It’s All a Big Hoax

Attention, anyone who has been told they are “color blind.”  Don’t believe that! You’re perfect the way you are, and no one should tell you any differently!

Color-blindness is a hoax!

It’s all a scam!

COLORS AREN’T REAL!

And, if anyone tries to tell you they can “see” green or red or yellow, they’re just trying to get control over you.  

Don’t believe me?  Well, here’s a question for all those people who supposedly “see” colors: why can’t anyone agree what they look like?

If other people really can see colors, then they ought to be able to describe them with at least a little consistency, wouldn’t you think?  Do they really expect you to believe it’s just “hard to explain” but “you’d understand if you could see the whole color spectrum, too.”

???

Yeah, right.

If THAT’S not suspicious enough, just Google “Colors aren’t real.”   You will see dozens of articles where expert debate this very topic.

Many scientists will come right out and say, “Colors don’t exist. Our brains have only made them up.

In other words, humans have only imagined them! (Well not ALL humans have imagined them, of course. The brains of colorblind people don’t make up such nonsense.)

Sure, there are scientists who say that even imaginary things are “real” in an important sense. They will say that perception is part of reality. They will say that thoughts and feelings EXIST, though they aren’t made of “stuff.”

In fact, James Jeans said the entire Universe is more like a “thought” than like a “machine.”

 

But that’s just his opinion.  Why should we listen to him?

HE PROBABLY THOUGHT COLORS WERE REAL, YET HE STILL WANTS THE REST OF US TO TRUST HIS BRAIN!  Why would I trust a brain that makes stuff up?

And, that’s why I’m blowing the roof off this “colorblindness” hoax once and for all.

If you’ve been told you’re somehow lacking because your brain doesn’t trick you the way most people’s brains trick them, don’t believe it.

You’re not blind. (What a horrible thing to tell a child!)

It’s the Color-Seeing people who have been indoctrinating each other.

Go ahead and try to prove that I’m wrong.

Advertisements

24 thoughts on “It’s All a Big Hoax

  1. sklyjd

    No mrsmcmommy, you are not wrong, you are using logical thought and science on addressing this issue and if you extend your logical and analytical scientific mind you will clearly see what you have discovered, and it is exactly why people believe in something they will never see. Creators in the form of gods are the most obvious example we have.

    Your statement “If you’ve been told you’re somehow lacking because your brain doesn’t trick you the way most people’s brains trick them, don’t believe it.”

    You have got it right here. Indoctrination into a religious or political ideology are a trick and designed to control the masses and as you suggested indoctrination breeds amongst us all, but of course, we are not all so easily tricked into these beliefs and as you will be aware from what scientists have said that your perception is your own reality.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
      1. sklyjd

        Your claims “Yeah–but scientists are trying to control us, too!”

        And “IT’S ALL A CONSPIRACY!”

        Science when you think about it is about discovery and invention. Without science, we would still be living as humans did back in the time of the Romans, just like many Islamic countries basically are today.

        Of course, science has a huge influence on our lives, especially in the last 150 years. It must first be realised science is not an ideology like religions or political systems, they do not have a doctrine or policy of faith or belief that will use indoctrination methods and reject evidence contrary to what they currently believe.

        The complete opposite is true and if you were more knowledgeable about the way most science works through the systems of checks and balances they use you would realise your conspiracy claim is on par with claiming the Earth is flat and it is in the middle of the universe. Read all about it here:

        http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/_0_0/socialsideofscience_04

        Like

      2. mrsmcmommy Post author

        Spoken like someone who has put a LOT of faith in “science.”

        The point, which was summed up well in the article I quoted, is there is no consensus about lots of things. Science and philosophy are hopelessly entwined. (And, yes, ideologies will get thrown into the mix.)

        If you don’t believe that science can/does become religion for people, I can’t help your “black and white” thinking. (See what I did there?)

        Like

      3. sklyjd

        You are dead right and wrong at the same time. I do not have faith in anything apart from the sun is going to rise in the morning, however there is evidence enough that can be tested that science is not a conspiracy against any gods but the driving force for human progression and survival in medicine and technology in mostly good ways.

        I agree many issues in science are not clear, no consensus, no “black and white” or absolutes. Having said that, in many fields of science certain research is overwhelmingly accepted when the scientific evidence and the scientific community clearly supports an issue.

        I expect you cannot deny gravitational pull, DNA research, space exploration, computer technology, the medical surgery and medicines used today. Of course, your hoaxes accusation only applies to Biological evolution, the dating of the universe and planet Earth only due to these issues being directly contrary to your ideology.

        We have scientific fanatics I agree who have faith and are devoted, just like the fanatical football supporters, fanatical soldiers, fanatical sailors and fanatical internet gamers, however science may not be quite as exciting for most of us. Do not confuse these with the deep emotional religious faith and devotion used in religious circles.

        Regards.

        Liked by 2 people

      4. mrsmcmommy Post author

        We’re not talking about many fields of science. We’re talking about the philosophy of blindness–specifically color blindness.

        You put a lot of faith in what you believe my ideology to be…

        Do you believe colors are real?

        Like

      5. sklyjd

        Philosophise all you like, but yes, the colours we see are real for all of us including the colour blind who see a different colour spectrum.

        If you check it out, we see reflected light in colours from a surface that absorbs some light and reflects the rest. Some animals and insects see far more than we do such as ultraviolet light so I guess we do not hold the highest standard of vision on this planet anyway.

        People are only indoctrinated to into believing what they are told without question. Seeing is believing because our brain tells us this, no amount of indoctrination will ever change red to green.

        In case you did not realise, due to your claim about scientists trying to control us and that it is all a conspiracy does go a long way to explain what your ideology is. I apologise if I got anything wrong.

        Like

      6. mrsmcmommy Post author

        I didn’t ask whether light was real. I asked whether colors are. (Regardless, I appreciate you sharing your philosophy on the matter–including your belief that no indoctrination will ever change red to green. Some experts disagree, so I hope you don’t put too much faith in that statement.) 😉 An interesting video, if you haven’t already seen it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evQsOFQju08

        Since there’s apparently some confusion about the intent of my post and first comment: they’re satirical. I’m demonstrating that it’s very easy to doubt something. Skepticism is easy. And, if you don’t want to be convinced of something, just call yourself a skeptic and demand that everyone else prove you are wrong.

        Truthfully, I don’t REALLY believe that scientists are out to control us. (Where there is scientific consensus regarding testable data, scientists have accomplished many amazing things.) But I do believe most Atheists don’t understand the way philosophy and ideology are tied into the interpretation of ALL data. There is no such thing as “pure” science, and an individual’s beliefs about where we came from and where we are all going will color his/her work. (See what I did there?)

        “Science” has become a huge, almost-meaningless word (much like “God”) in the minds of many people who have the philosophy that it can and does answer every question in the Universe.

        But, scientists will never be able to tell us some things, due to the nature of the scientific method. Many, many important questions (about origin and purpose) are outside the scope of pure science. Thus, I think many Atheists are similar to color-blind people–they lack the tools necessary to see what others see, and they simply refuse to believe others REALLY have an ability to detect the entity they can’t personally detect.

        “I strongly believe in the existence of God, based on intuition, observations, logic, and also scientific knowledge. Science, with its experiments and logic, tries to understand the order or structure of the universe. Religion, with its theological inspiration and reflection, tries to understand the purpose or meaning of the universe. These two are cross-related. Purpose implies structure, and structure ought somehow to be interpretable in terms of purpose. At least this is the way I see it. I am a physicist. I also consider myself a Christian. As I try to understand the nature of our universe in these two modes of thinking, I see many commonalities and crossovers between science and religion. It seems logical that in the long run the two will even converge.”

        –Charles Hard Townes, who received the 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics

        Like

      7. sklyjd

        That is a great video. He makes some good points to think about and I find most of what he says as quite logical. I would never expect to see the exact same shade of red as anyone else and I should imagine if you see green you have a colour blindness or the colour triggers some deep emotional state.

        As I have always maintained most of us believe we have control of your own mind and believe we can freely exercise our free will, however it is far more complicated and many factors influence our decisions and beliefs that we are not even aware of.

        If you look around the internet you come across sceptics, deniers and conspiracy merchants all over the place. Many of these people are simply wanting to be different because they can be, as you say it is easy to doubt something. For example, over the last couple of decades the forgotten flat earth people have come out again in bigger numbers than before, emphasising that people can be led like sheep if they are fed the false information often enough.

        I have come across many people who do claim scientists want to control us and are demons trying to destroy religion, so I took your comments literally. I do think you complicate science. Science is far from meaningless, granted it has some secrets and cannot answer all the questions right now, however it is inevitable that it will take us into the future. Philosophy is fascinating but are cognitive speculative answers to every question in the Universe and thinking people are now realising that cold hard pure science is the reality of the planet that we actually live in and this often does not sit well with theists. Even if we all see different shades of red, the fact is it is red for our eyes and our life even if it is known to simply be reflective light and it does not matter how much we are told it is green there is no evidence to support it. And even if we are convinced the real colour is green how do we know that is not just more reflective light and it is the true colour. If you dig a hole into the unknown people start to take it on as factual and that is the danger of religions.

        Science is evolving as we are and I doubt anything will be outside the scope of science. The entity you mention and the whole concept of religious belief will be exposed through science associated mostly with the brain that we are not yet advanced enough to fully understand. I believe religious belief is simply a survival mechanism that evolved along with all our other emotions.

        Like

      8. mrsmcmommy Post author

        I appreciate you watching and answering.

        But I’m afraid you still don’t quite understand the point that we’re not just talking about “shades” of red. (What you know as ‘red’ may look like what I call ‘green,’ and we’ll never know.) It’s not something that science will ever be able to answer…

        Furthermore, this is not a matter of philosophy vs. science. Philosophy is PART of science. How logic and reason are used cannot be separated from the scientific method. (Before the scientific method was fully developed and named, the founding fathers of science were ALL philosophers, trying to answer questions like, “How do we know that we know that we know?”)

        Again–you can claim that Theists don’t like science, but it’s actually the other way around. Most Atheists don’t like philosophy, even though they assume it and borrow from it constantly, without realizing.

        Like

      9. sklyjd

        Your example of people not seeing the same colour will have an answer in science.

        Thank you for the link that I have no disagreement with.

        I agree, but we have moved forward and certain questions will always be asked that have that have no scientific answer right at this time, however that will not always be the case.

        I found these definitions: Philosophy is concerned with abstract thought or subjects, as existence, causality, or truth, concerned with first principles and ultimate grounds, as being, time, or substance, highly abstract, subtle, or abstruse, archaic. imaginary or fanciful.

        It is very easy to understand what type of ancient philosophy many theists and apologetics hang their hat on as an easy answer to justify faith, therefore many atheists will criticise it, and who can blame them.

        Good philosophers, however, will always base their philosophising on what is already known and evidenced in the physical world and most of today’s philosophers support and present what is physicalist philosophy.

        As we live in a material world and we should just get on with it don’t you think?

        Regards

        Like

      10. mrsmcmommy Post author

        I think you can’t build a house in thin-air… and I recommend examining your foundations a little more. You’re depending on the groundwork which was laid by Theists, and then claiming you don’t need them anymore…

        Also, saying “we will have an answer in science [someday]” is not a scientific position. It’s a faith statement. (And it also shows a misunderstanding of the TYPES of questions we’re talking about.) Some questions, just by the nature of those questions, are outside the scope of pure science.

        “I strongly believe in the existence of God, based on intuition, observations, logic, and also scientific knowledge. Science, with its experiments and logic, tries to understand the order or structure of the universe. Religion, with its theological inspiration and reflection, tries to understand the purpose or meaning of the universe. These two are cross-related. Purpose implies structure, and structure ought somehow to be interpretable in terms of purpose. At least this is the way I see it. I am a physicist. I also consider myself a Christian. As I try to understand the nature of our universe in these two modes of thinking, I see many commonalities and crossovers between science and religion. It seems logical that in the long run the two will even converge.”

        –Charles Hard Townes, who received the 1964 Nobel Prize in Physics

        Therefore, when you say something like “questions will always be asked that have no scientific answer at this time, however that will not always be the case,” you are putting your prediction against a Quantum Physicist. I have no problem with you forming a hypothesis (the opposite of Charles Townes’ hypothesis) and then waiting to see who’s right. But let’s be clear that both of you have faith and a host of philosophical assumptions behind what you believe.

        The only difference I see is that Theists are honest about their presuppositions, while most Atheists actually think they are unbiased. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      11. sklyjd

        I understand the foundations of science and for centuries we had many scientist\philosophers who were overwhelmingly theists. Religious based philosophies have evolved into the physicalist based philosophers also known as Materialistic Monism of our modern world because the science is now not answerable to the elephant in the room that was religious belief. Theism may have been a foundation of science but that was only because they could lay claim it supported their ideology, but it soon changed and theology then became a millstone for scientific advancement.

        62% of Philosophers are claimed as atheists. Read here.

        https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/logical-take/201402/why-62-philosophers-are-atheists-part-i

        two Hundred years ago, most people attributed science to a god until a brilliant man called Charles Darwin and fellow biologist Thomas Huxley existed to explain the biological formation through evolutionary principles of the living world and basically started the removal of clerical domination from the scientific establishment.

        It was unheard of to speculate that science would find the answers to questions even 50 years ago, however we now understand that every new scientific discovery is a catalyst for more complex and faster scientific discoveries and just within the last 100 years has gone from a slow walk into a quick step and will continue to increase in speed into the future.

        It is not stupid to believe science will eventually discover how our brains are connected to our minds and the role specifically undertaken by our consciousness. It is also not ridiculous to speculate that life may exist on another planet or acknowledge that UFO’s are real, but it would have been regarded that you were either a witch or raving mad because the devil had taken over your mind.

        I have more than faith or assumptions to base my predictions on, I have history to as support. For example, much of the science fiction of the 50’s and 60’s has become true, much of what was thought impossible has become possible, just as the world believed in a creator it is now changing. Townes mind was in the past and he is mistaken as there is no scientific knowledge of a creator. Even in 1964 most atheists had not stepped out of the closet.

        Like

  2. mrsmcmommy Post author

    https://newrepublic.com/article/121843/philosophy-color-perception

    “One of the reasons I think philosophy isn’t very popular in the United States is that the secular among us assume not only that there exists a scientific explanation for everything, but that someone in a laboratory or a library somewhere already knows it. Primary science education plays up this assumption, preferring testable information to ongoing mysteries—I am reminded of an eleventh-grade physics exam on opponent processing. But here’s what they don’t tell you in school: The neurological and physical evidence that supports this model is extremely inconsistent.”

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s