Jump to content

- - - - -

Advancement Scientific Findings,but...?

  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 inverse



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 250 posts

Posted 01 December 2016 - 07:28 AM



could someones express their ideas on an issue

*** assume please we allege something which are so effective that will have very very big effect options.but will include some risks at the same time. we can hide the hazardous points as a secret. the reason to do it is that our advanced principle that we believe the "humanism" is a unique worth. because we found that any of indeed  religion,gender and economic characters were not a parameter for exact worth. generally physics - mathematics - chemistry are all Noble parts and we believe and almost conclude  that these are mandatory fields to have created Great findings. (check/control please gender,religion..are not making any real effect (or there exists no these specifications' correlation to do  science)

so, at the result : assume that we believe and also allege that we had found very very strong scientific contexts (highly more effective than nuclear bombs),but these will include some risks across all humans and may provide equivalent benefits for humanity. 

but what should we do?? ,should we send any sci. indexed journals/patent institute to record our scientific honor ,or should we prevent our ideas to be explained so that to protect humanity even though have potential and equivalent benefits?

I am humanist and I do not want to explain...generally whenever I see any risk,I prefer to interrupt every process. I believe I will not feel me so much suffering from hunger,but I am sure if I cause anyone to be sad,I will also be sad!

however,while all remarkings are containing potentiality,observation and experiements are generally required at the portrait appearance of my such researches...


note please: we do not consider to comment these thread,but we wonder other scientists ideas,soThanks very much to all ones who explain and clarify us.

Edited by inverse, 03 December 2016 - 02:11 PM.