| Throughout the ages there have been continuous refinements made to our understanding of how we gain knowledge about ourselves and the world about us. It is possible to see scientific activities as falling somewhere along a multicolored spectrum. Near one extreme we have the modern scientist, who studies data within the framework of her best knowledge of the best proven theories, who draws conclusions about how anomalies can be explained within that framework, and who, failing this, makes adjustments or additions to these accepted theories. This is the kind of activity that has in recent centuries resulted in the burgeoning of technology, a technology that seems to exert increasing stress on present-day cultures and societies. On the other end of the spectrum are learned men who reject the modern framework, who choose rather to accept uncritically the theories and myths of former ages, who cite authorities of former ages due to undeserved respect, who ignore data uncovered by the sophisticated technology of our day, who prefer instead to rely on traditions of unenlightened societies and cultures. John L. Casti (1943–) a mathematician specializing in modeling, in his popular book, Paradigms Lost, pp. 1–10, introduces science by typifying the modern scientist in Jocelyn (Bell) Burnell, who in the 1960’s made the connection between a “pulsar” and the theoretical neutron star demonstrating conclusively that it was remnants of a supernova. As the archetypical pseudo-scientist he sees I. Velikovsky, who ignores principles of elementary physics, who uses ancient texts of observations subject to multiple interpretations to derive speculative theories, and who supports the “theories” with rhetorical devices and arguments that abandon or stretch reason. |