The Theory is Broken

Continuing with the discussion for intelligent design from the previous post, here is a documentary I watched and highly recommend.  "Unlocking the Mystery of Life"  It takes you through it step by step very thoughtfully. I really enjoyed it. Leave me a comment and let me know what you think.

In the movie caption area/description there is a linked list of all of the sections of the documentary; they're about 9-10 minutes apiece. (These were posted back when YouTube had a 10 minute limit on films, which they've done away with a few years ago.) The third and forth 'movies' are the most convincing sections of the intelligent design argument in my opinion. It's a building argument, though, so make sure you watch the whole show and not just a few parts. The scope of the argument will leave you awestruck and then dumbfounded as to why exactly we're still arguing about this with all our technological prowess today. 

The scientists interviewed acknowledge there are religious implications for intelligent design but they don't dwell on it or try to beat you over the head with it. They're concerned with the study of molecular biology and the origin of the simplest forms of it. 

The source code for DNA is a given difficulty for those Darwinians who want to state a simple view that it all just arranged itself through chance or some built in(who built it??) magnetism. But 'irreducible reductionism' is really the very heart of the issue. Darwinians want to say that things are 'borrowed' from other sections or previously existing varieties of the type of machine present today in the cell. But where did those previous machinations come from? Who told them to change? If something happens slowly then how does it survive in the meantime with a changed environment which is demanding those changes for survival now? You can only break components of a machine's parts down so far before the argument is moot. You can't build something out of nothing! And I think that last part is what makes Darwinian's crazed. They want to say you can put a bowl full of mud with all the basic amino acids and proteins, add ... something(?!)... and voila! There will be life. It doesn't work, it hasn't worked, and it'll never work. People have tried zapping mud with electricity quite a few times. 

This is the most simple break down of the argument in it's all it's complexity:

"Without DNA there is no self replication. But without self replication there is no natural selection. So you can't use natural selection to explain the origin of DNA without assuming the existence of the very thing you're trying to explain." ~Stephen C. Meyer

This is why David Hawkins will never move beyond anything but screeching at the masses about how 'illogical' the God theory is: The burden of the theory of origin lies with the previously existing machine, not the one we have today. We don't know where the previous one came from but surely that one had a progenitor with the same parts somewhere in it's makeup. We think. We're pretty sure. We're not even sure where 95% of those other parts came from but.. whatever. Oh and the nucleus? The first cells probably didn't have them or need them. (I think my brain just did a 180 and came to a screeching halt with that asshat argument. With no instructions then who or what tells the cell to make changes?!)

Yeah, it's a pretty narrow lensed scope Darwinians are looking through. If it doesn't fit, toss it! But that's how they say natural selection occurred. If that's the case then where did all those billions upon billions of potential choices come from? Something inside the cell decided these things. What is it?  

"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have formed by numerous successive slight modifications my theory would absolutely break down."      ~Charles Darwin

Holy cow. Really? Isn't that rather ironic in the context of the argument being given about something as simple as the bacterial flagellum(tail/propeller) which is necessary for all life on our planet?

I ask the following question for all those in education or who have children being educated: why are we still teaching this?
 

Ben Stein vs. Richard Dawkins

This evening I watched Ben Stein's Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed documentary. It's a look at how evolutionists(Darwinists) have placed a stranglehold on academic discussion on intelligent design. Their reasoning? If you allow intelligent design discussion then we'll end up back in the Dark Ages where science is lost to religion.

Here's the full length movie on YouTube.


The academics Ben Stein speaks with on Darwinism make a valid point while getting to the meat of the argument itself: Darwin never explained the ORIGIN of man at all, just what he thought happened after the atoms were already arranged! And that is the place there Darwinists and Creationists painfully collide. Midway between them, leaning a little more right than left, you have intelligent design. "Something awfully smart created those first atoms! So intelligent that we're unraveling layers upon layers of mysteries within the atom itself every year!" 

The sentiment expressed continually throughout the film is that the continued study of Darwinism for scientists eventually leads to atheism. I want to say that I can see this would be true for at least those academics and scientists who don't have a backbone and/or only want to climb the academic ladder to stardom and money. Or at least tenure and a somewhat comfortable retirement plan. However, I have also personally known many teachers, scientists, and those who began as scientists but left the field who have said that the further they looked at science overall then the more religious they became-- not the reverse. But if they had only the confines of Darwinism to use as a template for all their accepted work then yes, they'd have suffered a crisis of faith or just seen their curiosity wither and die. I think perhaps this may be the intent of the establishment.  Those teachers I knew who became more spiritual at the end did leave the field for other private studies. They knew their career was at stake because they could not in good conscience teach something they knew was false.

One of the highlights of the film came at 1:27(that's one hour and twenty-seven minutes) Richard Dawkins explains why he believes in intelligent design! It's a riot because afterwards Ben Stein asks him to clearly state that he does not believe in any god or God of any religion whatsoever. However Richard Dawkins doesn't even hear what he'd previously admitted. He wasn't tricked into anything. There was no slick sophistry involved. Here's part of the conversation. To see the full thing you'd have to watch the movie : 




Richard: "So it couldn't have just jumped into existence spontaneously." 

Whoooahhh! Wait. Isn't that what the anti-creationists aka. DARWINISTS are trying to shove down everyone's throats including the Big Bang Theory?! That somehow this... thing... just happened and there was nothing intelligent about it?!  But a so-called hard core atheist thinks that someone super smart(elsewhere in the universe, of course) designed us(is he hearing himself?!), planted our genome here on this planet and then ...... sped off back to whatever lovely world they came from. But of course that race of super smart beings or being evolved by some Darwinian process themselves, because you know Darwinism has to play into our genesis at some point right?

Chicken and egg, Richard. I'm calling bullshit on that, my friend. Who made that first race of beings who supposedly made us? ... if they did indeed evolve Darwinian style and were not spontaneously sprouted from some God's head fully formed.

The logistics of this argument make my head spin! It seems quite obvious to me at this point that the most obvious questions are not being asked in the classroom and unfortunately for the child who does want to ask .... I think their teacher may be inclined to not engage the child in conversation at all because they fear for their job.

An idea I've been pondering and refining for some time now: Man created religion as a way to explain the mysteries of God Science. Within gnosis we're able to see the forest(we live in it) AND the trees(we dream them) because we soar above it through his eyes to see what it is he wants to share. That intrinsic and basic connection we share with him is what gives us our sense of wonder, our sense of awe about the universe and even the trees and butterflies. Being the body of the All itself, how can we not be amazed?

Gravity Light Technology!

GravityLight: lighting for the developing countries from Therefore on Vimeo.

I'd like to know when this will be available to the rest of the world. My electric bill isn't getting any cheaper. 

Isn't it uplifting to see what amazing things engineers are coming up with? While there's always those who want to build bombs and weapons and the like, you've also got guys like this who are devoted to building toward the future in a positive way while lessening the impact on our planet. 

I hope they get the funding they need.  If you know of anyone who's interested and capable of helping them out, please spread the word!

1976

A blast from the past. Part of a 60 Minutes episode on swine flu in 1979. Pay special attention the info being presented starting at 4:00 forward.

(Video seen here) Opens in new window
Here's a transcript of the whole interview. 

5:38... Dr. Sencer from the CDC is spectacular. "There had been several reported but none confirmed."  

So we've never seen this virus. But we have a vaccine for it. Aren't they smart? (i.e. $$$$$ savy) What's even more spectacular is that we now know that the 1918 Spanish Flu wasn't flu at all. It was a bacterial infection of the lungs which is completely different from influenza. Compounded with poor diet, stress, and lack of antibiotics... yes, people died.

And not only that but the second batch of the 1976 vaccine(which was a different formula from the first) wasn't even under the scrutiny of trials before they were rolled out and injected into millions of unsuspecting human beings.

Dr. Michael Hattwick's admission that they knew about the flu vaccines causing neurological illness is stunning. He was very matter of fact about it. 

This is a link to the last six minutes of that video.  It continues on right in the middle of the last sentence that asshat bureaucrat from the CDC left off. 

He wiggles around like a worm on a hook. Squirm squirm squirm. And then he finally admits that they DID know about the neurological damage from flu vaccines! But, as he said, "The consensus of the scientific community was that they did not feel that this association was a real one." In essence he hands down responsibility of the decision to withhold the information to people in the lab. ... but wait. HE was the director of the CDC! 

The bit about Mary Tyler Moore and other famous people being used in the ad campaigns... hilarious. Mary looks fabulous back in that 1979 news slot, by the way.

I found this 1977 book written by Eleanora McBean, Ph.D, N.D.  called Swine Flu Expose. It's a great read!  www.whale.to/vaccine/sf1.html   She even goes a bit into water fluoridation at the very end because she realized(along with others) that there is a direct correlation between highly fluoridated cities and illness. There's an index there so you can skip around; it's not all one big huge document. Very easy on the eyes.

One last note: In 'Questions and Answers, June 24th, 1011" Doctors at the CDC now quietly admit on their website that the "CDC does not know exactly how many people die from seasonal flu each year."  They are backing away from the 36,000 influenza death figure previously quoted in their other literature. The CDC now says that "only 8.5 percent of all pneumonia and influenza deaths and only 2.1 percent of all respiratory and circulatory deaths" are influenza related.

In other words, it ain't gonna kill ya unless it's complicated with something else! So grab your box of tissues, drink chicken broth, and take some fever reducer. We don't need vaccines for the flu.


 

Gate's Philosophy of Immunology and Population: Get your flu shot!

The CDC has once again put out dire predictions for this year's flu virus, AKA: "It's going to be bad, folks. Come on down and get your shot. We know you're probably going to be sick as a dog for a few days afterward and will miss work but isn't it better than you plan such things rather than it happen spontaneously when someone sneezes on you?!"

I'd like to leave all my Readers with one quote from a well known voice and then I'll leave the topic well enough alone. Unless I get the flu this year. Then you're not going to shut me up. But the chances of that happening are nil. I haven't had it in many years. Here's the quote: 

"The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

That's straight from the mouth of Bill Gates, who also gives millions upon millions of dollars to fund 'research' and to implement vaccines for people all over the world. Look at his track record and it'll make your bile take a northern trek up your gullet. His research and implementation has made millions sick, caused spontaneous(?!) miscarriages(and not just overseas! Here in the US, too.), as well as increased the already growing number of children on the autism spectrum. 

Don't get your flu shot. Keep your brain and organs intact. 

If your employer is stating that it's mandatory then do Google searches on "employees fight vaccines.flu shots" and be prepared to smile. Folks are fighting this and WINNING!! The Patient Bill of Rights stands firm so don't be bullied. To have a shot is medical procedure which makes you a patient of someone. If that doctor or nurse administering it refuses to sign a liability form against any harm you may suffer then that gives you something to think about, doesn't it? 

The doctors don't want to be held liable. But the pharmaceutical companies won't be held liable for it EITHER and Congress said it's a-ok. Why? Because vaccines are experimental science and you, as the patient, are accepting a 'reasonable risk.' 

The one time I got a flu shot I wound up in the hospital with walking pneumonia, exhaustion, and vaccine overload. No thank you. Never again. Moncrief General Hospital(Army) still wont release my records about my hospital stay, which is not surprising in the least. They had just given my entire company about a dozen vaccines two weeks prior to my lengthy visit to their hospital bed.

Somebody to Love

Queen, singing 'Somebody to Love.' I gotta tell you that between Freddie's killer vocals, his rockin' Superman shirt, and his antic at the end, this guy put on an awesome show. I'd have loved to have been able to see a concert of his. It'd have been a riot, I'm sure.

So where's the gnosis in this song?  Freddie got it about right, I'd say. It's in pink text. Rest in peace, man.  When you break down that far Somebody does indeed lift you up.

"Somebody To Love"

Can anybody find me somebody to love?
Each morning I get up I die a little
Can barely stand on my feet
Take a look in the mirror and cry
Lord what you're doing to me
I have spent all my years in believing you
But I just can't get no relief,
Lord!
Somebody, somebody
Can anybody find me somebody to love?

I work hard every day of my life
I work till I ache my bones
At the end I take home my hard earned pay all on my own -
I get down on my knees
And I start to pray
Till the tears run down from my eyes
Lord - somebody - somebody
Can anybody find me - somebody to love?

(He works hard)

Everyday - I try and I try and I try -
But everybody wants to put me down
They say I'm goin' crazy
They say I got a lot of water in my brain
Got no common sense
I got nobody left to believe
Yeah - yeah yeah yeah

Oh Lord
Somebody - somebody
Can anybody find me somebody to love?

Got no feel, I got no rhythm
I just keep losing my beat
I'm ok, I'm alright
Ain't gonna face no defeat
I just gotta get out of this prison cell
Someday I'm gonna be free, Lord!

Find me somebody to love
Can anybody find me somebody to love?

The Bible's Falacies

Just a short five minute clip of Sam Harris raising some reality(not fundamentalist) based points about how most people gloss over the truly grotesque and illuminate the divine aspects of holy books. I thought he was quite eloquent and right on point, which is why I am sharing this with you here. Even fundamentalists would find offense at this.

I was raised with the exact argument he's speaking of, that the Old Testament was wiped away and no longer relevant once Jesus died for the world. And yet the whole time growing up I always wondered why we kept reading the Old Testament.... still can't figure it out. The smartest thing to do would have been to strip away all the(95% of the Old Testament) newly rejected(as forgery or highly questionable) gospel and only talk about what actually pertains to us now. But those two books are still stuck together in the same binding like they belong together.

The Laughing Christ in the Gospel of Philip

The lord said it perfectly:
"Some have entered the kingdom of heaven laughing, 
and they have come out laughing."
They do not remain there:
one because he is not a Christian,
another because he laments his later acts.
As soon as Christ went down into the water
he came out laughing at everything in this world.,
not because he thought it a trifle, but out of contempt.
whoever wants to enter the kingdom of heaven will do so.
Whoever despises everything of this world, scorn it as a trifle,
will emerge laughing.
So with the bread and the cup and the oil,
for above is one superior to all these. 

______________________________________________

The term Christian is being used in a derogatory sense here, as in labeling oneself not being helpful for the soul/aiua to evolve beyond the pettiness which this life can be.

Why would we lament our later acts after spending time with pleroma? I can think of a million reasons. Just one off-hand would be this: resentment that in order to do the right thing we have to stay and deal with the insanity which is this life. So not only do we resent him for at least a moment or two for telling us that we have to stay but we also resent ourselves for feeling such an abhorrent thing for him to begin with. We KNOW that he's right. But that doesn't make us less emotionally inept at dealing with the cold hard facts. In acting out that 'lament' of our later acts we can do some pretty stupid stuff; do things we never would otherwise. Like a typical teenager thumbing their nose at their parents.

The bread and the cup and the oil reference-- think of annointings, blessings, wine, breaking bread and the like. Philip states that these three things themselves are trifles but the heavenly All is superior to all these and we shouldn't get so immersed in ceremony or iconography. 

11/18 addendum:
Looking back at this now I see that the laughing may also have to do with the absurd things pleroma shows a person when immersed within his being. Try being squishie hugged by a Santa Claus/Jim Carrey/Jaques Cousteau type charactor. Loving, irreverently funny, insatiably curious and educational nerd. Yep. That's him. That's The Man.

Donut and Coke Bottle Challenge-- Hint #3

On 7/21/12 I posted an announcement for the Donut and Coke Bottle Riddle.

It has been more than two months and as I promised, I have another hint for you.

As a refresher,  hint #1 was to figure out where each item goes and what astronomical phenomenon it can be equated to. Hint #2 is that it has nothing at all to do with food.

Here is hint #3 to this universal riddle is this: Study the Electric Universe theory. Then study the similarities between quasars and pulsars. Now go back and read about the Electric Universe theory again. Put it all together. What are the similarities with all three? Quasars and pulsars helped us arrive at the Electric Theory to begin with and has helped debunk the Big Bang Theory. (Yeah, that was a trip and a half trying to explain this to my twelve year old high schooler. "Yes, honey, you were taught this particular theory. But now we're rethinking it." Poor kid is living in interesting times...Like suddenly finding out the earth isn't flat.)

Helpful visuals and explanations of the Electric Universe being seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5crTaDIhqE4&feature=relmfu  Pay careful attention to the information at 3:00 forward concerning the emitted beams of radiation.

http://www.thunderbolts.info  contains a wonderful archive of proof for this theory. Many pictures and examples.

Quasar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar

A quasi-stellar radio source ("quasar") is a very energetic and distant active galactic nucleus. Quasars are extremely luminous and were first identified as being high redshift sources of electromagnetic energy, including radio waves and visible light, that were point-like, similar to stars, rather than extended sources similar to galaxies.

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=20444

This research suggests that, in addition to its mass and spin, the quasar's central compact object may have physical properties more like a highly redshifted, spinning magnetic dipole than like a black hole. For that reason, most approaching matter does not disappear forever, but instead feels the motor-like rotating magnetic field and gets spun back out.

and/or pulsar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsar

Post a comment below and let me know how you're doing with this riddle. I'd really like to hear from you.

As a side note I must say that it has been increasingly stimulating to think further about this riddle in the context of actual astrological phenomenon. When I arrived at the answer to the riddle I had never heard of the Electric Universe theory or studied quasars or pulsars! I had to literally trip across pictures and information about these things to understand how to make this concept .... edible... for you. Digestible? Eh... I'd get lost in a thesaurus if I tried to come up with a better descriptive than that. 'Edible' works.

Until I learned about these real phenomenon I didn't have a clue as to how to present this riddle challenge. Like a good collection of healing herbs in a cuppa steaming hot water to make tea, the images had been steeping in my brain for a long time but I didn't have the language to use for you. All I had was the visualization and the emotion being shown to me as an explanation for what was happening and why.

Rather like a powerful case of deja vu. Mentally going to a library, reading a whole row of books and later discovering, 'Hey! That looks familiar... I can't remember the name of the books but I know I've learned this stuff before.' Gnostically speaking, sometimes it's creepier than hell. Once you get used to it, yeah, it becomes a bit easier to swallow. But in the beginning or in times of a massive flood of information it can be a little tiring and straining on the brain synapses.

"I read a really great book," is not something we uncommonly say we do in our sleep. Couldn't tell you a whole lot about it besides a few scene frames and grasp at a few ideas which were presented but we do remember that it was captivating. Sometimes TMI and disgusting, and you realize that Somebody sometimes acts like an overgrown toddler poking at something gross saying, "Isn't this awesome!??"  Ok, yes. Biologically speaking, it is awesome and magnificent and deserves to be appreciated. But not when I'm reading about something completely unrelated and You go off on a tangent. I can appreciate the hilarity of the moment but it still activates my gag reflex. Surely I am not the only one He has an affinity to for showing the physical differences between species and all their peculiarities?

Absent and Now Returned

This blog disappeared for a number of months for a few reasons. A few I can go into and a few I just can't. My apologies for the extended absence. A few Readers have written me wanting to make sure I was still breathing. I am, thank you for your concern. And I hope that the blog continues to exist for quite some time. 

#1 Reason-- I began to receive some pretty scary harassing messages from people. It wasn't your typical literalist Biblical bullshit of, "You're going to hell, bitch! Quit preaching all that love and unity and shit. We hate you!" No. That I can handle. I just shake my head and hope that one day that person finds peace. 

This was more sinister. I research and sometimes even bring to you some of the topics which I find are directly affecting people today. Things like vaccines, education, genocide, political lies and maneuvering, warmongering that my own country is perpetuating, and oh yeah... some religious stuff I find interesting along the way. 

The blog has morphed from a religious documentary of my evolution in gnosis into a (sometimes)rant filled diary about the injustices I see and read about. I can't apologize for that. This blog is personal and I have a really difficult time dividing my attention to write about only certain topics. My husband says that that he (now!)"likes that I'm not a mindless drone" and that I read so much about the world. That didn't used to be the case. I used to drive him crazy bringing up topics like this to discuss. But he's evolved along the way, too. He understands that I can't sit idly by and watch the world turn upside down. The more I talk the more he listens and I can see a subtle change taking place with him over time. This has been gratifying.

These threats, though, have become personal and terrifying. My computer was hacked. My husband's  computer was hacked. My husband works at home and his work computer was in danger because it runs off the same ethernet system. Granted, his employer's firewalls are world class but still, the danger was quite real. 

It's taken all this time to get stuff straightened out so that I can feel somewhat safe posting online again. That does not mean that danger isn't present. I've been hearing and reading about other blogger's websites which have been ripped down for talking about the very same things I do. Obama's NDAA bill doesn't only purport to protect us from foreign terrorists, it claims that American citizens should be thrown in jail without legal representation in exactly the same manner-- and for reasons which should make us all take a hard look at where we are and how exactly we arrived here-- for stating opinions which go against the government, discussing political events with the express purpose of inciting change(I didn't say violence- I said change), and simply being an activist in general. You don't have to say things like you're going to murder someone or say that you're planning some awful bombing. Nope. All you have to do is talk about how shitty the government is and BAM! you're on the NDAA watch list as a possible civilian terrorist. 

Free speech is no longer a right. 

I read a story a while back which was in all the alternative news channels about a woman who was an Occupy activist. She was arrested and thrown into solitary confinement for months without trial or representation. Why? She and two of her buddies(who weren't even in town at the time!) were accused of being involved in violence which took place at an Occupy rally. After months of her friends and family screaming at news stations, writing letters and calling congressmen, and general mayhem, the woman was finally released. Her two friends have not been released and their ordeal has no end in sight. If that first woman had no friends and family who knew where she was she'd have simply been yet another desaparecido.

In the end we have to make a stand. What are we willing to put up with and for how long? Do we run for cover from our own government when WE are supposed to be the government itself? We elect people who no longer represent our opinions. Lobbyists and corporations rule the land, not us.  Our 'representatives' are bought and paid for, with only a few exceptions. 

If my blog is torn down then so be it. At least I was able to enlighten a few people and pass along some information in my brief time here. 

I plan to keep writing and keep hope alive.