Any info on this? I've spent a good chunk of my life in academia, worked on some peer reviewed papers, had two PhD offers but the stipends were bogus. Many of my close friends are doctoral students right now (or already finished their programs) and I've not once heard of religious involvement in academia. If there is outside involvement like this, I'd love to know as I'm working on some code right now to attempt to automatically flag peer reviewed research that comes from funding which would warrant skepticism.
I'd have to come back when I have time to pull proper sources if you want those. But the gist of it is this: Most (all basically) grant money the large researchers and profs teaching at major schools rely on to cover that gap in the year where they aren't making salary comes from the National Science Foundation in the states (and let's face it, the world). The National Science Foundation is the organization passing out all that sweet grant money that pays for your studies, experiments and covers that multi-month gap everyone needs to fill each year when they'd otherwise be without a salary. I could direct you to some talks where someone goes into detail about this if you want.
But it goes beyond that of course. It's the journals. If you can't publish you can't make it. There are many topics where you don't get published if you go against the dogma. Then there is the entire issue of organizations like DARPA and other alphabets controlling who and who doesn't get that sweet NSF grant money.
I wonder if they are just shit optics for whatever this church/group is, and I'd argue that at least from my perspective as a 27 year old who's lived up and down the east coast, but nobody trusts jack shit. It's wild, people don't trust the news, they don't trust their local newspaper, they don't trust social media feeds, I'd argue that the distrust we have in every point of our information ecosystem is a natural and expected response to it having been weaponized as it was, but also we need to focus on rebuilding this in a more transparent way that works better. My degree was specifically in information security, and it was studying exactly this issue.
In my experience far more people are trusting than not-trusting. Basically, everyone that can't for themselves trusts the media, Government, media or a combination of those. The type of people that watch the nightly news every night at 6pm and take whatever is said there as gospel. Which sadly makes up a large part of the population. Especially among the very old and young.
I was using this as an example of something more I should have been more clear about. But let me ask you, are you familiar with the tests that were done on water and how it responds to sound? I believe they were conducted by a Japanese team. Very interesting stuff. It isn't so much just the music thing (although that is part of it). It's more about how if the spectrum is being shitted up with so many man made sources things can get bad for people's health/mood/etc.
We were not living in this soup in the spectrum 200 years ago and we keep adding more to the soup with each passing year. There is great documentation to show that mass die-offs were happening every time something new in the spectrum was lit up. There is a book called "The Invisible Rainbow" about this subject that I think you'd find very interesting. Everything you probably want to know is in it.
I wasn't talking about the ISO either. Before the ISO mandated another group was pushing hard for it (I don't even think the ISO was a thing when they first started pushing for the change). I'll admit though since its been 2 or 3 years since I read about this stuff in detail I'm fuzzy on the details right now. I think that book mentioned above also touches on it slightly. Although, it's more about when electricity then later the telegram network was first lit up. The after that the early stuff in the radio spectrum just before WW1 and later when more and more things were lit up in the spectrum for applications like radar in WW2 (then mass broadcasting after the war).
I'd have to dig it up again but I have several patents issued by the US Office dealing with things like being able to effect the mood of someone with a common TV and LCD monitor using pulsed frequencies. Guy applied for and got the patent in the early-mid 90s in addition to about 20 related patents. Where they proved they could do things like change the emotions of someone in the same room as a television even if that person wasn't actively paying attention to it. At the end of the patent he even lists off several "evil" applications that could be applied. Guy opened a webpage (no defunct) around the year 1999 where he was warning about it and seemed to feel guilty about what he invented/discovered.
I could dig you up some stuff if you want when I have more time.
The greater point is there is no way we evolved to live within the soup we're currently walking around in. If we had organs that could see/hear it we'd be so overwhelmed we most likely couldn't function. There is absolutely no way it isn't doing bad things to us (many of which have been proven over the years). Yes I'm aware cancer and "the flu" goes way back through history in the documentation. But keep in mind that could have easily been from natural sources (the sun) and of course the same symptoms of sickness can be caused by various different things. The book I mentioned above shows a pattern of mass die-offs due to pandemics happening every time a new portion of the spectrum was lit up. The Spanish Flu being one of the prime examples.
You're probably best off reading the book and making up your own mind. It includes mountains of sources and I read it in like 1-2 days. It was an interesting read for sure.
I agree wholeheartedly with this, math that's too deep in theory to even be practical in computational contexts (modeling computational complexity, analyzing the constraints of abnormal automata we could engineer via PCBs/FPGAs, etc.) serves really nobody. I would argue that economics is even worse in this way, significantly too "written by those who benefit from it" imo. Psychology kills me in this regard too, as you mentioned science is a method to discover truth, and every scientist I know personally and have ever met is kind of imprinted with a significant dose of skepticism. I've never met someone who actually works in or tangential to academia who believes in some sort of "scientific dogma", I think it takes someone who's never really interfaced with science to think that it has all the answers. Nobody thinks they know less than everybody else, than somebody with a PhD. Every door you open just shows you how many more are left shut.
The problem with academia is the fact it operates as a modern priest class. Same thing new name. No one is saying they're wrong about everything. What I am saying is many of them refuse to question basic things. Mostly things they've heard repeated to them over and over again since childhood or their early years in "higher education".
It's absolutely 100% true that there are a wide variety of topics that will get you laughed out of the room and blackballed at every institution of higher learning in the west. Just like it's easy enough for anyone to see that the spooks have a major hand in the affairs of most major universities. In fact, it's their primary recruiting ground.
I know my own chosen field is filled with a bunch of horrible practice and outright lies being peddled by people claiming to be "experts" who sell a lot of people a bill of goods. The entire "cyber security/infosec" field is a total joke for an example.
Oh and it might surprise you but concerning science and religion being joined at the hip. I highly encourage you to read more about the Catholic church's role in the standard model. Without the Catholic church you do not get the standard model we have today. Up until the early 1900s most every well known scientist/celeb daring of academia was on team God (well team Vatican). The Vatican runs many things today like you wouldn't expect. Like several major telescopes. They've also published some really wild books in the past 10 years or so concerning things like ET contact and promotion of things like the big bang theory.
I haven't got many good sources for you right now. I could dig them up. This is stuff I picked up over the years and I'm just recalling from memory.
By chance, are you aware of the 12,000 year destruction cycle for the planet Earth?
