Skip to content
September 7, 2012 / itsnobody

What is a reliable scientific experiment?

Now that the atheists have taken over science and have de-valued and discouraged experimentation I’ll try to re-value experimentation and encourage experimentation again like how it use to be prior to atheists taking over science in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Why have atheists done this? It’s because experimentation gives us data that reflects reality, and often reality behaves very differently from how scientists want to think it does. Modern day atheist scientists want to find data that matches into their incredulity and mathematical models, not data that necessarily reflects how reality works.

Remember, experimental data is used to verify the accuracy of mathematical models, not the other way around like many modern day scientists think.

So I’ve come up with the basic properties of a highly reliable scientific experiment.

The Properties of a Reliable Scientific Experiment:

– Repeatability:  This means that the exact same results of the experiment are duplicated over and over again (when following the exact same set of systematic procedures). If the results of an experiment can be repeated over and over again yielding the exact same effect when following the exact same set of procedures, then the results of the experiment cannot be denied (although the results can possibly be interpreted differently). If your experiment only yields a certain result one time or a few times or in a non-repeatable condition then the experiment is not useful or scientific.

Controls: Since correlation is not causation it’s important to have controls (if possible) to determine what’s causing certain results in an experiment. Having controls eliminates certain variables causing certain effects in the results of an experiment.

A simple example can be seen with determining which fertilizer is best for plant growth. In order to create a scientific experiment you would have to keep all the variables the same except for the fertlizer (these are the controls). Like the plant type, the amount of water each day, the time watered, the exposure to light, etc…

Without having control variables it would be unclear as to what’s causing the results in the experiment.

– Not Relying on Subjective Users:  This ties into repeatability and means that the experiment doesn’t rely upon any subjective methodology, like only working if special users participate, a subjective bias or anything like that. Take for instance remote viewing experiments that only work if specially trained remote viewers participate. Since they would only work if special users participate it doesn’t give us any reliable repeatable data that’s useful in science.

If we had more experiments that adhere to these properties science and technology would be much much much further ahead.

Unfortunately in modern times many things published in peer-reviewed journals and all over the media do not adhere to these properties or even attempt to adhere to any valid methodology. Why does this occur? It’s because now that atheists have taken over they have de-valued empirical observations and valid reasoning and instead only value authority and incredulity.

So now anyone with authority can publish any nonsense they want. Authority figures are no longer forced to come up with valid reasons and empirical observations to support their assertions like in the past.

The beautiful thing about the scientific method and empirical testing is that it has no bias, and takes no sides. Proper experimentation simply reveals to us what reality is like.

Throughout history in science you’ve never needed a mathematical model to perform an experiment. Mathematical models were invented to model experimental results and/or experimental data was used to verify the accuracy of mathematical models. It’s only now that the atheists have taken over that they’re trying to get rid of experimentation and require mathematical models to perform an experiment, thereby tremendously slowing down the growth of science and technology.

If you have lots of reliable objective experiments then eventually basically any mathematician or group of mathematicians will be able to figure out a mathematical model.

Atheists have always been out to set back science and threaten scientific progress. I don’t even know why they participate in science.

Reality behaves the way it does regardless of what people want to believe, and repeatable objective experiments give us data that reflects reality.

Now there are a few ways that atheists and others can attempt to deny the results of a repeatable objective experiment:

  • Just ignore the experiment and discuss authority and incredulity alone
  • Claim that mathematical models are required to perform an experiment (an argument from personal incredulity)
  • Fundamentally modify the procedures of an experiment to gain desired results

Those are really the only 3 possible ways that someone can attempt to deny the results of a repeatable objective experiment.

People have just to realize that as long as atheists exist with their anti-science ways that scientific progress will always be hindered. No other group is as anti-science as the atheists.

The same progress that would take atheists thousands of years would only take Theists 20-30 years. They just can’t do anything right.



Leave a Comment
  1. Adarsh kumar / Apr 23 2017 4:16 am

    An experiment for presence of water in any object:-
    1.Take a bucket or mug and fill it with water.
    2.And take empty container which flexible such as, face wash bottle ,Colgate container ,etc.
    3.Put it in bucket or mug which is filled with water.
    4.push it with hands
    what do you observe?
    Is water bubbles come out ?
    what is this bubbles?
    It shows that there is air in the container.
    by Adarsh kr.
    I think you will do this.

    • Anonymous / May 23 2018 10:03 pm

      This is worse than

  2. Gary / Feb 25 2017 3:05 pm

    What do Atheists have to do with science??

  3. Gary / Feb 25 2017 3:03 pm

    Trash articles like this will keep people stupid for many years

  4. SAm / Nov 13 2015 10:07 pm


  5. Anonymous / Sep 29 2013 6:59 pm

    wow no offenese but guys this is just a article on science and you guys are fighting like a pack of wolves over the last piece of meat …you are all RIGHT!!!!!… need to get rude ..okay ??

    • Anonymous / May 21 2014 8:48 am


  6. Chris R / Nov 15 2012 12:50 am

    Still doing my atheistic experiments and still getting paid plenty of money to do more. Customers like their machines and buy more – providing downloadable static and video content.

  7. Anonymous / Sep 30 2012 6:32 pm

    Hate to burst your bigot bubble, but your first and main flaw is that atheists are responsible for every scientific problem yous see. I’m sorry that they helped put forth alternative more logical theories that “set back science”. And the quote I found ridiculous: “It’s because now that atheists have taken over they have de-valued empirical observations and valid reasoning and instead only value authority and incredulity.” Alright, so de-valuing empirical observations. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that atheists actually place their faith into empirical observations as opposed to a book or deity with many logical fallacies that contradicts empirical evidence. As to some of your flaws with science and properties of a good experiment, I completely agree, but that is not a problem that atheists are solely responsible for, theists are just as guilty. Also, now atheists are responsible for the problems in mathematics. If so then why do you have an article saying how atheists think math is stupid and unnecessary (contradiction meter is spiking up). Pop.

  8. sugarcanegray / Sep 18 2012 5:28 pm

    As always, your pathetic argument is built on an utterly delusional base. In your paranoid little mind you seem to think atheists have somehow “taken over” science – was this by threat or force, I wonder? The reason more scientists are atheists these days is that to be a good scientist, the knowledge you need simply makes it far less likely to believe in childish magical sky father stories. Scripture, in it’s entirety, has been shown to be a lie, so it’s not a big leap to understand that without any other evidence, the entire story is a lie. But I digress…

    Firstly, you show no proof of your claims that science is now going wayward and not adhering to the scientific method, experimentation etc. And it’s easy to show the contrary – pick up any science journal and it’s riddled with actual experiments alongside the complex maths.

    Secondly, you argue against the use of mathematical models but these are absolutely essential in understanding the world. Without mathematical models, we would have no place to start experimenting at the levels we are now. The Higgs Boson, for example, and other was searched for because of the mathematical models that preceded it. Mathematical models are proven to be correct time and time again because mathematics, put simply, is the language of nature. Your beloved Newton understood this.

    Scientists are now at such a level that experimentation is often prohibitive without sufficient cause. Take the Higgs again – do you have any idea the scale and cost of the experiment needed to verify it’s existence? If so, you should understand that we need the models to explain what we’re seeing, and give us an inkling as to what’s coming next.

    Your idea of science is so pathetically out of date you seem to think everything in the world can be explained with basic Faraday type experiments. News flash for you – that’s already been covered, science has moved on, way on, and now is explaining the very beginnings of our universe and beyond. You cannot study this kind of thing by putting small electrical charges through conductors – you need massive equipment capable of recreating the conditions at the start of the universe, as we have now at CERN.

    Your assertion about theists is a little wrong. Take evolution, for example. This is very well understood, very well explained now, and yet, go to your religious science websites such as or watch the videos by that lunatic “scientist” Kent Hovind and you see they are actually regressing in knowledge. Science from over 150 years ago and your religious scientists aren’t able to even comprehend it. And the shit they come out with instead… well yeah, real cutting edge stuff… and none of it backed by any kind of scientific method.

    It’s also amazing how you criticise this so-called atheist science, yet reap the benefits in your everyday life. Such as publishing your childish and pathetic rhetoric on the internet… something brought to you not by scripture, nor by religion, but by the ingenuity of scientists and engineers. People that you claim aren’t any good. Well, if they aren’t any good, then why aren’t the religious coming up with anything better? Oh yes, that’s right – they’re too busy attacking science education in schools, lobbying to remove women’s rights, carpet bombing democracy into foreign lands, pathetically trying to refute evolution, and running sites such as the embarrassing

    It’s also amazing that you claim to have a rigorous belief and understanding in the scientific method, yet still maintain a belief in your childish and spiteful invisible friend. Does he answer your little prayers? Does he smite all your little foes for you? Awww, diddums. What the fuck does your God actually do? Any scientific experiment will show he does absolutely nothing. Which would lead any person with a brain to conclude, he most likely doesn’t exist.

    To be fair on the people reading this blog, you really should state out your exact beliefs. Do you, for example, believe in the talking snake? Or maybe that Noah lived to a few hundred years old? That God made Abraham murder his son? (such a loving God he is!) That the Earth is around 6,000 years old? Or that Noah managed to collect two of every kind of animal and load them onto a gigantic boat to save them from a giant flood? Or maybe that Jesus “ascended” into heaven? Or that Moses parted the red sea? If you don’t believe any of these, why not? And if you don’t, why then do you believe in God? The hypothesis (The Bible and other assorted children’s stories) is absurd, and there is no evidence to support it at all, nor any way to test the hypothesis, and there really isn’t any logical argument to be made (this blog being a great example of that) in it’s favour…. so please tell us on what you base your beliefs other than outright self-delusion and a total misunderstanding of how the universe really is?

    Maybe you’re just afraid of the dark? It’s ok to be afraid of dying, it’s perfectly natural. There really is no need to concoct these fairy stories of an invisible best mate and his life-happily-ever-after cloud kingdom. Just accept that one day you’ll die, and get on with life. There’s more to it than preaching hate.

    • Yves / May 9 2013 2:23 pm

      @ sugarcanegray ,

      You are just an impersonator ; you wrote comments under the nickname of others just like you act in everyday life. The usual atheist manners to lay with girls : cheats , tricks and lies.

      You are a degenerated usurper.

  9. Chris P / Sep 11 2012 11:29 pm

    My atheistic experiments are doing just fine thanks. Companies like the results. What experiments have YOU performed lately – please share.

  10. GreenDiamond / Sep 10 2012 2:18 am

    And what is the result of this ridiculous “new science”…… the most rapid technological advancement and innovation is the history of mankind!!!!! yes, I am sure that you are right, itsnobody! This technological advancement and innovation MUST STOP!!! We need to go back to the old ways of superstition if we are to make any real progress!!!

    • Glen / Oct 7 2012 12:46 pm

      I’m neither a scientific mind or a religious one. I consider myself a pretty normal guy with a 9 to 5, a wife and some kids.

      I will say that the thought of death meaning total non existance is pretty unappealing, since most of my life I’ve felt there was more, and I don’t know about god, but felt there was something.

      I suppose the word felt is a pretty untestable and therfore mundane and unrespected condition, but I maintain it. And while I agree that religions seem to require a pretty large suspension of disbelief if taken literally, I think that maybe the common theme across every religion is not how they differ in detail, but the fundamental belief in a creating force, the details of the rest seem to be stories, figurative and symbolic.

      What is intereting to me has been the unability of science to scientifically explain quatum mechanics, it’s not to say I believe pseudoscience that likes to use quantum to piggyback. But then again what theory other than the mundane explaining quantum won’t say is pseudoscience.

      • Glen / Oct 7 2012 6:00 pm

        Excuse the spelling mistakes, typing quickly from a phone.

Post a Comment

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: