Gaia Community

compassion, collaboration & cooperation iN transistion

 Since the beginning of mankind's ponderings ...

 On the "nature of all things universal" - ALL science and all scientists

 have ultimately been proved to be wrong in either some major or minor

 way. The theory of the Universe as perceived by Ptolemy gave way to that

 of Copernicus - Copernicus to Kepler, Kepler to Hawking & Penrose 

 and Hawking to Leonard Susskind.


A JOB IN PROGRESS so to speak !

- and as Susskind has said ...

"I was obsessed with the problem. I couldn't

see how what Stephen said was right "


"Traditional scientific method has always been, at the very best,

20-20 hindsight. It's good for seeing where you've been.

It's good for testing the truth of what you think you know, but

it can't tell you where you ought to go." - Robert M. Pirsig


"Nonetheless, ever since Copernicus and Galileo and their grand intuition,

we have all learned to distrust our senses. We generally pay far more

attention to what we are told by the experts than to what we can learn

with our unaided senses. We have split our reasoning minds off from our

sensing bodies. In order to buy into the Copernican worldview, it would

seem we had to accept this split, had to hold our thinking selves apart

from the sensuous and sensing life of the body. But what great damage

that's done - we've forgotten our instinctive, corporeal solidarity with

the breathing earth.

After all, we now know that the sun, too, is in motion, and that even the

"fixed" stars are rapidly rushing apart from one another – indeed all of the

celestial bodies are in motion relative to one another. Hence it seems an

arbitrary choice where one chooses to stabilize one's perspective. But since

we find ourselves here, on this earth, it perhaps makes just as much sense

to consider the breathing earth as the stable center of our world ...

(to recognize the ground underfoot as the very ground of our reality)

than to consider the Sun as the unmoving center" 


                                                             David Abram




Although the beauty about Andrew Cohen's "What is enlightenment"    

magazine-initiative is that it brings together such a wide diversity of  

knowledge & opinion - acquired and established by the very broadest   

spectrum of specialist practitioners - such that articles about       

and A New Dawn for Cosmology can be published in the same edition -       

there is a tendency to encourage us to seek & get involved with more        

 and more about less and less.

This is exemplified by the latest edition which highlights Ken Wilber's view's

on God's Next Move - as Ken himself acknowledges Ray Kurzweil's views on

the singularity etc. - against a background of discussion between Ray Kurzweil

- as a scientist - and Stephen Woolfram - as a mathematician  - about

Stephen Woolfram's book ... "A New Kind of Science".

Science and the Superstition of Materialism

In view of our ever increasing need to consider - and accept - what changes when change changes? - Einstein's observation that ...

we cannot solve problems at the same level of thinking at which we created them

still seems most appropriate - but should we not, equally ... be seeking less and less about more and more?

In the same way that Spinoza inspired confidence in Leibnitz to publish his theories, as a result of their discussions about the I-Ching - we should utilise the Zaadz ‘like-minded collective' to promote a greater collective spiritual understanding of what needs to happen to change the world!



We are not bound by the laws of physics as we know them today -





Quantum physics tells us that NO THING is actually solid.  


Everything is energy ...



Those who preach “one path” and DO NOT leave room for

future realities are not only dishonest fools, likely obsessed

with honours and personal wealth, but are likely unable to

face their likely many past/future mistakes.




THIS editorial introduces knowledge of electromagnetic

radiation, black holes and, vacuum space to help the reader

better understand Haramein’s recent paper and is a must read

to understand why mainstream scientists have and continue to

abuse their notoriety. 





Only the Kosmic Dance of the MIND   


would accept the IDEA that it is possible 


to acknowledge the existence of the


Parallel Worlds of our perceived


multiverse of parallel universes









First published by Michael Grove @zaadz 9th June 2006


Access_public Access: Public



views (835)



13 days later

thunderbeing said

I agree with you Michael sort of… in my view… science has not been proven wrong because there is no right and wrong with models of reality. It is a question of degree of fit. The theories now fit better… or has
reality moved? That is the question. I like that about seeking less and less about more and more.

That is certainly the direction to go in my opinion. Great post :-)

Michael : catalyst-producer

20 days later

Michael said

20 days later

Zoe said

Thanks for that link, Michael! I've been trying to find that thread since having had to sign off the day I asked for your friendship!

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

Could it be even contemplated, that the organisation which gave us the internet,

be now about to let the ”BIG PICTURE GENIE out of the BIG PICTURE BOTTLE” ???

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

… OR that the idea that the Universe has been around ‘forever’ didn’t, in fact, start at the Big Bang, as suggested by Brian Cox, and that Stepehen Hawking and Dr. Michio Kaku are among those discussing the possibility of travelling close to the speed of light and how that would change the way we experience TIME.

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

Whose science IS IT anyway? asks Michael Brooks in his article; re-iterating Jose Ortega’s insight that the majority of scientists are - ”shut up in the narrow cell of their laboratory, like the bee in the cell of its hive” and felt that, every now and then, scientists should look at the cultural value placed on science, and consider
how society and the heart of man are to be organised in order that there may continue to be [scientific] investigators”.

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

“The signs of environmentalism’s death are all around us: we speak in terms of technical policies, NOT vision and values; we propose 20th-century solutions to 21st-century problems; we are failing to attract young people, the physical embodiment of the future, to our cause; we’re failing to attract the disenfranchised, the disempowered, the dispossessed and the disengaged; we treat our mental categories, ourselves and other elements of nature as THINGS; most of all, environmentalism IS no longer capable of generating the power it needs to deal with the world’s most serious ecological problems.”

Adam Werbach, 2004

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

Space storm alert: 90 seconds from catastrophe - says the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), in its latest report about the threat of Solar Storms and the scientific community declare, after its Copenhagen emergency meeting, that …

We need another kind of scientist to save the world

SCIENCE and politics make uncomfortable bedfellows.

Rarely is this more true than in the case of climate change, where it is now
time for emergency counselling. One point repeatedly made at last week's climate change congress in Copenhagen was that formulating an action plan to curb climate change is
NOT the job of scientists.

LET THE NEW stratified realities ROLL ON

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

Science, like theology, reveals transcendent truths about a changing world.
The best scientists are moral individuals whose business is to seek the truth.
Corruption of this process undermines not just democracy but civilization itself.”

Robert Kennedy Jr, 2004

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

Levels of intelligence WILL UNDOUBTEDLY EVOLVE throughout the 21st Century, which will prove that ”Evolution as a spiritual processIS a SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

… JUST as Stephen Wolfram prepares to launch his Wolfram Alpha computational search engine as complementary to Google rather than in competition.

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 2 years later

Michael said

The conscious delegation of decision making to
computers is the next phase of social evolution

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

SCIENTISM, the view that science can explain ALL human conditions and expressions, mental as well as physical[IS] one of the dominant superstitions
of our day.

Leon Wieseltier - New York Times

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here.
The two windows give different views, but they look out at the same universe.
Both … are worthy of respect.

Freeman Dyson

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

” Evolution IS a spiritual process ” … says Ray Kurzweil

Have a listen to this interview at EnlightenNext
and take some time to read the Blog comments.

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

… whilst the New Scientist discusses The dizzying ambition of Wolfram Alpha

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

SCIENCE IS a double-edged sword.

The science that can create genetic engineering that can end diseases,
IS the same science that in the hands of the Nazis tried to destroy humanity

We can light the world with the atom or we can destroy the world with the atom.”
John Hogue

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

Jim Lovelock is an iconic figure in British science, a prophet whose prophecies are coming true. Lovelock is best known as the 'father' of Gaia theory, which is now established as the most useful way of understanding the dramatic changes happening
to the environment of the Earth.

Yet,throughout his life - as a student, independent scientist and writer -
Lovelock has met with disagreement and disparagement. His drive came
from personal belief, curiosity and conviction. He has been right for
all his working life and, although it is frightening for us to believe
the scenario he describes in
The Vanishing Face of Gaia, he is right again.

The Vanishing Face of Gaiais James Lovelock's final word on the terrifying environmental problems
we will confront in the twenty-first century. The earth as we know it
is vanishing. It is moving inexorably to a new, hot state. The idea
that we can “save the planet” by reducing carbon emissions is, Lovelock
writes, nothing but a sales pitch. The earth, as it always has done,
will save itself. It is up to us to save the human race.

As heapproaches his 90th birthday, James Lovelock looks forward to what he
describes as “a hell of an upgrade”, as Richard Branson is sending him
into space with Virgin Galactic, so he can, for the first time, see the
face of Gaia.

AS Renaissance 2 have recently stated …

Weeach need to take personal responsibility for acting in whatever way we
can to ensure the renewable world scenario emerges, acting from our
highest self and our greatest strengths. Could you live with your
conscience knowing the consequences of inaction? Each of us can and
does make a difference, even in the smallest ways.

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

IT IS hardly surprising that public confidence in science has taken a dip lately, what with all the turmoil surrounding climate change research, the failure of the peer review process to block Andrew Wakefield's paper on MMR, and the near-comical troubles at the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland.

The lesson from all this? Don't be surprised – or disappointed – when scientists don't get everything right all the time. Science has delivered a host of developments that have made life safer, better and longer-lasting for all of us.

BUT there have always been bumps in the road of discovery – and while science remains a human endeavour, there always will be

Michael Brooks

Michael : catalyst-producer

over 3 years later

Michael said

Certainty and confidence in science marked its development in the 19th and much of the 20th centuries, but now it carries on unaware that the
determinism that had so long enlivened it IS DEAD. The recocognition
that science was provisional and could never be certain was always
there in the MINDS of GOOD SCIENTISTS.

Gradually the world of science has evolved to the dangerous point where computer model-building has precedence over observation and measurement,especially in Earth and Life Sciences. In certain ways modelling by
scientists has become a threat to the foundation on which science has
stood: the acceptance that nature is always the final arbiter and that hypothesis must always be tested by experiment and observation in the real world.

One of James Lovelock'smost beautiful pieces of hard science - which tipped the balance in
favour of Gaia - is his discovery of a great cycle in which algae in
the oceans produce volatile sulphur compounds that act as seeds to form
the oceanic clouds. Without these dimethyl sulphide “seeds”, the
cooling oceanic clouds would be lost

Lovelock is NOTa doom-monger but a practical problem-solving man, with suggestions for
alleviating the climate crisis at many levels. In the short term, as
far as energy is concerned, his answer is nuclear power, followed soon
after by thermal solar power, produced by huge arrays of mirrors in the
prime deserts of the word, such as Arizona and the Sahara. His own
proposal for reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide is an ingenious
spin-off from his algal-cloud theory. Large plastic cylinders thrust
vertically into the ocean could bring nutrient-rich lower waters to the
surface, producing an algal bloom that would increase the cloud cover.

Lovelock is the real Jim who can fix it.

Leave Your Wise and Insightful Comment

Views: 746

Comment by Michael Grove on February 26, 2013 at 9:50

" The practice of mindfulness and concentration always brings insightIt can 
help both Buddhists and scientists. Insights transmitted by realized practitioners like the Buddhas and bodhisattvas can be a source of inspiration and support for both Buddhist practitioners and scientists, and scientific tests can help Buddhist practitioners understand better and have more confidence in the insight they receive from their ancestral teachers.
It is our belief that in this 21st Century, Buddhism and science can go hand in
hand to promote more insight for us all and bring more liberation, reducing discrimination, separation, fear, anger, and despair in the world."
Comment by Michael Grove on March 8, 2013 at 7:09



“Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists
 as ornithology is to birds.” 

                                                 - Richard P. Feynman



  TIME - as Professor Brian Cox has suggested in the

  Wonders of Life - for the scientific community to

  explain the spirituality which forms the basis of

  each and everyone of our belief systems 

  NEVER forgetting of course that Rupert Sheldrake's mindset

  of 'realism' was significantly influenced by his friendship with

  Terence McKenna, who for me will be forever remembered for

  his proposal in respect of marijuana that "The mystery IS IN the

  Body and the way the Body Works itself", which for me has had

  the most significant influence on my practice of Tai Chi; and of

  course " IF the words LIBERTY and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS

  don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness,

  then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was

  written on" 




Comment by Michael Grove on July 27, 2013 at 12:51

The emphasis that science has placed on one particular form of observation has made any

kind of unified view quite impossible. As said here before and often complained of elsewhere,

the dualistic view is self-justifying. It makes a (quite spurious) claim to "objectivity" in such a way

as to exclude human experience and knowing from any possibility of delivering the "truth".

The objectivity is spurious because that choice of perspective is a subjective one. Perhaps more

importantly, it is quite simply out of touch with the scientific nature of reality. Remember, we

have used science itself both in our method and our reasoning, to establish that the "mind"

and the "matter" are not in any way separable

Put another way, we have provided scientific evidence for the existence of

those things which people describe as "spirit", "essence" and "soul".

Reality and the Social Order p307 The Science of Possibility - Jon Freeman & Juliana Freeman

Comment by Michael Grove on February 24, 2014 at 15:16

The Theoretical Minimum is a series of Stanford Continuing Studies courses taught by world

renowned physicist Leonard Susskind.  These courses collectively teach everything required to

gain a basic understanding of each area of modern physics including all of the fundamental

mathematics. The sequence begins with the modern formulations of classical mechanics

discovered by Lagrange and Hamilton in the late 18th and 19th centuries, and then moves on to

the radical new theories of relativity and quantum mechanics discovered by Albert Einstein and

others in the early 20thcentury. The sequence concludes with a study of modern cosmology

including the physics of black holes.

Comment by Michael Grove on March 7, 2014 at 6:50

So much research, today, seems motivated  less by a sense of wonder than by a great

will-to-control. It is a mark of immaturity, I think, a sign that science is still in its adolescence.

A more mature natural science – the science to come – will be motivated more by a wish for

richer relationship, for deeper reciprocity with the world that we study.

                                             David Abram during an interview with Derrick Jensen  entitled ...
                                            Alliance for Wild Ethics || The Perceptual Implications of GAIA

Comment by Michael Grove on July 28, 2014 at 10:23

Gradually the world of science has evolved to the dangerous point where model-building

has precedence over observation and measurement, especially in Earth and life sciences.

In certain ways modelling by scientists has become a threat to the foundation on which science

has stood: the acceptance that nature is always the final arbiter and that hypothesis must always

be tested by experiment and observations in the real world.

James Lovelock


Comment by Michael Grove on November 7, 2014 at 12:48

In Rupert Sheldrake’s A New Science of Life: The Hypothesis of Formative Causation (1982), the

notion of morphogenetic fields advances an explanation of an essentially telepathic intraspecies

medium of communication. Peter Russell’s notion of the Global Brain (1982) builds on the

electronic communication and nervous system metaphor of the noosphere to establish the idea

of the noosphere as a planetary global brain. Buckminster Fuller’s concepts for developing a

whole system design perception of the Earth - Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of

Thinking (1975) and Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth (1969) - are also fundamental to a

theory of the noosphere as intrinsic to a view of the planet as an evolving organism, an

idea also articulated in James Lovelock’s Gaia Hypothesis (1981).

Sheldrake has proposed that memories are better understood in terms of morphic resonance, a

process whereby patterns of activity in the past resonate with patterns in the present on the basis

of similarity, with this resonance passing across or through space and time from the past to the

present. He has discussed this hypothesis in detail in his book The Presence of the Past and it is

summarised in his book Science Set Free/The Science Delusion in Chapter 7.

Comment by Michael Grove on February 8, 2016 at 7:10

Progress is made by trial and failure; the failures are generally a

hundred times more numerous than the successes; yet they are

usually left unchronicled. 

William Ramsay

We know that scientific knowledge is a powerful force, but as the

old adage goes, “with great power comes greater responsibility,”

and as scientific understandings evolve, the applications become

increasingly exhilarating and connections across disciplines enable

powerful conceptual revolutions to take hold. In my opinion,

the story that underpins black hole theory reveals that while

scientific breakthroughs inspire innovations, it also reminds us

to develop a mindset that solving our global problems requires

leaving the door open to new realities and unseen connections.

Here is a roundup of recent scientific news related to black hole theory.

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Gaia Community to add comments!

Join Gaia Community

© 2024   Created by Michael Grove.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service