amenoum.org blog 0 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5718446 /authors/Amenoum.html#credits

B . L O G

[ 2021.11.27 ] The pitfall of randomness
MESSAGE 001E: BEGIN
Log author: by Amenoum
Log date: 2021.11.27
As I have stated previously, mainstream science has a lot of problems and these problems will only increase until it embraces new paradigms. In fact, these are not good times for any religionists to be overconfident - be it communicators of mainstream science or anyone else disrespecting or faking relativity. The same is true for consumers of such absolutism. While they might be more careful in academic environment, unfortunately, communicators of science often communicate their beliefs to public instead of objective thought. I, however, do not think they fall in such trap by accident - the general public is more open to beliefs than knowledge. Many of these beliefs will turn out to be wrong for one reason - the abuse of null hypothesis, ignorance of possibility for the existence of hidden variables (hidden correlation). This is why synchronicity is still not on the agenda and this is why periodicity of mass extinctions is still not taken seriously. However, periodicities of 26 to 30 My (million years) have been found in diverse geological phenomena, not only in mass extinctions - flood basalt volcanism, ocean anoxic events, deposition of massive evaporites, sequence boundaries, and orogenic events. If one accepts the new paradigm - a living Earth, it becomes obvious that this is not a coincidence, all these events are supposed to occur relatively simultaneously in the events of neurogenesis. Furthermore, if one accepts another new paradigm - that thermonuclear fusion does not occur in the core of the Sun (it occurs in the Radiative zone), Kelvin-Helmholtz contraction of the core gives 25.746608 My for the time it takes for it to exhaust the fuel (this is not the end of the Sun's core though, it is hypothesized that fuel gets periodically replenished). Considering that the best candidate for periodicity of mass extinctions I have obtained is 25.74 My (see the same reference above), this is a remarkable correlation that should be hard to ignore. My calculations also suggest that Sun's core is at the end of the contraction cycle, agreeing with the hypothesis of imminent major extinction. The null hypothesis should have nothing to do with bias, but it does when the null postulate states "the currently accepted theories and models cannot be wrong". If mainstream science wants to progress - I suggest it inverts the null postulate and consider the evidence. It is not that there is a lack of signals, there is an overabundance of overconfidence in old models (not measurements!) treating these signals as noise.
MESSAGE 001E: END