Science Suspected of Being a Bunch of Humpty Dumpty’s Lusting for Nobel Prizes instead of  focusing on a Decent Systematic Search for the Laws of Everything.

So Scientific Eggheads are Subpoenaed to Set this Straight

Sanction:  A hard time before drink up time.   

The Shroud of Idiocy on the Rubik’s Cube Chess Game-Play of Life

Well, okay let’s take it that only Science in Transition has been verbally decapitated in absentia by Lady Justice in so far it concerns the Royal Dutch Scientific Society KNAW for having covered up evidence with the NWA 2015. This by deleting the clustered search terms instead of posing valid falsification. See my earlier post More Millionaires, No Poor, No War.

So, let’s temporarily screw the head of this headless horseman back on and give them a fair retrial together with a first trial for the rest of science.

Let’s start with a clean slate, shall we?

So Scientists having a social contract with humanity: Quo Vadis? Or what is your stated goal?

Can you pose valid falsification that the stated goal should be and should have been best practice:


And if so, can you pose valid falsification of the five laws of everything I claim to have found?

The fourth Law of Everything shows you that you should have your mindset i.e. focus on the blue goal orientated algorithm of Mars in stead of the algorithm of Saturn of playing green humble rings of Saturn yet unwittingly craving authority and Nobel prizes.

Enjoy explaining to not have been a “Humble” Humpty Dumpty Headless Horseman Zombie  to anyone whilst having a drink!


  1. ·

    Gris: you write, to the scientists of the world: “ Can you pose valid falsification that the stated goal should be and should have been best practice: A DECENT SYSTEMATIC SEARCH FOR THE LAWS OF EVERYTHING?”

    You must tell us how we could falsify your “laws”. ie what could we do which would cause you to admit that you are wrong. If if’s interesting and if in principle doable, then we might consider it.


    1. ·

      Richard you need to distinguish between falsifying the stated probandum (for the benefit of the not legally educated it means “that was is to be proven”) that you’ve copied and falsifying the subsequent laws that I claim to have best practice found on that probandum.

      As being Dada Easter Bunny magistrate on inherent Laws of Everything presiding, I honour, appreciate and respect your posing of position in defense of Science.

      Legally it is in this speed proceeding now by me deemed established fact via being non disputed positions by you that Science indeed has failed humanity for not ever having had the stated goal or any other better goal.

      Not seeing you to have professional legal representation after having performed the role of the attorney of God via rendering a subpoena, I’m bound as magistrate to appoint myself as amicus curia i.e. the honourable advocate of the Devil in defense of the Holy anti-theses i.e. your position.

      So be advised that you can then ask for a retrial on the otherwise then established facts. That would require Nova, for we don’t want to go round in circular argument for times on end on a further undisputed and thus established probandum of averting WW3 in 2022 now do we? So these points are closed unless you pose to reconsider via Nova. If you whish I can clarify.

      As a point of further clarification: My claimed best practice proofs of said Laws are also circular arguments only I claim having proven to make the largest circles as that best practice proof.

      Yet before we can come to that and me answering your fair question after having established the said probandum of Science, (“the where the hell are we going quo vadis question) we must establish the postulate or postulates. I.e. what most fundamental assumption(s) if any do we make for this proceeding?

      In short:

      Do you dispute the Grand Postulate as stated in an earlier post?


  2. ·

  3. ·

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *