"Sit down before facts like a child, and be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever and to whatever abysses Nature leads, or you shall learn nothing." - T.H. Huxley
The word "fringe" often has a negative connotation. We speak of the "lunatic fringe" or of "fringe groups" - referring to people who are far from the norm, and usually not to be taken seriously. We instinctively shy away from people and things that are strange. We say that they are bizarre, weird, maybe even dangerous. Nowhere does this attitude show more clearly than in how we approach knowledge.
When it comes to knowledge, we tend to be unwilling to entertain new ideas. In fact, much of the time new ideas are met with hostility or ridicule. Original thinkers are called crackpots or worse. Many innovators throughout history have died impoverished and unknown, because their ideas were too startling for their time. Some were persecuted, either by the Church or the scientific establishment, burned at the stake, excommunicated, ostracized, dismissed from their positions, and so on. If your thinking is original, you are at risk of being punished for it.
There is some justification for this mistreatment, or at least for serious skepticism. Most of the time, the innovative thinker is wrong. His ideas are impractical, impossible, or otherwise unacceptable. There is a lot of chaff to sort through, before you find any wheat. If you simply reject any brand-new idea that comes your way, you'll be right most of the time. However, you'll also miss the occasional new idea that can change how we look at the world.
The fringe is where the action is. This is where our knowledge grows. If we always stay within the bounds of what we already know, then all we can do is rehash our knowledge, work out the various implications of it. This is fine - it's a necessary part of our quest to understand things. However, it isn't enough. In order to grow we need to move past the limits of our knowledge, to step beyond the fringe. Most of the time we'll be chasing down false leads, concepts that don't quite work, notions that are less than half baked and take us nowhere. But even then, we're learning. Finding out what doesn't work is how we eventually find out what does work.
This Website is my effort to investigate some of the more enduring "fringe" notions, ranging from ESP, crop circles, ghosts and other so-called "supernatural" phenomena, UFO's, ball lightning, spontaneous human combustion, ancient mysteries, and so on.
I also want to investigate fringe science and junk science. There is a difference between the two. Junk science, in my opinion, consists of claims that violate well-known principles of science. Perpetual motion and free energy come to mind. Fringe science consists of ideas that are unknown to established scientific thought, but not known to be impossible. An example is cold fusion. While it is unlikely that cold fusion actually works, it hasn't been conclusively shown not to work. There's still a chance that some experimenter will finally figure out how to make cold fusion a reality.
While I enthusiastically investigate all manner of strange ideas, I don't blindly accept them. I apply reason to the idea, check it against what I already know. I freely admit that I know very little, that the world is a wonderful and mysterious place full of surprises. However, there are some basic rules that apply. These rules have not been shown to be incorrect. They have withstood every test so far. Until such time as they are shown to be wrong, I accept them.
These rules include the laws of thermodynamics. These "laws" (which are actually theories) have been so successful in advancing scientific knowledge that they are considered almost beyond question. The operative word here is "almost." Although it would require an enormous amount of verification, if it ever happened that some phenomenon violated these laws, the laws would have to be modified or replaced by something better. Such an event would result in a complete upheaval in science - but it wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened. It's called a paradigm shift. It is precisely when a paradigm shift takes place that science makes the most progress.
That being said, you can't just declare a "paradigm shift" every time your ideas conflict with scientific theories. Your idea needs to be tested. The greater the conflict, the more rigorous the testing needs to be. For most ideas, testing shows them to be unworkable. Far from there being any secret conspiracy of scientists to resist innovation, it is part of the scientific process. New ideas are suspect, and must prove their worth before they will be accepted. This is not conspiracy; it is common sense.
Luckily for us, we are not scientists - at least, I'm not. I can take a look at just about anything and comment on it without worrying about creating (or thwarting) any paradigm shifts. This is what I intend to do.
Although not a scientist, I have enormous respect for what is called the "scientific method," which is an idealized way of approaching ideas and facts. In general I am likely to agree with the scientific establishment more often than not. This does not mean that I'm being paid off by "Big Oil" or some other sinister group. Such arguments are specious and annoying. You show me a photocopy of a paycheck to me from Big Oil (or whoever), and then I'll respond. Otherwise...
Pretty much everything here is my opinion. I try to be fair and honest, but it's likely that my biases will show through at times. I'm likely to get some of my facts wrong. If you get nothing more from this site, at least take this: question what you are told, regardless of how plausible the notion may be. Check your facts, do your own thinking, form your own conclusions. Question authority, and be particularly suspicious of what appears to be obvious.