Too Much People Asking Peer-Review for Matrix/DNA Theory: Here is The Answer


Again, in a public debate, someone asked peer-review, and I have copied here my answer:

You said: ” if you have scientific evidences for your theory, please present your theory in scientific circles to be peer-reviewed. Otherwise, who is going to take you seriously?”

Louis Morelli: ” I can’t do it, but is not my pretension that people here take me serious – the person debating – but take serious the contents of my replies, I am developing and testing the theory against facts and you gave me good ideas for testing.

This theory is a new, never imagined before world view, Sir, from the universe’s origins to what we have here today, in a unique logical line, based on nature and scientifically proven facts. There is no peer-review for such thing, never had. How could Copernicus getting approved with peer-review, if he was suggesting a new interpretation of the world totally strange to the scholars? What peer-review got Mendel? Even Darwin, took 30 years writing his book for announcing his theory, it went to peer-review? I am still writing a book. What about Galileo? Do you believe that they would give him peer-review if he was saying that the sky is not static, even that he could prove there was a new star in the sky? The normal human brains are not neurons configured for accepting such changes, Sir, at every cycle, Science is produced by an ideology, they never will read thousands of pages that uncomfortable, like you are feeling reading few paragraphs here.

As said Einstein when nobody understood its theory, : ” One does not need to prove that his/her theory is the right one, only showing that it makes rational sense”. The universe and its theory can not be described by Physics and Math alone, it needs biology, till neurology for explaining lots of things… do you know any scientific authority doing peer-review that would be able to analyse this theory? What if a Theory of Everything can not be elaborated by modern human sciences with all its fields? And of course, it can’t: we and our scientific instruments are able to grasp only one face of this relativistic universe with manny faces, only the face and objects and shapes and movements that vibrates and reflects light inside the visible light, but is hidden the other six worlds interacting with our world? I wrote at the introduction of my website: this is not a scientific theory, it is in the right philosophical term as coined by the Greek philosophers.

I have no PHD ( I made business administration, hihihi) for sending working to peer-review, they will not see it, although I am studying science, included university books, by myself in the last 50 years. If you ask for evidences, I have listed one thousand in the website and tens of confirmed predictions. But it is not enough for believing that this world view is the best today, I am very skeptical with myself. And the best school I have, the teacher that gave me the fundamental information is Nature, seven years studying that whole biosphere, identificating each kind of system and trying to calculate the whole network of its interactions. That biosphere sent me to lift the eyes for seeing the sky, following the sun’s light, if I was wishing answers for origins and meaning of our existence. That’s why I entered in the Astronomy field also. Ok, Sir, I am telling that ( I don’t know if you will have the tolerance for reading it), because you seems to me to be a searcher, like me, and these kind of issues are good food for thought for a searcher. Cheers, and have a happy Sunday…

Comments are closed.