Seven easy steps to create a theory for everything1. Create list of all scientific fields of study
2. Create list of all basic principles of each subject
3. Cross check all basic principles to make sure there are no contradictions
4. Create list of all intermediate principles of each subject
5. Cross check all intermediate principles to make sure there are no contradictions
6. Create list of all advanced principles of each subject
7. Cross check all advanced principles to make sure there are no contradictions
OK maybe it's not quite so easy however it will be a lot easier to do it this way than to do it in an unorganized way.
The reason I wrote this is that there are an enormous amount of obvious mistakes being put out by "experts" presented by the establishment. It is not good enough to point out the mistakes one at a time. There needs to be a system to correct these mistakes as they go along. Experts within their own community routinely know that the media is full of it when they discus their own subject but the majority of the public doesn't know. The majority of the public doesn't know the basics for an enormous amount of subjects and they rely on demagogues with hidden agendas to provide them with information to base their decisions.
Many people don't seem to understand that in order for this to be a democracy that people have to participate.
Realism is the belief in what is real. The three primary principles of realism could be:
1. Accurate facts never change
2. Accurate facts never contradict themselves.
3. Accurate facts stand up to thorough accurate scrutiny.
The way people perceive facts may change but the facts themselves never do. Accurate facts do not always seem to stand up to thoroughly distorted scrutiny. If we allow demagogues to control the debate they can turn everything upside out.
Fundamentalism plus is when you start with the fundamentals and work your way up. A fundamental is a basic fact. When so called religious fundamentalist hold up the bible and say it is the divine truth this is not a fundamental statement. It is a statement about a very large book in order to find the basics you have to look into the book and go through a slow tedious process of checking the facts.
Literalism is saying what is literally true. The basics of literalism would be the dictionary. Unfortunately the dictionary is not always consistent. Writers of some dictionary have said that they try to define the way people use the language but people don't always use the language right so if they copy the public and the public is wrong they will be wrong.
Sometimes a word as simple as excuse is routinely used wrong. One dictionary defines excuse as a reason. It should be justifiable reason. If you try to explain that part of the reason that mass murderers became mass murderers is because they were abused as a child many people get upset and say you’re trying to excuse them which is not necessarily true not all reasons are excuses. This is part of the explanation but not an excuse. Once you understand the explanation then you can address the problem but if emotions get in the way it prevents people from addressing the problem. This is just one of many cases where problems can't be solved simply because the language we used isn't as clear as it could be and people define words differently.
The basics of archeology could describe the way they dig Archeological site and log in each item and how they organize them. A description on how to dig without harming things would be helpful. A list of all archeology sites is almost certainly kept somewhere but it is not shared with the public that I know of. An inventory list must be made and kept somewhere but they don't seem to think the public is interested in this. They are probably right about the public not being interested but that is because the public hasn't been taught how important this could be. In order to understand how important this is you have to know a little about it. An inventory list would be very long so it would be important to have a summation of this list. For example in a Mayan site you might start by listing how many pyramids there are and how big they are, how many stele's there are etc. Then you might highlight the most important few steles’ and a more typical stele. Most of this would be boring to the average person but once you understand it and realize how much can be learned from it that may change. Archeology tells us a lot about the past and if you rely on the experts to interpret it for you they may put there own biases in and you'll never know it unless you understand the process. I have made a list of some of the ancient wonders of the world but the less spectacular sites are also important to see these wonders of the ancient world Click here
Archeology dating methods
1. Carbon dating
2. Historical records and carbon dating on the records.
3. The lower you dig the older it is so if you find something close by to an item dated to one time frame then it will probably be dated to the same time frame.
4. Water erosion in combination with study of ancient climate.
5. Tree rings which don't apply often but it may come in handy in some cases.
6. Cross checking. Whenever possible it is good to cross check to make sure that different dating methods don't contradict each other.
The economy is a system that people set up to exchange services so that people who work together can provide each other with necessities and luxuries more efficiently than if they work alone. The purpose of the economy is to improve our standard of living in the most effective way possible. Or at least it could and should be. The currant version of the economy presented by the mass media, the government and the corporations is designed to encourage just about any and all trade and work so long as the corporations can skim a percentage. This is an economy for the rich of the rich and by the rich. A "people's economy" could be different if the people paid attention and understood how it works. First of all it wouldn't really be a people's just because I called it that but for now it will do. In a people's economy trade or work wouldn't be good for the economy unless it actually improved the lives of the consumer. This would involve educating the public so they would be rational consumers instead of indoctrinating them so they will just work work buy buy work work buy buy etc. This would have to involve media reform where the media is partially controlled by the public. But that is another subject.
History is more than just recording facts. There is a process to recording history that many people are not aware of.
"History is written by the winner" is a common quote that people often take for granted. Many people are willing to acknowledge this when it comes to distortions that they don't like but not when it comes to distortions from their own allies. There is an exact way that history happened but there is no exact way of recording it so until we have a more reliable way of recording history it might be better to look at it as leading hypothetical versions of history since we can't be completely sure of it all. A good historian will show the sources to let the public know how they came to their conclusions. This doesn't mean that everyone will look at them but those that want to can and that allows for checks and balances. It would still be a good idea for the public to understand more about the process of how history is recorded so that they will understand more about how accurate history is. A good historian will get input from a lot of different fields in order to come up with the best hypothetical. This would include linguists, Archeologists, sociologist etc.
Mythology is often a mixture of history and legends or totally made up. Technically it is possible for myths to be real but in practice it rarely if ever happens. In most cases it is very difficult if not impossible to tell which if any parts of myths might be real. Myths often get mixed up with history which is one more reason to look at history as a leading hypothetical unless you have very strong records to back up a version of history.
One of the most common principles of mythology is that heroes get more heroic and villains get more vicious as stories are repeated more often. Myths tend to be exiting. If someone told you a story about people that had happy lives got along in peace and harmony would you find that story exiting? That is why there are always wars and other conflicts in myths. Myths don't involve figuring out the most practical ways to solve problems and doing it since that sounds so boring. When people start worshiping myths and taking them too seriously they think of them as practical ways of solving problems and they even wish for the disasters that happen in myths to come true so that they can be part of a great adventure. People that go through great adventures often find out the hard way that they are not so good when they are actually happening. But after the fact when people are telling great stories they may join in and glorify their adventures. This often gives others especially young and naive people the wrong idea. Myths may be fun to read or watch on TV but if they are not put in their proper perspective and they encourage a war mentality they back fire.