Forbidden Science by J. Douglas Kenyon © 2008 Bear and Company ISBN
978-159143082-7 310 pages Paperback $18.00 (U.S.)
This is the third "Forbidden" book I have reviewed (History" and
"Religion"
being the other two). Each of them has presented an alternate view of
traditional interpretations of history. Mr. Kenyon is the editor and
publisher of "Atlantis Rising" and, as such, may be expected to accept
such
alternative views unreservedly. And if this book ware only his work that
is
what I would expect.
This book, like the others, however, contains the writings of over a dozen
authors, many of whom put forth conflicting ideas and some of whom are
truly
skeptical. I use the word "skeptical" purposely. They are not debunkers.
They don't say "Only this is true. Everything else is nonsense." They
say
"If this is true, let's try to find the proof for it."
The primary theme of these essays does contain a certain amount of what
many
people would call paranoia - suppression by the establishment (government,
academia, etc.), but given the prevalent attitudes it may be justified.
And, besides, just because someone is paranoid doesn't mean nobody is out
to
get them. Does that paranoia invalidate the conclusions drawn by these
researchers? I don't think so. It may affect their perceptions regarding
why their work is rejected without affecting the research itself.
If "fringe science" or "voodoo science" (to use a couple of establishment
buzzwords) interests you; if you are open to non-traditional views of the
universe (potential anti-gravity, archeo-astronomy, alien life forms, and
ESP among others); if you simply want to see the "other side" of the
arguments; this book should be an interesting read for you.
Even the authors of various articles admit that proving some of the
assertions is, at this time, impossible. They propose that these ideas be
accepted as working hypotheses, and that experiments be undertaken, and
fairly evaluated, to determine which lines of study should be pursued.
The
emphasis here is on the words "fairly evaluated," since all too
frequently
results which fly in the face of accepted theories are dismissed out of
hand
(think Galileo, Copernicus, etc.). Just because the results aren't what
was
expected doesn't necessarily make them wrong, it merely kames them
unexpected.
|
