Without doubt, modern science is one of the foundations of today’s world, having much to do with how we mark what we call progress and why we call ourselves modern. If you consider the impacts of science, especially since the inception of the modern scientific method in the 1600s, you will be hard pressed to find any area of human life unaffected by the advances of science. Indeed, the impact science has had on our daily lives was never more pronounced than in the present day.
While the advances humanity has enjoyed due to modern science are so evident, there is also monumental evidence showing us that ancient societies and cultures had abilities, capacities, technology and therefore a science that has long been forgotten, now lost to us and remaining beyond our present-day knowledge and understanding. Perhaps the greatest stand-out example is the Great Pyramid of Giza, believed to have been built around 4000 years ago, the magnitude, precision and permanence of which is beyond our current day abilities to reproduce. Another great example is the ancient monumental complex at Göbekli Tepe in Turkey, believed to have been constructed around 10,000 years ago, comprising the oldest known monolithic architecture in the world, which completely contradicts our understanding of the capabilities of the Neolithic era hunter-gatherer culture that is understood to have existed there at the time it was built.
We simply don’t know how, nor why these structures were built, but the scale of each defies our modern understanding to fathom, and there is no doubting the magnitude of purpose, focus and ability of those who built them.
If we project and calculate to attempt to understand them, based on our current knowledge of the ancient societies, cultures and technologies of those times, the conclusion is that the workforces and timespan in years required to complete each renders both projects as incomprehensible feats. For example, the workforce to build the Great Pyramid is speculated to have been some 100,000 men for a period of 15-20 years, the pyramid comprising some 2,300,000 stone blocks averaging 2.3 metric tons in weight. The workforce for at least part of Göbekli Tepe is speculated to have been many hundreds of men, there being some 200 pillars placed upright, each weighing between 10 and 20 metric tons and positioned very precisely with a smaller stone laid with the same precision across its top, all sourced from a quarry some 100 metres away.
As we don’t know how they did it, these two examples alone demonstrate that we are now disconnected from our origins, lost to the magnificence of the science that humanity has accessed in bygone ages. That being the case, a worthy and telling question to ask would be: as we actually don’t know how many workers and how long it took to build the Great Pyramid, what if it was built by, let’s say, 10 people and within a much shorter timeframe, let’s say 2 years? Now, if that was the case – and we don’t know it wasn’t – then the science at work was entirely different to what is commonly projected and definitely something beyond what we know to be science today.
Asking this different question highlights the importance of the intelligence that prevails at the outset when we approach anything scientifically, to the point that it is literal and precise to state that:
The question we ask before we start is all important in determining the result of any scientific enterprise.
And there is much more that remains unknown to humanity, as modern science is very aware and open to admit and about which the questions scientists ask is all important. No greater example than the NASA website [https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy], which at the time of writing this describes that modern science can account for only 5% of the detectable universe, the remaining 95% being detectable only by data and calculations which persistently and undeniably imply it must be there, but which in itself remains beyond our scientists’ earthly senses and instruments to detect and measure. This unknown 95% is further calculated to be 68% dark energy and 27% dark matter, both being described as ‘dark’ because at present scientists are literally ‘in the dark’ about them. Scientists globally are hoping that the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Switzerland will help solve this mystery, but what if the question asked that has resulted in the monumental work and investment that has gone into the LHC was not the question that could or will result in the true answer?
The modern scientific method is at the heart of what we now call science. This method is quite simple: you start by making an observation, then you ask a question (the all-important question), from which a hypothesis or testable explanation is formed, then you make a prediction based on the hypothesis, test the prediction and then report and use the results, so that you or someone else can go on to make new hypotheses and predictions. And so, the cycle goes.
There is no doubt this method works, evident in the great technological and other advances humanity has enjoyed by applying it for some 400 years, but is that the limit of science, the only perspective, the greatest scientific method possible for humanity? Who dares ask such a question, for fear of being shouted down by today’s scientific elite?
As an illustration that science can only ever be as good, great or as wanting as the intelligence that demands it – i.e. that which asks the all-important question – consider how the modern scientific method applied merely to address the symptoms of disease will produce vastly different results than will science applied in wisdom to address the underlying cause. This must be so because the first step, the initial question (and therefore the founding intelligence at the outset), is vastly different between the two. Does the intelligence motivating the scientist to ask their question seek to ameliorate the observable symptoms, or to understand and address the underlying cause? These are two vastly different questions. The underlying motivation for observing and asking the specific question asked at the outset is the prevailing intelligence that cannot but influence every move that follows, to the point of producing the result and framing the conclusion drawn.
With every question there is a great responsibility. A college of true physicians would understand that if they do their job with full integrity, by arriving at and healing the underlying cause of disease in society, they would effectively put themselves out of a job.
As demonstrated, intelligence determines the outputs of science well before the scientist takes their first step on the cycle of the modern scientific method, which is simply to make an observation, as the intelligence that has prevailed over the scientist to that point then dictates every determination and movement that comes after making the observation, including the interpretation of what is observed so that the question asked supports the prevailing intelligence. And so, while the modern scientific method is founded on the principle of objectivity, there is an unavoidable subjectivity that is the mind of the scientist in arriving at their all-important question – the question they dare ask, as opposed the question they dare not.
As human beings, we like to think that we think; we like to think that we are intelligent and that our intelligence is our own. But what quality of intelligence is this, when so much of human behaviour, individually and societally, observably says something else? Based on this observation, is it not an obvious question to ask: what if our intelligence is not our own, but rather is something we access? What if our thoughts don’t originate in our brains, but rather our brains receive them, much like a radio, from the source of intelligence to which we are aligned?
You may consider that farfetched or ludicrous, and therefore unsafe to ask, just as in a past era the accepted knowledge based on the science of the day was to consider ludicrous, even heretical (and therefore extremely dangerous), the possibility that the earth was anything but flat and at the centre of the universe. Just the same, the accepted knowledge of today, as delivered to us by the modern scientific method, includes many things that no doubt will be considered ludicrous in the future. Today’s doctor is tomorrow’s barber (analogous to the now disdained bloodletter of the middle ages) and tomorrow’s doctor is today’s unwanted disruption that, today, will inevitably be branded a quack, at least until the intelligence shifts radically enough to permit a different question be asked, without severely endangering the reputation and livelihood of the scientist who would otherwise dare not ask it.
And for today’s doctor, who asks “how do I treat the symptoms my patient is presenting?”… what if tomorrow’s question is “what is the underlying energetic cause manifesting as my patient’s disease and how do we address that?”
The What is Intelligence? section of this site examines the fact that there is much about human life that does not make sense and never has. A key aspect to be considered here is that the modern scientific method has made little if any impact on the ongoing fact of nonsensical human behaviour – metaphorically we have changed our clothes but we are still the same humanity underneath them – still ‘in the dark’ about the greater proportion of ourselves and the Universe we’re in, and therefore still plagued by disease, unrest, disharmony, disunity, division, violence, greed, poverty, war and so on. And yet, as we change in outward appearance (only), we mark that superficial change as ‘progress’.
Recognising the implications of the intelligence that prevails over and determines the questions we dare ask, what must precede observation, therefore, is a great depth of honesty, as without this we cannot arrive at the question that is at the heart of what is intrinsic to all truly evolutionary science. If there is a science of the entirety of daily life, then that must be learned and practised as a lived way if we are to truly evolve personally and as a human society. Indeed, only with absolute honesty can we make the untainted observations that can lead to this burning question:
What is the cause of my and society’s unending unrest and everything by way of the disease and disharmony etc that we suffer as a result?
As we have well and truly proven, with abundant evidence piling up around us, the other question, “What can I do to manage and relieve the discomfort of the symptoms of my (or my patient’s) disease and unrest?”, has never served humanity well throughout recorded history, other than to deliver some temporary relief that never addresses the underlying cause. And there is no sound intelligence that says this is suddenly about to change, given the same intelligence informing the same method guarantees the same result – in this case the perpetuation of humanity’s underlying disease and unrest and the ongoing demand for relief.
Have we reduced science by rendering it to its modern form? There is compelling evidence that shows this to be the case, as outlined above and illustrated in greater depth here in other articles in The Science Says section of this site. It is for the reader to observe the observable outplay of the factors that have driven and maintain what is here described as that reduction – insistent on a strict confinement of science within the framework of one method that relies solely on the five physical senses and the rigidity of ‘evidence-based’ thinking, to the exclusion and often fierce derogation and criticism of other approaches.
What of that 95% of the Universe that remains in darkness to modern science? As we are inseparable from our Universe – a simple energetic fact – could it be that we are also, and more importantly, in the dark to all but 5% of ourselves?
And what of Intelligence? Observable from farthest observable reaches of space to the unquestionable exquisite intelligence displayed by the dancing honey bee and 100,000 starlings flying in synchronised harmony, is it that the Universe itself is the ultimate source of all intelligence and that we ourselves as humanity and individually have none, other than by way of whatever quality of intelligence we are aligned to and thereby accessing, like radio receivers? Be it a lesser intelligence, perhaps one confined to and churning within that 5% of the Universe and ourselves that we know, or a greater, universal and truly evolutionary intelligence that is of and from the 95%, which presently remains in darkness to us, whichever of these we are basing human life on, what then is the science of mastering that alignment – so that ultimately we can tune into, access and live human life according to that greater intelligence, ultimately the Truth and Ageless Wisdom, of the greater universal being of which we are inescapably part?
If the confinement of our human being-ness to the 5% is expressing as the deliberate exclusion from science of the human capacities for inspiration, revelation and intuition, that were until relatively recently so much part of it, then the resulting expression and movement would, predictably, be the division of science from its origins, in unity with religion and philosophy – see Integrative Religion. And this clearly, while it may benefit a few for a time, has long been and remains, observably, to the detriment of humanity on the whole.
How is it that we understand and are aware of so little, at best some 5% of the Universe, and of ourselves?
As the NASA website says, “More is unknown than is known.” So there is much for us to consider here in honesty if we are to arrive at the truthful answer to this question, as the evidence so strongly says that modern science has forgotten its origins in the sacred science of our distant past, is in staunch denial of, actively excluding and even ridiculing the possibility of a magical side of the Universe and ourselves that is everything to do with a multi-dimensionality that is accessible by every human being. That act of forgetting, ultimately, is to render and keep ourselves separate from and no longer cognitive of the fact of the beyond-human intelligence that is so abundantly, persistently and obviously presented and reflected to us in every moment, on earth and in the heavens.
At some point – which may be described simply as the inevitable point where eventually we shift our alignment from the self-serving intelligence that feeds us everything that prolongs our disease, unrest, disharmony etc, including the science that supports that intelligence and tells us we’re ok when in fact we are far from it – we will indeed realign to another intelligence that will deliver to us the science that starts with asking a different question, from which can be developed a practicality of living and moving that re-imprints everything about human life – the foundational intelligence of Oneness that ultimately is Truth and The Ageless Wisdom.
The website demonstrates, from the lived way of its many authors, the possibility that there is far more to science than the modern scientific method, we having each in our own way gone beyond the well-defined boundaries of that method, to dare to ask a different question and from there realise and bring to life a simple practicality that is the science of the entirety of everyday life, be it of love, relationship, religion, family, work, integrity, responsibility, healing and intelligence and more –
Signifying the possibility of a grand, enriching and transformative science that is completely available, waiting to be accessed from the essence of what we truly are, and that produces consistent, measurable and repeatable results, as any true science should.
