Are they people at all?

For science, from the point of view of how we know it today, unexplained phenomena are undesirable in any field. After all, he denies a rational understanding of the world, yet, what a paradox, he needs these irrational sciences as a stimulus. For many scientists, a big dilemma arises: "Either I deny these excesses and my career will have an upward trend, or I will not downplay and deny them, I will examine them - and then my reputation, reputation, and therefore my career is in jeopardy…"

Luckily, I'm not a scientist, my career is in a different direction, and so I can afford to argue with scientific axioms, trying to break through the arrogance of four-titled researchers in front of their names and their names. But here's the proverbial saying. The title does not honor man, but people honor titles.

Already in 19. century scientists were convinced that in essence everything that could be learned was already explored. The human desire for discovery would have to break away from science disciplines and devote itself to beautiful art and philosophy. And those open confusion like gravity or the way the brain works should be removed soon.

Well, and because I strongly disagree with the above, I will try to point out in my new series of creatures that vastly outnumber those 99,9999% of the population. And mainly deny steady science lessons. And unfortunately, whether or not a goodwill (for whom) opens up a large number of question marks before us and opens up a space to think over these fantastic ways of our thinking.

I have no patent for reason, I only try one thing. To point out that not even scholarly scholars and their scholarship may be true.