Dear Friends,

How could any proof for disruptive discovery or theory could see the light of day (or error in our knowledge can be exposed), if no one is willing to investigate evidence that can prove the disruptive discovery or theory?

For example, how is it possible to expose flawed basic beliefs (e.g. such as the Earth is static at the center), if no one is willing to look at evidence that can expose such basic errors? If anyone try to expose such error, often many scientists or researchers resort to personal attacks or humiliating insults to suppress open honest debate.

The basic moral and ethical obligation or sacred duty of every scientist is pursuit of absolute Truth directly or indirectly, where indirectly also includes moral and ethical obligation to validation of sacred tenets for upholding Truth. Refusal to investigate conclusive evidence that can prove a new discovery of fact is tantamount to promoting an error by suppressing the Truth. Suppressing truth (by any scientist) is a volition of scientific method and moral code of conduct (for anyone consider himself a scientist).

How any new discovery of fact, basic error in mankind’s knowledge or new theory could see the light of day, if each member of community of researchers or scientists evade their mandatory moral obligation of investigating evidence and facts that can prove the theory or expose a flawed belief? Any real discovery only shines under rigorous validation or scrutiny by brilliant critics or opponents.

No researcher or scientist should ever ask anyone to blindly believe his/her discovery or theory. Every discovery or theory must be backed by falsifiable proof, evidence and reasoning. Falsifiable doesn’t imply that the discovery or theory is flawed, but it can be falsified, if it is flawed, for example, by finding a counter evidence or sound counter reasoning.

Scientific research is nothing but pursuit of absolute Truth (and upholding the Truth), which also includes getting closer and closer to the Truth by eliminating imperfections in our BoK (Body of Knowledge). The community of researchers and scientists are morally and ethically obligated to uphold the Truths, by investigating the evidence to determine the validity of the discovery or theory.

What would have happened, if everyone ignored or snubbed seminal theories or discoveries of a young 25-year-old low level clerk (named Einstein) at a patent office in Bern? Research community successfully suppressed disruptive discovery of Copernicus for hundred years, which eventually prevailed due to great sacrifices of researchers like Giordano Bruno and Galileo, which resulted in a scientific revolution.

Mankind would be still in the dark ages without their sacrifices to uphold the Truth. Disruptive or outside of box discoveries expose inconvenient Truths/facts, so face fierce resistance and hostilities.

Almost every disruptive or revolutionary discovery faces fierce resistance and opposition. If any scientist disagrees with a theory and proof backed by evidence, scientific process requires channeling the fierce resistance and opposition for falsifying the evidence and facts for invalidating proof. Only incompetent or ignorant people resort to personal insults. Any determined efforts to falsify proof for any discovery end up proving the discovery, if the discovery is Truth/fact. But it is unethical to suppress or snub the discovery to evade such mandatory moral obligation of investigating evidence by resorting to personal attacks or insults.

What would you do, if you stumbled onto a revolutionary discovery, and if no one in the scientific or research community is willing to investigate the evidence and facts, which can provide conclusive proof for the discovery by employing unethical evasive tactics such as personal attacks or humiliating snubs to suppressing facts?

What can you do, if research community ostracizes you (e.g. by resorting to personal attacks, humiliation and snubbing), when you politely request for an opportunity to present evidence that can provide conclusive proof for your theory or discovery?

Assume, you spent more than 12 years making sure that you are absolutely right by accumulating many proofs, where each proof is backed by more than enough evidence. If you are not very wealthy and powerful, you would be helpless (e.g. can do nothing), if research community refuses to look at your evidence that can prove your discovery.

What can you do, if you don’t have large financial resources to force the research community to investigate your evidence, for example, by dragging them to courts for abdicating their moral and ethical obligations (e.g. upholding the Truth) or for gross negligence, in case if researchers are being funded by taxpayer money and having mandatory obligation to find and promote such discoveries?

It is a laudable example that few great researchers took time to investigate disruptive discovery by a low-level young patent clerk. But in case of Galileo and others, research community blatantly abdicated their moral obligation and failed the mandate of scientific method or process for upholding the Truth. Most people claim to be a scientist doesn’t even know what is meant by being a scientist and what are the moral or ethical obligations and mandate of scientific method.

How can we advance mankind’s scientific knowledge into new unexplored frontiers, if research or scientific community abdicates their sacred duty – Pursuit of absolute Truth, flawless knowledge and wisdom? One must stop pretending to be a scientist, if he is not willing to fulfill moral or ethical obligations and mandate of scientific methods for pursuit flawless knowledge and/or upholding of the Truth.

Best Regards,

Raju Chiluvuri