moving the observer
I appreciate people who can make a point that refutes any of my theories. I would even put it on the page it self. Attacking the author should of course not be looked upon as a cohesive argument. The thing is, in my opinion the line where most people just stop looking at something is very clear to all of us. All I do is look a little further as that.
Now to my astonishment sometimes it doesn't take much work to find more substantial data changing the original view 180 degrees. If I then look over my shoulder and see mankind has abandoned the topic using the small chunk of initial data I cant help but think ""ahhh, IDIOTS!!"" New discoveries happen from clues, they don't come in paper boxes out of the factory. Nature doesn't write in any peer review journal. The primordial state of the discovery is the CLUE!
I had already established the rest of mankind was to dumb to go look for it. Now they want to pin this "believes anything" label onto me? ha-ha? Taking my second look I can clearly see the joke is not on me at all. Being clueless goes well described in our dogma.
The nasty thing is that among the many clues they have so ignorantly discarded are the biggest treasures mankind could ever discover and that they do so on a daily basis. .... by the millions of them......
If we would persuade half of them the next generation clue would also be much more constructive.
The fact it means all scientists are idiots seems like the minor discovery in all this.