Scientists continually declare that their work uncovers new truths and increases human knowledge. How can they make such incredible claims, and should we as society be willing to believe them? These are bold statements, and when looking deeper, it becomes increasingly obvious that scientists are very wrong regarding both truth and knowledge.

As a general example, scientific studies often focus on examining the events of the past, especially when attempting to explain how things came to be they way they are now. But we can never genuinely know what happened in the past, because we were not there to see it for ourselves. Clearly trying to figure out what occurred in the past is futile and a waste of time as well as funding.

The only thing any person can logically do right now is observe the things around them and record the observations. Eventually these records will hopefully be what allows people in the future to know what was experienced here in the past, despite the fact that those people were not able to observe it for themselves.

The past may be undefinable, but is there anything that is true that we are not able to verify through our own direct experience? If there are such truths, where would we be able to find them? Miraculously, there is indeed a place to get all the answers one will ever need to know; the answers are in an old collection of writings.

Though this collection may have been created through multiple editions and had several amendments over time, it can no longer be modified, because it is infallible. Nevertheless, when needed, it may be translated if it was not originally written in the modern version of the native language of those persons who wish to read it.

While all other things may be questioned, the content of this collection cannot be. It is impossible to debate this fact, and the collection itself does not require any validation of its own truth. In fact, all other collections similar to this one that claim they contain similar truths are also wrong. If any person does not recognize this fact, that person is living their life incorrectly. It is the humble responsibility of those who do recognize it as the source of all truth to inform the non-believers how their lives are wrong, and that they must fundamentally change what they believe.

Also, quite conveniently, all moral rules can be found in this collection, which means all moral judgments must be made through consulting it. However, sometimes this can be a bit tricky, because some of the words and stories in this collection are not meant to be considered as fact. Regrettably at this time I am personally unclear on how to separate true advice and moral law from metaphorical parables or stories that should be understood within their historical context. Regardless of my own confusion, selectively choosing to apply certain rules and disregard others has allowed me to understand that this collection should undoubtedly be the basis of all other laws, as well as government itself.

As humans we seem to have a strong desire to acquire knowledge and attempt to gain real understanding for the world around us. The only way we can come anywhere close to meeting these goals is to know that there is only one place where we can find truth. We must also realize that there are people who somehow refuse to acknowledge this, despite how obvious it may seem to many others. Unfortunately, it is this kind of denial that leads to blatantly false confirmations that are often embraced by science.

We must realize that great harm is caused when the public begins habitually accepting facts that they cannot confirm themselves or that are not explained within the old collection of writings. We must not sit idly by and let this happen. For if people are taught to simply believe whatever they are told by science, they will never gain the ability or freedom to discover real truth.