When David Copperfield “the world’s most famous illusionist” let a buss, airplane and even the statue of liberty disappear in front of numerous television cameras and people of all kinds that are there to testify the truthfulness of the event, the world is glued to their TV set and amazed by what they see. Evidently most of us, even though we don’t know always how it has been done, do understand due to our knowledge of the observable world and correct use of our commonsense that trickery and not magic has taking place.
Another phenomenon we’re often confronted with is what we call in science optical illusions. Strictly speaking an optical illusion is always a recreated projection of the physical world within the brain that doesn’t corresponds with the true image, or nature, of the thing we observe. Needless to say that all recreated things are always subject to limitations, and that all observations are in essence projections in the brain that can be internally and/or externally activated; nevertheless it’s not our goal here to outline you all the technicalities of the processes involved herewith.
The only things we want you to realize for the moment is that Copperfield magic and optical illusion disassociate us of physical reality if we give too much weight to first order observational facts.
Luckily for us we humans are endowed with the faculty of commonsense that doesn’t only allow us to bypass these shortcomings but also enable us to align ourselves with the true nature of things.
Unfortunately the high priests of secular science use often first order observational facts of fundamental Nature to sustain their believes and wishful aspirations, and postulate things and laws that ‘are not’ and will ‘never ever be’.
The reason for this is twofold: firstly, science is said to be a truth alignments methodology that has liberated us from the vicious claws of doctrinal religious institutions, and in the process of it, through the practice of ‘science’ and not ‘dogma’, has allowed us till some extent to understand Nature and produce life-increasing and life-improving tangibles.
Science is therefore seen, and declared, as the sole and only valid instrument to address the more fundamental questions of life face-on, and here answers are considered truth by default.
The problem is that almost all answers to fundamental questions of Nature can be related to us, hence, prescribe in one way or the other how we ought to conduct our lives. For this reason we should always assure us of the fact that we don’t base our conclusions too much on first order observational facts while trying to depict fundamental Nature, if not we just end up with Copperfield magic that even though wonderful stunts of deception are not something to base our life upon.
Of course, the fact that humans are still around today clearly testifies that we’ll not always die by living the fiction, however, to live our life to its fullest potential we have to realize in the first place what our essence is by understanding fundamental Nature as a whole.
If scientists, when dealing with fundamental Nature, for historical reasons or predisposition uphold dubious views in defense of their claims than science on the fundamental level is what we call illusive science.
Under the umbrella of illusive science we’ll give you some examples of first order observational facts that led to wrong conclusions of our factual world; evidently not all of you will agree with what we say, but then again, there are still people out there that believe and insist that they don’t exist, but this is all together another story.