About me
Stephen Foord
View Stephen Foord's profileMy research qualifications include a first class physics degree and a Ph.D. in biophysics as in my Linkedin profile above.
I am a pioneer in fair science. I apply fair principles in science to avoid tacit prejudices even at the foundational level. When I took my physics degree I still did not realise strong prejudice was involved. My blindspot was that mathematics is not primarily to do with being fair. It can be used to model any universe or reality that we ask. Much of my time at school was in learning mathematical exercises. I got three O-levels in mathematics. Technical prejudice may feel so 'natural' or right that we do not learn to question. That starts in school.
When people are cheated of fair rights by scientific prejudice that may be criminal. Thus, a fair error estimate for a theory is actually a combination of its technicality and its criminality. A theory can show technical genius but be pure crime. Indeed a pure ‘science’ divorced from ethical considerations might also be pure crime.
I have four books out in 2023 in fair science. Book 1 is in reality-science formerly ‘The General Theory of reality’ now "The Fair Rights Foundation to Science & Theology". It generalises Einstein’s general relativity in principle and focuses on ending natural history in court. Natural history is a hypothesis and has a counter hypothesis of supernatural history. A little work shows it is the latter that may have a walkover both technically and criminally in a fair court. Book 2 also formalises Newton's proof for God in his General Scholium to the Principia. I rediscovered it in chapter 6 before seeing Newton's take on it. I tend to work out of fair conscience and to be denied a living to do such work calls the legitimacy of the profession into question. Modern science is testimony to a powerful force of prejudice in this universe. That testimony may be its real value in history.
Fair science goes back to Newton as simply about not framing or falsifying hypotheses. To frame a hypothesis may hide partiality to neighbours against Newton’s religion, Leviticus 19, 15. If we do not question prejudices in science then the communication that results may be propaganda for a scientific tyranny. Events like WWII or terrorism or 'natural' disasters may help set a scientific tyranny in stone blocking further fair progress. Moreover those events may in reality be invoked by a current scientific tyranny in true cause and effect law. If we really hate Nazis or terrorism modern ‘science’ may have to go by fair science identifying its partiality for courts.
A choice for scientists is whether to stand by a fair court or stand by power to a local alliance of religious and scientific tyrannies. My work develops fair science to show that it is a real choice. I hope to be an expert witness to that for courts.
I am a pioneer in fair science. I apply fair principles in science to avoid tacit prejudices even at the foundational level. When I took my physics degree I still did not realise strong prejudice was involved. My blindspot was that mathematics is not primarily to do with being fair. It can be used to model any universe or reality that we ask. Much of my time at school was in learning mathematical exercises. I got three O-levels in mathematics. Technical prejudice may feel so 'natural' or right that we do not learn to question. That starts in school.
When people are cheated of fair rights by scientific prejudice that may be criminal. Thus, a fair error estimate for a theory is actually a combination of its technicality and its criminality. A theory can show technical genius but be pure crime. Indeed a pure ‘science’ divorced from ethical considerations might also be pure crime.
I have four books out in 2023 in fair science. Book 1 is in reality-science formerly ‘The General Theory of reality’ now "The Fair Rights Foundation to Science & Theology". It generalises Einstein’s general relativity in principle and focuses on ending natural history in court. Natural history is a hypothesis and has a counter hypothesis of supernatural history. A little work shows it is the latter that may have a walkover both technically and criminally in a fair court. Book 2 also formalises Newton's proof for God in his General Scholium to the Principia. I rediscovered it in chapter 6 before seeing Newton's take on it. I tend to work out of fair conscience and to be denied a living to do such work calls the legitimacy of the profession into question. Modern science is testimony to a powerful force of prejudice in this universe. That testimony may be its real value in history.
Fair science goes back to Newton as simply about not framing or falsifying hypotheses. To frame a hypothesis may hide partiality to neighbours against Newton’s religion, Leviticus 19, 15. If we do not question prejudices in science then the communication that results may be propaganda for a scientific tyranny. Events like WWII or terrorism or 'natural' disasters may help set a scientific tyranny in stone blocking further fair progress. Moreover those events may in reality be invoked by a current scientific tyranny in true cause and effect law. If we really hate Nazis or terrorism modern ‘science’ may have to go by fair science identifying its partiality for courts.
A choice for scientists is whether to stand by a fair court or stand by power to a local alliance of religious and scientific tyrannies. My work develops fair science to show that it is a real choice. I hope to be an expert witness to that for courts.
The Politics of Fair Science
Fair science is about fair play. Its conscience is in an awareness of failure to be fair. The alternative ‘conscience’ to a selfish ‘science’ feels need to deny fair rights when necessary for security of the profession. That is to show partiality against ‘enemies’ even who threaten to bring fair standards professionals deem unwise, unfit or failure by selective standards. That partiality may be instinctive or religiously spiritual. Victims of rights abuses may try to organise to tackle selfish ‘science’ in court over negligent failings.
Fair science relies on fair courts. Selfish science relies on status as an expert tyrannical witness above 'fair' courts. The aim of fair science is progress in fair rights. There is a theoretical path for fair science to replace the material foundation to ‘science’ by one based on fair rights. It exists because we can move material, e.g. arms and legs, to go to court in support of fair rights. Some might like to scoff that but book 2 highlights necessity by systematically ruining the material foundation.
A fair error estimate for science is a combination of its technicality and criminality as explained in 'About me' above. The criminality of a natural-material-foundation may be at level of the worst crime possible in this universe. Naturally its supporters do not dwell on that. As a result modern scientists may lead a conspiracy to pervert justice worse than the Nazis as the elephant in the courtroom. Trials best not make use of their brilliance at technicalities to trap lesser crooks. Do natural scientists blind courts with crooked ‘science’?
Ideally scientists owe a duty as regards fair error estimates and to be open on their potential criminality for society and judges. They should make courts aware if a ‘science’ has to show partiality to social groups and if that partiality is removable? What difference can removing partiality make to ‘science’ or groups it may technically cheat of fair rights? Are groups cheated to include court judges?
Scientists these days all train to frame hypotheses or models within a natural paradigm. However there is no formal fair case for ignoring evidence for the supernatural. A purely natural world is also infinitely unlikely which should ring alarm bells. Lots of incredibly unlikely things happen in this universe. However, the origin of a natural universe is not something that happens in the universe. It happens within the imaginations of scientists and if they adopt crooked ways to frame a case for that origin tare they not crooks? §6.16, book 2. Ordinary crooks know judges reject infinitely unlikely alibis for crimes. It is not fair to them if judges let professional scientists use tall stories as alibis for crooked ‘science’ to ignore areas of evidence that do not fit.
If being fair is caused simply by inherited flows of matter there may be no such thing as a fair trial. It means a ‘fair’ judge at a cake competition is prejudiced by the material cakes tasted. Further a ‘fair’ judge at a trial involving religious evidences may be prejudiced by the taste of faith in genetic materialism. That is a danger of routine criminal trials prejudiced by faith in genetic forensic evidences. To avoid that we ask to see fair error estimate for genetic materialism being false that include its criminality or crime-potential. Experts in genetic materialism might be far worse crooks than those they help courts capture and more successful at perverting justice for power than the the Nazis. How else may we see that?
Fair science must analyse all religion and science for fair order as in Book 2. That may allow a universal theory of the soul and its guardian spirits to all religion and science, chapter 10, Volume 2, book 2. That universal theory implies all people are steeped in familiar spiritual forces. It implies spiritual forces are real subject to dispute on their meaning. Genetic materialism is then not the full hereditary science over this world but of a cult agenda to incarnate demonic gods as inspired leaders.
Fair science relies on fair courts. Selfish science relies on status as an expert tyrannical witness above 'fair' courts. The aim of fair science is progress in fair rights. There is a theoretical path for fair science to replace the material foundation to ‘science’ by one based on fair rights. It exists because we can move material, e.g. arms and legs, to go to court in support of fair rights. Some might like to scoff that but book 2 highlights necessity by systematically ruining the material foundation.
A fair error estimate for science is a combination of its technicality and criminality as explained in 'About me' above. The criminality of a natural-material-foundation may be at level of the worst crime possible in this universe. Naturally its supporters do not dwell on that. As a result modern scientists may lead a conspiracy to pervert justice worse than the Nazis as the elephant in the courtroom. Trials best not make use of their brilliance at technicalities to trap lesser crooks. Do natural scientists blind courts with crooked ‘science’?
Ideally scientists owe a duty as regards fair error estimates and to be open on their potential criminality for society and judges. They should make courts aware if a ‘science’ has to show partiality to social groups and if that partiality is removable? What difference can removing partiality make to ‘science’ or groups it may technically cheat of fair rights? Are groups cheated to include court judges?
Scientists these days all train to frame hypotheses or models within a natural paradigm. However there is no formal fair case for ignoring evidence for the supernatural. A purely natural world is also infinitely unlikely which should ring alarm bells. Lots of incredibly unlikely things happen in this universe. However, the origin of a natural universe is not something that happens in the universe. It happens within the imaginations of scientists and if they adopt crooked ways to frame a case for that origin tare they not crooks? §6.16, book 2. Ordinary crooks know judges reject infinitely unlikely alibis for crimes. It is not fair to them if judges let professional scientists use tall stories as alibis for crooked ‘science’ to ignore areas of evidence that do not fit.
If being fair is caused simply by inherited flows of matter there may be no such thing as a fair trial. It means a ‘fair’ judge at a cake competition is prejudiced by the material cakes tasted. Further a ‘fair’ judge at a trial involving religious evidences may be prejudiced by the taste of faith in genetic materialism. That is a danger of routine criminal trials prejudiced by faith in genetic forensic evidences. To avoid that we ask to see fair error estimate for genetic materialism being false that include its criminality or crime-potential. Experts in genetic materialism might be far worse crooks than those they help courts capture and more successful at perverting justice for power than the the Nazis. How else may we see that?
Fair science must analyse all religion and science for fair order as in Book 2. That may allow a universal theory of the soul and its guardian spirits to all religion and science, chapter 10, Volume 2, book 2. That universal theory implies all people are steeped in familiar spiritual forces. It implies spiritual forces are real subject to dispute on their meaning. Genetic materialism is then not the full hereditary science over this world but of a cult agenda to incarnate demonic gods as inspired leaders.
Ancestry Issues
I had one male Jewish grandparent who died of TB before I was born. I never really knew the Jewish side of the family. We moved around a lot for work reasons to leave me feeling rather rootless.
My other grandfather was a captain in the horse artillery. His son, my father Harry, married my half-Jewish mother Edna despite anti-Semitic prejudices in the war. Technically I would have been Jewish had my grandmother rather than grandfather been Jewish.
The Messiah is said to be Jewish in fulfilment of prophesies in scripture. The Messiah could be the spirit called Wisdom as mother of all fair life for father God at Proverbs 8, 22-36 . He is then mother to fair Jew and Gentile. Christianity has her incarnating as male Jesus by a virgin birth to become the man to save her fair children at John 1, 1-5. It may be mind boggling to see gender-bending implied.
Jesus may be Mary’s mother but became her son so she could become his brother in a genderless or all male heaven like God. To get past prejudice against such ‘unholy’ life-style changes may enable to ask if scripture allows that Jesus could have been gay or bisexual in the interests of God’s plan? Partiality may delay scholars from being fair to the issue but God is not partial is He? Leviticus 19, 15, James 2, 9-10. God is to come out of the closet for fair rights on earth. Gays could be seen as a chip off that block.
If ‘fair’ is a spiritual inheritance then is a fair reading of scripture gifted a thousand generations back (twenty thousand years) by the inheritance law in Exodus 20, 5-6? The important point is that Exodus may be a composite of laws for Lord God who blesses to a thousand generations and Lord Satan who curses up to four generations. Technically Lord Satan is God’s left hand in law which Satan may gloat about at Job 1 & 2. All inheritance law is legally attributed to the Lord God but His left hand may curse legally in ways not directly God’s will as at Lamentations 3, 33. However, Lord Satan could become ‘the Lord’ fairly if he breaks just one prophesy of God’s plan. All creation may be watching for that, Hebrews 12, 1. The devil may incarnate to lead his faithful to win that prize. He leads them into hell as his jail should they fail his plan to break faith in Justice, Isaiah 14, 12-17. The actual meaning of scripture may slide to describe Lord Satan if he wins. The proof of fair allowance for that in God’s courts is if people first accept Lord Satan as ‘God’ on an issue then repent to move on. History is about those issue-by-issue turnings to God that prove that life has been given a fair choice in the title-contest. The turns to God make the stages to God’s plan of prophesy. Fair science may detail all levels in readings to the same scripture to make the point.
The Jewish root religious culture is unique in claiming to be a kind of Trojan horse for fair Justice to this world. Jews may then have cultural children among the Gentiles as fairest of Gentiles, Isaiah 29, 18-24. But scripture is said to be a sealed book to Jews to end times, Daniel 12, 9. The reason may be to pass salvation on to Gentiles who can then prove their fairness by opening scriptures to the Jews. Prophesies then cover the opening of it for a Jewish escape from hand of their enemy (the devil of Job 1 & 2?) in end times, Isaiah 10, 20-22, Psalm 98. Note that Jews who refuse to escape might enter hell in triumph as its honoured priesthood for ‘the Lord’? Daniel 12, 1-4.
In formative school-choir days I was a treble in Verdi’s requiem to sing of its terrifying view of Judgement Day. Book 1 manages a theory of Judgement Day to justify democracy and a free press. Nowadays ‘Get Happy’ seems a better song to cover Judgement Day for its salvation from lie and murder on earth. Both views have validity.
Key places set by scripture to seek understanding of Judgement are the theory of atonement to Isaiah 53 or of the crucifixion of Jesus. Those harrowing events are to do with the due process by which a fair God establishes an umbrella to defend ambivalent conscience from quick death by custody claims of ruthless evil. What fair theory of the atonement events does not defame God as liar and murderer? It must solve the riddle of Isaiah 1, 15-20. It may be solved in book 2. Book 1 adds that gay rights may lead Jews to fair theology to fulfil prophesies of fair Jews returning to God.
To refuse salvation from a gay or bisexual rejects the Messiah if of that nature as unholy. God’s sexual values may not be as conventional as some suppose, Hosea 1, 2. God has to achieve a separation of fair from prejudice. Sex issues are beset by prejudices as an area that may separate sheep from goats in ways to astonish the unprepared.
There is said to be no gender in a fair heaven as why gay love might be acceptable to God, Mark 12, 31. Not all gays are fair and not all Jews are fair. However, their cultures may open or hold open paths to overcome dark prejudices. Further, a fair gay is life that like God could hardly evolve by passing selfish genes on under a devil’s natural paradigm. The devil may then make LGBT hate-crime targets to block their cultural paths to fair truth. They defy prejudice for love. Religious hate-crime towards them may still be forgiven provided ignorance of sin can be pleaded at Judgement. Do LGBT harbour a secret house closer to God than established religion when of a Satanic mind to oppress? But the latter house may be forgiven for its ignorance till God opens truth. That may be the time to repent and turn to God?
God’s mercy is the measure of Justice in saving lives from murder and lie, even life that for a time spits on the process of Justice or makes ‘Justice’ its holy diktat. True Justice is fairly agreed by life if necessary without being prejudiced by knowing that is what life on earth is about. Justice may then come from the heart even whilst the head is bewildered. There are examples of love overcoming prejudices as well as of prejudices ruining lives.
Scripture may set a plan of prophesies as the due process to establish fair Justice on earth that is in part led by respect for life’s wishes from the heart under blind test. Life’s loyalties on earth may be judged by spiritual clothing whether angelic or demonic or mixed. Most of us cannot easily see the dress we take for granted but it may be obvious to spirits who inspire us. Earthly clothing is a metaphor for it, Zechariah 3, 1-4.
End time prophesy may be a tyrannical demonic spirituality placed in God’s temple that the fair flee from pending appeal for a coming of God’s fair authority to save. It allows an interesting take on ‘blessed are the poor in spirit’ for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Some may prefer a poverty of spirit to demonic dress, Daniel 3, 12-18. That may mean they cannot network very competitively in local society. The devil may use spiritual forces to dress and test selfish faiths. Who has to be disillusioned if truth is also spiritually determined in for rival kingdoms? Some may be firm in spiritual dress that sets a ‘faith’ above fair query. Evil may burn up such hostages, Psalm 97, 3, to defend that faithful from corruption by sight of a fair God, Job 42, 5-6. They may be leaders to a ’heaven’ within hell for a final bid driven by torments of hell to evolve for a way to break out to depose Justice. That is a preferred life-style choice for those who may find a fair heaven unsatisfying.
My other grandfather was a captain in the horse artillery. His son, my father Harry, married my half-Jewish mother Edna despite anti-Semitic prejudices in the war. Technically I would have been Jewish had my grandmother rather than grandfather been Jewish.
The Messiah is said to be Jewish in fulfilment of prophesies in scripture. The Messiah could be the spirit called Wisdom as mother of all fair life for father God at Proverbs 8, 22-36 . He is then mother to fair Jew and Gentile. Christianity has her incarnating as male Jesus by a virgin birth to become the man to save her fair children at John 1, 1-5. It may be mind boggling to see gender-bending implied.
Jesus may be Mary’s mother but became her son so she could become his brother in a genderless or all male heaven like God. To get past prejudice against such ‘unholy’ life-style changes may enable to ask if scripture allows that Jesus could have been gay or bisexual in the interests of God’s plan? Partiality may delay scholars from being fair to the issue but God is not partial is He? Leviticus 19, 15, James 2, 9-10. God is to come out of the closet for fair rights on earth. Gays could be seen as a chip off that block.
If ‘fair’ is a spiritual inheritance then is a fair reading of scripture gifted a thousand generations back (twenty thousand years) by the inheritance law in Exodus 20, 5-6? The important point is that Exodus may be a composite of laws for Lord God who blesses to a thousand generations and Lord Satan who curses up to four generations. Technically Lord Satan is God’s left hand in law which Satan may gloat about at Job 1 & 2. All inheritance law is legally attributed to the Lord God but His left hand may curse legally in ways not directly God’s will as at Lamentations 3, 33. However, Lord Satan could become ‘the Lord’ fairly if he breaks just one prophesy of God’s plan. All creation may be watching for that, Hebrews 12, 1. The devil may incarnate to lead his faithful to win that prize. He leads them into hell as his jail should they fail his plan to break faith in Justice, Isaiah 14, 12-17. The actual meaning of scripture may slide to describe Lord Satan if he wins. The proof of fair allowance for that in God’s courts is if people first accept Lord Satan as ‘God’ on an issue then repent to move on. History is about those issue-by-issue turnings to God that prove that life has been given a fair choice in the title-contest. The turns to God make the stages to God’s plan of prophesy. Fair science may detail all levels in readings to the same scripture to make the point.
The Jewish root religious culture is unique in claiming to be a kind of Trojan horse for fair Justice to this world. Jews may then have cultural children among the Gentiles as fairest of Gentiles, Isaiah 29, 18-24. But scripture is said to be a sealed book to Jews to end times, Daniel 12, 9. The reason may be to pass salvation on to Gentiles who can then prove their fairness by opening scriptures to the Jews. Prophesies then cover the opening of it for a Jewish escape from hand of their enemy (the devil of Job 1 & 2?) in end times, Isaiah 10, 20-22, Psalm 98. Note that Jews who refuse to escape might enter hell in triumph as its honoured priesthood for ‘the Lord’? Daniel 12, 1-4.
In formative school-choir days I was a treble in Verdi’s requiem to sing of its terrifying view of Judgement Day. Book 1 manages a theory of Judgement Day to justify democracy and a free press. Nowadays ‘Get Happy’ seems a better song to cover Judgement Day for its salvation from lie and murder on earth. Both views have validity.
Key places set by scripture to seek understanding of Judgement are the theory of atonement to Isaiah 53 or of the crucifixion of Jesus. Those harrowing events are to do with the due process by which a fair God establishes an umbrella to defend ambivalent conscience from quick death by custody claims of ruthless evil. What fair theory of the atonement events does not defame God as liar and murderer? It must solve the riddle of Isaiah 1, 15-20. It may be solved in book 2. Book 1 adds that gay rights may lead Jews to fair theology to fulfil prophesies of fair Jews returning to God.
To refuse salvation from a gay or bisexual rejects the Messiah if of that nature as unholy. God’s sexual values may not be as conventional as some suppose, Hosea 1, 2. God has to achieve a separation of fair from prejudice. Sex issues are beset by prejudices as an area that may separate sheep from goats in ways to astonish the unprepared.
There is said to be no gender in a fair heaven as why gay love might be acceptable to God, Mark 12, 31. Not all gays are fair and not all Jews are fair. However, their cultures may open or hold open paths to overcome dark prejudices. Further, a fair gay is life that like God could hardly evolve by passing selfish genes on under a devil’s natural paradigm. The devil may then make LGBT hate-crime targets to block their cultural paths to fair truth. They defy prejudice for love. Religious hate-crime towards them may still be forgiven provided ignorance of sin can be pleaded at Judgement. Do LGBT harbour a secret house closer to God than established religion when of a Satanic mind to oppress? But the latter house may be forgiven for its ignorance till God opens truth. That may be the time to repent and turn to God?
God’s mercy is the measure of Justice in saving lives from murder and lie, even life that for a time spits on the process of Justice or makes ‘Justice’ its holy diktat. True Justice is fairly agreed by life if necessary without being prejudiced by knowing that is what life on earth is about. Justice may then come from the heart even whilst the head is bewildered. There are examples of love overcoming prejudices as well as of prejudices ruining lives.
Scripture may set a plan of prophesies as the due process to establish fair Justice on earth that is in part led by respect for life’s wishes from the heart under blind test. Life’s loyalties on earth may be judged by spiritual clothing whether angelic or demonic or mixed. Most of us cannot easily see the dress we take for granted but it may be obvious to spirits who inspire us. Earthly clothing is a metaphor for it, Zechariah 3, 1-4.
End time prophesy may be a tyrannical demonic spirituality placed in God’s temple that the fair flee from pending appeal for a coming of God’s fair authority to save. It allows an interesting take on ‘blessed are the poor in spirit’ for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Some may prefer a poverty of spirit to demonic dress, Daniel 3, 12-18. That may mean they cannot network very competitively in local society. The devil may use spiritual forces to dress and test selfish faiths. Who has to be disillusioned if truth is also spiritually determined in for rival kingdoms? Some may be firm in spiritual dress that sets a ‘faith’ above fair query. Evil may burn up such hostages, Psalm 97, 3, to defend that faithful from corruption by sight of a fair God, Job 42, 5-6. They may be leaders to a ’heaven’ within hell for a final bid driven by torments of hell to evolve for a way to break out to depose Justice. That is a preferred life-style choice for those who may find a fair heaven unsatisfying.
