' are not recognized to exist by science and academia: all science has 'fill in the gaps' mermaid reasoning.
Mathematically measure a curve. Man has many different ways of measuring curves, but each method places stationary points where there is motion. It is not possible to measure motion with stationary points, but man's science and academia do claim that their stationary measurements of moving objects are true and perfect. Similar to measuring a wall while not knowing what occurs in-between the points, mathematics measures curves without knowing what the measured thing is, nor knowing what the measured thing was doing. Man's mathematics has the golden ratio that is sometimes placed upon curves, but never in Reality does the golden ratio literally exist as a real thing. When observing a curve, the motion continues, and only after the motion is judged as a past event does the 'golden ratio point' then exist as a mental invention. The golden ratio does not exist until after a motion has traveled beyond where the golden ratio is recognized to exist. All things are in motion, static points do not measure motion, mathematics places points A and B on things that occurred in the past, and mathematics cannot place a point on a thing that exists in the 'now'. Without the ability to be conscious of the 'now', man cannot know what exists, nor where the things in motion are going. All mathematics is based upon inventions, of imaginary 'fill in the gaps' mermaid reasoning, of making stuff up, of claiming that the rules of a closed system must be applicable and identical to the rules of open systems.
Science is popular consensus. Science is an exhibition of the normal human's limitations of observation and cognition. Science to one person might be true truth and be the limitations of what is possible for the individual's own mind, but to a different person science is primitive Flat Land nonsense.
Now, what has occurred prior to each hurricane? If an event occurred prior to each known hurricane, and the event was not observed to occur at any other time, then it is very common for humans to compare the two groups of facts and to then form a proven conclusion that the two groups of facts are connected. Today, the act of comparing and relating two or more simultaneously occurring groups of events — and then predicting that the groups will always accompany another event — is given the name of science.
Scientific method: [i] form an opinion of a thing, [ii] form a method of measuring the thing in chronological and mathematical order, [iii] observe the thing to determine if indeed the two or more events always occur simultaneously, and then [iv] conclude a hypothesis that predicts a mathematically valid sequence of cause and effect. Most all of today's science is performed similarly.
The sequencing of evidence about mermaids in the 1700s was how scientists today form scientific theories of climate change, and so, if the scientific theory was incorrect for mermaids, then why was it incorrect, and why is the same sequencing of reasoning allegedly correct for climate change? Humans have not magically gotten smarter, humans are still basically the same mammals that have been around for many, many seasons, and so if an ignorant and superstitious group of villagers in the 1700s were not correct in their belief of mermaids, then upon what logic can it be said that today's humans are not making similar mistakes of reasoning?
Again, humans mentally assemble groups of things that the humans have observed, and humans then judge how the different groups of things relate to the other. Whensoever there are gaps of connections between the mental groups, it is within the human ability and nature to fill-in the gaps with plausible assumptions (make stuff up). As an example, most people believe that the human body functions with electrical currents (science and academia teach the belief to be true fact). But, does not electrical current always have an electromagnetic field? Do not all body functions emit different electromagnetic field patterns? Would not a mass quantity of people expressing similar body functions cause a large electromagnetic field that must influence the Earth's own magnetic fields and weather? According to today's science, animals migrate by feeling the very weak magnetic fields of the Earth — while the animals are not influenced by strong magnetic fields — and so, according to science, field strength is irrelevant. Hurricanes are allegedly affected by the Earth's magnetic fields, and, thus, must be affected by humans' electromagnetic fields also. Right? No? Why? Most humans are unaware of the electromagnetic fields that they emit, and so the observation is not included when the people make stuff up about what causes hurricanes. Maybe if a lot of humans behaved badly, causing a mass emission of negative electromagnetic fields, would that not be like the old beliefs of the gods and heavens punishing humans for their bad behaviors? Yes? No? Why? Regardless of the answer, the example illustrates one of the things that most humans ignore when connecting the dots — when they make stuff up — between what they themselves are able to observe and what they are able to think about. There are countless things occurring in-between all other things that humans simply cannot observe nor measure — such as illustrated in the Mermaid Calculus graphic — which sums to the obviousness that all theories, all assumptions, and all science always includes gaps of reasoning where the people and scientists have filled-in the gaps with made-up stuff; always.
Test it for yourself; ask someone who believes in an increase (or decrease) of hurricanes being caused by climate change to explain to you exactly why climate change causes stronger or more frequent hurricanes. Except for a rare few individuals in the world who might be familiar with the physics, it is expected that the answer will be something along the line of '[a] warmer weather [b] causes stronger hurricanes'. Between 'a' and 'b' was a huge gap where the individual merely held an imagined belief (made stuff up) that somehow 'a' automatically connects to 'b' (like measuring a wall's height, no consciousness exists in-between the two points). Most individuals believe that science knows all answers, and the individuals leap to believe that science must know why climate change causes stronger hurricanes, and so, since the news media has said that the world will be destroyed by climate change, then to the individuals, they believe that their belief in science and the news media is a valid answer for everything.
"But by the term 'scientific' is understood just what was formerly understood by the term 'religious'." (A Letter to a Hindu, Leo Tolstoy)
If an individual cannot explain with great details of how each atom and molecule is affected by kinetics, magnetics, temperatures, elevations, pressures, and the thousands of other things that an individual absolutely must understand intensely well, then the individual cannot possess a valid reasoning of why climate change might affect hurricanes. Believe it or not, no human knows everything, not even scientists, which simply means that everyone has to make stuff up, and there is no such thing as a perfect understanding of any topic. Yes, scientists do make stuff up, and it is absurd to claim otherwise. All claims of scientists not having made-up stuff are claims of the scientists having a god-like omniscience that far exceeds the universe's laws of physics, and the claims merely further reinforce the fact that the speaker worships science as a faith-based religion.
The normal human mind is formed within the inherent ability to cope within a simplistic life that needs little more than food, shelter, and a mate, but the normal mind is limited to what can be observed and reasoned, which is one of the reasons why humans make up wild beliefs and insist that their beliefs are true science.
For over twenty years some people have claimed that HARPP causes hurricanes and earthquakes. Other people have claimed that militaries have weather weapons that cause hurricanes and earthquakes. Some people sincerely believe that an evil deed can cause hurricanes and earthquakes. Maybe it was North Korea that caused Irma? Maybe it was those evil, evil, Russians that the news media has cried about for over a hundred years? Maybe it was the atmospheric warming caused by the billions of cell phones' microwave radiation? Maybe it was the electromagnetic fields from cell phones that altered hurricane strengths and paths? Humans have always behaved badly before each hurricane, and humans did some naughty things right before Irma hit, and so is that not scientific proof that the gods, the heavens, space aliens, demons, or mermaids caused the hurricanes so as to punish the humans? Most everyone — including science — has their 'mermaid theory', and since none of the theories agree with the other, then it is very likely that they are all incorrect.
The Mermaid Syndrome
Thousands of years ago, most humans believed that gods flew in the skies and created living beings. When man invented machines to fly in the skies, then humans began believing that space aliens flew in the skies while gods created living beings. When man learned of genetics, then many humans began believing that space aliens fly in the skies and that the space aliens created living beings on Earth. Some humans today believe that all living beings were created by and evolved through accident — by chance mutations — which is a belief that defies the people's own scientific laws of physics while also illustrating 'filling in the gaps' with made-up mermaid stuff.
Observe that alleged photographs of UFOs in the 60s showed alien spacecraft that were styled somewhat like 60s automobiles, and in each decade the alien spacecraft evolved to have similar styling as the automobiles of those decades. Man's beliefs and interpretations change, always showing that his previous beliefs were false, always false, always.
Observe the sequencing of beliefs; man's science evolves in sequence with popular consensus, and never is man's science correct. When the belief in genetics is someday found to have been in error, again man will change his beliefs of who flies in the skies, of who creates living beings, and of who swims in the seas.
A quote from what I wrote in the 80s: 'If a belief can be changed, then it was an illusion, and what is now believed, is also an illusion'. If a person can change a belief, then it was a false belief, it was not true fact, it was a made-up belief of a topic that was not understood, which also mandates that the current belief must also be made-up because the topic never was and still is not based upon what is real. Each time science makes a new discovery, the discovery proves that the previous science was imaginary. There will be more discoveries in the future, and they will prove today's science to be imaginary. It will happen if man survives along enough; it must happen.
Betting on today's science is like betting on a dead horse; it is already known that it cannot win a race.
Science does not know how consciousness exists, nor how memories are formed, nor how thoughts occur. Science does not so much as have a knowledge of the linear chronological sequencing of how a mind forms and develops. Regardless of what the pulpiteers and sciencians loudly claim, science is profoundly ignorant of life and Nature. All scientific beliefs of the mind are made-up, 'fill in the gaps' mermaid-like imaginations that cannot be correct. It is a physics-based impossibility for a human mind to form a correct thought. All individuals who are competent with physics are aware that there always exists variables in-between each human thought, and the variables render it as being impossible for a human mind to form a thought that does not include 'filling in the gaps'.
I use the term mermaid syndrome to point to the very obvious fact that all known living organic creatures make stuff up and imaginatively fill-in the gaps where there is no connection between linear durations. The mermaid syndrome is the inherent nature of the human mind, of humans inserting beliefs in-between what humans are able to observe.
All scientific beliefs of the human mind have always been false; the beliefs themselves were formed within the mermaid syndrome, and, thus, all scientific beliefs must also have flaws because it is impossible for a human to accurately 'connect the dots'.
When an individual claims that their science is true truth, the claim is illustrative of the mermaid syndrome.
Science is What a Person Wants to Believe
I have my own 'mermaid-like' curiosities too. My primary research project is extraordinarily captivating to me, but there are many things that cannot be known. I use the word wuji (a Chinese word that implies a void that has no means of measurement) while pointing at a thing that is known to exist but cannot be explained with words, and I use the word kin to point at another thing that is related to wuji and always occurs simultaneously — it is as if tying the string of time into numerous knots and then observing how the paths influence the other from a Flat Land-like point of reference within the restrictions of three dimensions without restrictions of directional flux — but I have no clue nor potential to know what exists in-between. The research shows that there is always a 'mermaid event' that connects wuji and kin to the present Flat Land chronological order, but regardless of the accuracy and fascination of the events, my only choice is to simply observe the events, and to permit myself to enjoy the experience of observing while toying with predicted results. Each time that I believe that I have made good progress, another discovery is made that makes the previous discoveries appear flat and stunted, so now I know that there is no boundary, and no means of knowing the thing well. To me, the firsthand experience is what matters most, and the other stuff is for other people to imaginatively fill-in the gaps with their Flat Land-like scientific interpretations.
I looked in the mirror and saw that I was the handsomest man in the mirror. I looked in the mirror and saw that I was the ugliest man in the mirror. I looked in the mirror and saw that I was different than the previous time. I looked in the mirror and saw that I was the smartest man in the mirror. I looked in the mirror and saw that I was the dumbest man in the mirror. Believe it or not, all people always interpret all things by what they themselves want to believe at the moment. Each time a person looks at science and facts, each person always sees something different than what someone else sees. Sometimes it is okay to just let-go of interpretations, and to instead merely enjoy the moment's experience.
Believe it or not, humans are not capable of knowing everything, and humans cannot know all causes of all things. Hitting a baseball with a baseball bat may always result in the ball being propelled in a different direction: the cause is the bat, the effect is the ball moving in a different direction and speed, but regardless of how two things might occur in sequence, it still does not imply that the observer knows how the effect is made possible. A mathematics professor once became angry at me for my stating that it was silly to believe that the energy of one thing causes a change of energy of another thing; the professor stated that that was exactly how cause and effect occurs, that of kinetic energy being transferred from one object to another. The professor did not know what kinetic energy is, nor how fields influence the other, but he was very confident that [a]
It is okay to not know an answer, but it is not okay to make stuff up and then claim that the invented belief is true fact.
The current social hysteria over climate change is not a new phenomenon; it is the way that normal humans have always behaved and always will behave. The March for Science protests are as crowds of eighteenth-century villagers who merely use a different term for their superstitions and signs: "Save the planet from
Dementia within the Mermaid Syndrome
The studies of dementia article helps to illustrate some of the variables of mental processing within different individuals. A typical sequence of thought within a normal human might include segmented linear connections — the individual retaining consciousness of points A and B being connected, but not connecting points F through Z — but the vertical durations are colored by the individual's own beliefs and emotions. When linear points A and B are explained by the individual, the explanation is weighed and colored by the vertical durations of beliefs and unconscious emotions. The final product is as a individual claiming 'between points A and B is what I want it to be', or, 'between points A and B is anger and selfishness'. The individual's explanations are always nonsensical because the sums were formed upon 'fill in the gaps' mermaid events.
The only known method of retaining rational interpretations is for the individual to retain a stable emotion, one that weighs and judges all events similarly. Unfortunately, most humans have no control over their emotions, which always results in the individuals inventing explanations that are mere expressions of the moment's unconscious emotions.
Roughly 37 years ago Voyager 1 took photographs of Saturn's north pole and hexagon. The hexagon is reported to be larger of diameter than planet Earth. The Cassini mission took more photographs, and Saturn's hexagon is still there.
(PD) Saturn's north pole hexagon.
After 37 years, the cause of Saturn's hexagon is still not known to science. The most common scientific explanation is that there are many weather storms on Saturn that miraculously cause the hexagon shape. According to modern science, the news media, and villagers throughout the world, after 37 years the weather storms have somehow miraculously remained perfectly stable.
(PD) Saturn's north pole hexagon in gray scale.
The above photo of Saturn's hexagon is shown with gray scale contrast. Do you believe that the hexagon is the miraculous effect of weather storms? Does the hexagon look like a normal effect of weather storms? How many hexagons have you seen on Earth that were caused by weather storms? How many storms on Earth have remained miraculously stable for over 37 years?
(PD) Malaclemys terrapin turtle.
Some turtles have hexagon shapes on their shells. The hexagons are not equal of sides, but the hexagons are hexagons, and the patterns repeat themselves. Why do hexagons exist on turtle shells? Is there a
©2017 Larry Neal Gowdy SesquIQ Turtle (the graphic is purposefully blurred).
I purposefully blurred the above graphic so as to not give more details than necessary, but while leaving sufficient resolution to see some of the polygons. (The original graphic is very detailed.)
Over ten years ago (before first seeing a photograph of Saturn's hexagon) I placed a variation of the turtle graphic on the SesquIQ website. One of the reasons of why I placed the turtle graphic on the SesquIQ website was to see if anyone would comment on the polygons. Nobody did.
There exist symbols on ancient walls and boulders that relate to specific 'themes' during different epochs. Some of the symbols are still highly visible in most all cultures. No known writing explains what the symbols imply, but some individuals do understand what the symbols mean, and the SesquIQ turtle was hoped to catch the eye of any individual who might know what the hexagon implies when placed alongside of other shapes.
It is understandable that the general public does not understand what polygons imply, but it is unacceptable that the 'expert' scientists do not know. Saturn's hexagon is fascinating, and the hexagon's cause should have immediately sparked plausible and tantalizing explanations, but after 37 years there is still no coherent scientific explanation. The absence of a rational explanation gives rise to a sharp disdain for the scientists' alleged qualifications and the news media's worthiness of existence.
The science that claims that Saturn's hexagon is caused by weather storms is the same peer reviewed science that claimed mermaids cause hurricanes, and the same science that claims that global warming will cause more hurricanes.
Scientists claim that animals migrate by
Scientists claim that
Scientists claim that
Scientists claim that
Scientists claim that
Wheresoever there exists a scientific theory of cause and effect, there will also exist many mermaids.
The Pathological Science of Cause and Effect
Just because 'A' may always occur before 'B', it does not mean that A causes B. Just because 'female human A' may preceed 'baby human B', it does not mean that the female human is the cause of electricity, physics, planets, molecular stringing, atmospheres, nor any of the countless other things in Nature that must exist and occur before a human can form and be born. Gasoline 'A' might usually always exist before a gasoline-powered car can 'B' self-propel itself, but gasoline by itself is not the cause of cars moving. Mathematically measuring a wall is an act of ignoring everything in-between points A and B, and all claims of cause and effect are the acts of ignoring everything in-between points A and B.
'Cause and effect' is an idiom. Science and academia preach the idiom to be literal. All known cultures and languages have accepted the 'cause and effect' idiom to be literal. It is generally not possible to communicate with a written language without using the idiom within a tense of being literal.
Science's nature is  'A' cause,  mermaid event, and  'B' effect. It is the way of normal man.
Pathological Science Articles
The Mermaid Syndrome gives examples of how people invent and sincerely believe in peculiar claims, Pathological Science #1 touches on a few examples of how some scientists have invented some rather ridiculous theories, Pathological Science #2 Binary touches on the false science of a binary universe, Pathological Science #3 Experts gives examples of frauds who claimed of themselves to be 'expert' scientists, Pathological Science #4 Emotions illustrates how science's lists and descriptions of emotions lend evidence of fake 'expert' scientists as well as science itself being a negative ideology, Pathological Science #5 Fermi Paradox provides a few examples of why the Fermi paradox illustrates the negative nature of science itself, Pathological Science #6 Animal Migration touches on some the underlying fallacies found within all of science's theories of animal migration, Pathological Science #7 March for Science Signs gives several examples of the pathological science written on March for Science signs, Pathological Science #8 March for Science Environmental Signs gives several examples of the pathological science of written on March for Science environmental signs, Pathological Science #9 March for Science Hate Signs gives examples of the hate expressed within the March for Science protests, Pathological Science #10 March for Science Religion Signs gives examples of how Science is interpreted as a religion, Pathological Science #11 March for Science Appeal to Authority Signs gives examples of how popular science is based upon appeals to authority, Pathological Science #12 March for Science Signs Make Stuff Up gives examples of how the March for Science protesters made stuff up, and Pathological Science Updates gives updates and explanations of some of the topics mentioned in the other articles.
More articles on The Logics home page...