“Procrustean Science” is a wonderful phrase I came across on the internet in a paper on “Indigenous siderophiles in the lunar highlands”. It’s a rare phrase, deriving from the legend of Procrustes, who was an inn-keeper that liked his guests to fit their beds exactly. If the guests were too short, he would stretch them on a rack, and if they were too long, he would chop off their feet.

In Procrustean science, the bed represents the theory, and the guests represent the facts and observations constituting the evidence. If the facts do not fit, then they are simply altered to make them fit the theory.

That’s the problem with chemtrail theory, they start with the theory, and then pick and choose facts, and narrowly interpret information in a way that fits the theory. They problem is that you can do that for ANY theory. Just constantly refine your interpretation so it is always correct.

Real science does not work like that. It starts with the facts, and then considers all possible explanations, and narrows in on the theory that fits the facts, rather than picking and adjusting the facts that fit the theory.

  7 Responses to “Procrustean Science”

  • …and true science will change it’s thinking if better ideas/better evidence/a more convincing explanation of an observed phenomena pops up.

    Well done for digging up Procrustean thinking…not many people know about that charming landlord, Procrustes.

  • I’ve just ordered this book: “Fluoridation: A Modern Procrustean Practice.” I did not know what “procrustean” meant so I did a web search and found your site.

  • SVP arrêter avec vôtre désinformation c’est complètement farfelus de croire que de la simple condensation de réacteur peut trainer dans le ciel et s’élargir et faire des cumulus artificiels ..c’est ridicule!! Il faut une réaction chimique pour que se produise un tel effet! Alors c’est pas des contrails mais bien des chemtrails!!

    Please stop with your misinformation is completely crazy to think that the simple condensation reactor can hang out in the sky and expand and make artificial cumulus clouds .. this is ridiculous! It is a chemical reaction that such an effect occurs! So it’s not contrails but chemtrails!

  • Pourquoi?

    http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tra%C3%AEn%C3%A9e_de_condensation

    Les principes de formation des traînées de condensation sont donc similaires à ceux des nuages et sont expliqués en détail par la physique des nuages.

  • well, you’re a man of many talents U, not least french fluency.

  • An example of weighting the experiment to give a particular result.
    I asked a FB chemtrail page about not getting a sample contaminated with windblown paticulates….

    Marcel Marceau I’m in UK. Any advice on how to stop windblown particulate ie dust and pollen etc getting into my rain sample jar? Any help would be appreciated.
    Yesterday at 14:37 · Like.

    Chemtrails Project ‎Marcel Marceau, the best advice we have right now, as there is no perfect way to capture rain, is to make sure there are no overhead obstructions (trees, canopy, etc). If the rain sample is collected in a clearing, and you get the first 5-10 mins of rain, then that is as close to “pristine” as we will get. From there the determination of growth can still be patterned with the other samples.
    Yesterday at 16:07 · Like.

    Marcel Marceau Just spoken to some mates, and their advice is not to sample at the beginning of the rain. The reasoning behind this is, if there is any windblown particles in the air, the rain will pick them up and deposit them. Therefore the longer the rain is on before collection, the less dust and spores and pollen etc. will be collected in the sample.
    Sounds sensible to me. What do you think?
    20 hours ago · Like.

    Chemtrails Project the first 5-10 mins of rain is what contains the “contaminates”. Later rain samples have provided low readings. The “dump” comes early
    19 hours ago · Like.

    Seems like their rain sampling ideas need a bit of tweaking to get impartial results.

  • You could filter out particulates to some extent, with good enough equipment, if you wanted to only see dissolved elements.

    The US NADP program uses a bucket that closes when rain is not present, and collects larger batches of rain weekly, so temporal variability during a rain storm is not as much of an issue. This study was looking at pH, but found wide variances during storms, between storms, and at diffferent locations in the same storm:
    http://nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr_ne25/gtr_ne25_053.pdf

    Even multiple samples purportedly taken contemporaneously show variances:
    http://metabunk.org/threads/135-Chemical-Composition-of-rain-and-snow?p=1410&viewfull=1#post1410

    The text you provided sound like they are tweaking to get “particular” results.

    This instructions here for surface waters are a gross example of getting what you want:
    http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/html/watertesting.html
    “Surface water tests have the highest numbers and will really freak you out when you get the results.
    If you are testing a pond, then the only thing different is how you collect the sample. The very bottom of the pond is where the elements stack up. Turn your jar upside down and get the mouth to the bottom of the pond or still water….the older the pond the higher the readings. Turn the jar over and collect both the water and a LITTLE of the bottom sediment. You will need to put the lid on underwater before you lift the jar off the bottom and out of the water….thats it!”

    This is how the “Shasta Bunch” got 4,610,000 ug/L in one of their samples, it was loaded with mud!

We are no longer taking comments on Contrail Science
If you would like to comment, or ask questions about Contrails or The Chemtrail Theory,
then please head over to the contrail forum at our sister site:

METABUNK.ORG

   
© 2014 Contrail Science Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha