Philosophical Musings

Philosophical Musings

Sunday, March 19, 2017

Is there an Afterlife?

 Here are some possibilities, regarding the afterlife:
  1. Death is the end. No soul. No purpose other than immediate existence. A naturalistic view of the universe.
  2. There is a unique soul, and eternal consequences for its words & actions. Individual accountability.
  3. There is a unique soul, but no consequences for words or actions. Amoral relativity.
  4. There is a life force, but no individuality. Your 'spark' returns to the pool & your individuality is gone.

I can't really think of any other possibilities, from a philosophical POV. If there is not an individual soul.. a unique spark of life that continues in some kind of afterlife, then the result of either #1 or #4 is the same. Your essence, whatever it is, will be lost, & your uniqueness will dissipate into the nether regions of eternity.

But, if there is an eternal soul, that will continue on in another dimension, then the choices we make in this life take on eternal significance.

If we got to choose the above 'reality', i'm not sure any of the choices are very comforting. I've always like Clarke's quote about the supernatural:

“Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.” ~Arthur C. Clarke

Some people believe in the naturalistic/atheistic worldview. Others believe in a supernatural/theistic ideology. I can't really see that either belief has much comfort to the angst filled person, wondering what the meaning of his life is. 

On the one hand, there is eternal nothingness.. end of story. Life is over, & there is no memory, no future, no purpose or significance to our lives, at all. We are a cosmic accident, with no explanation, no hope, no meaning. Not much comfort there, but at least the pain only lasts a short time, while we are alive.

On the other hand, there is eternal existence. A Supernatural Being (or Beings) hold us accountable for our brief lives in this existence, & we will face consequences for our thoughts, words, & actions. There is a possibility that this Supreme Being is very strict &/or ruthless in His standards, & that the 'sins' that we might consider to be small potatoes, relative to other people, are major issues in the Presence of a Holy God. Not much comfort there, either, if there is a possibility of eternal torment, or continued pain from the actions in this life.

And the other unfortunate thing about Reality, is that we don't really get to choose it, regardless of the fantasy illusions of the left, & their identity politics, where you can choose your gender, race, & self image. Actual reality is not so accommodating. It IS, & we had better adapt to it. So hoping that our BELIEFS about the afterlife or the soul is the one that we get to go by might lead to a rude shock. That is why humans for millennia have searched for Truth. Angst is a very real thing, in the human experience, & IMO, it is the ONE clear evidence that we are here for Something More. Angst has no naturalistic explanation. But, it has been recognized by wise men & seekers of Truth throughout history.

“What else does this craving, and this helplessness, proclaim but that there was once in man a true happiness, of which all that now remains is the empty print and trace? This he tries in vain to fill with everything around him, seeking in things that are not there the help he cannot find in those that are, though none can help, since this infinite abyss can be filled only with an infinite and immutable object; in other words by God himself.” - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

And the famous quote by Augustine (354-430)
So what is the conclusion? Pick your poison, & hope for the best? That does not seem very wise, since there MIGHT be so much at stake. I submit that the words of Jesus & Jeremiah are good advice, for the human seeking clear vision of Reality.

Jeremiah 29:12. Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.
John 8:31. “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

If there is something i note from these quotes, it is the necessity of sincerity & honesty, which stands to reason. If there is an afterlife, & eternal consequences for our works, thoughts, & actions here on earth, then a genuine search would let go of any bias or preconceived notions about God or the afterlife, and sincerely seek Reality. Truth is the goal, not validation, or comfort, or justification. The seeker of Truth must be willing to give up all of their beliefs, opinions, notions, and indoctrinations, if they wish to discover it. If there is a God, He is no fool, & will not be deceived by games or manipulations.

And of course, you can just ignore it all & hope for the best. But, if there is an afterlife, and an eternal soul, & a Supreme Being, to whom we must answer for our lives, it seems to me at some point we should make a concerted effort to discover the true nature of Reality, rather than piddle our lives away with temporal distractions. I can think of no more important quest.

Friday, March 17, 2017

Philosophical Basis of Science

This interesting quote from Einstein has always intrigued me. I have always considered religious faith as something that is separate from scientific inquiry, but he correlates them as part of the quest for Truth. And, my experience over the years debating science, especially with militant atheists, confirms his point here. I generally avoid religious faith, when discussing scientific issues, but militant atheists ALWAYS bring it up. They constantly try to drive a wedge between religious faith & science, which they do not follow, themselves.

Anyway, the more i ponder this quote, the more i tend to agree. Having some kind of clear belief system, & recognizing it as such, is a good foundation for scientific inquiry. Without that philosophical foundation, scientific inquiry blindly follows flawed assumptions. And without the empiricism of Facts & scientific methodology, the philosophical beliefs have no feet.. nothing to propel them.. they are lame. So it is a good quote, & worthy of consideration.

[​IMG] 

I am reminded about John Locke, who was a fierce advocate of searching for Truth.

“To love truth for truth's sake is the principal part of human perfection in this world, and the seed-plot of all other virtues.”
 ~John Locke

Without this 'religious/philosophical' foundation, too much that is labelled 'science' is just agenda driven propaganda.. FAKE SCIENCE. There must be an underlying love for Truth, & a philosophical foundation of integrity & sincerity. Otherwise, as we see constantly in this world, science becomes an agenda.. a basis for manipulating people. It is what i have called, 'Fake Science'. It is not based on a 'holy curiosity of inquiry,' but indoctrination for some ideological agenda.

Now, how i interpret 'religion' in Einstein's quote, is a clear recognition of one's philosophical opinion.. NOT a dogmatic insistence of Absolute Knowledge, that they cannot possibly have. And unfortunately, that is how the militant atheists present their beliefs.. they won't even call their opinions 'beliefs'. They dogmatically assert that they have Absolute Knowledge, & have no circumspection about the vast mysteries of the universe. Everything is neatly logged in a tidy package, bereft of mystery or the unknown. This blinds them to possibility, as Einstein is saying. It is NOT their atheism that is the problem, it is the lack of objectivity, & the lack of awe & wonder for the universe. They are without mystery, & are stuck in dogmatic assertions of false knowledge. They are blinded by their own dogmatism, & have lost the wonder of the 'religious' experience of mystery & the unknown.

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

Horsing around with Equid DNA

I'll try to keep this short, but there is a lot out there, regarding equus. I will narrow my examination on one particular study of the mtDNA in equids. THIS ONE will be the primary resource, & IMO, the findings are fascinating. Here is the graphic:

[​IMG]
I could not get a larger image to display, as the study is embedded in a technical article. Anyone can follow the link for more details about it. I will post some of the things i found interesting that detailed the findings of the study. I don't have the time to go into detail about it, which would probably bore everyone to tears, anyway. But i'll try to highlight some key points.

The rich fossil record of the family Equidae (Mammalia: Perissodactyla) over the past 55 MY has made it an icon for the patterns and processes of macroevolution. Despite this, many aspects of equid phylogenetic relationships and taxonomy remain unresolved. Recent genetic analyses of extinct equids have revealed unexpected evolutionary patterns and a need for major revisions at the generic, subgeneric, and species levels. To investigate this issue we examine 35 ancient equid specimens from four geographic regions (South America, Europe, Southwest Asia, and South Africa), of which 22 delivered 87–688 bp of reproducible aDNA mitochondrial sequence. Phylogenetic analyses support a major revision of the recent evolutionary history of equids and reveal two new species, a South American hippidion and a descendant of a basal lineage potentially related to Middle Pleistocene equids. Sequences from specimens assigned to the giant extinct Cape zebra, Equus capensis, formed a separate clade within the modern plain zebra species, a phenotypicically plastic group that also included the extinct quagga. In addition, we revise the currently recognized extinction times for two hemione-related equid groups. However, it is apparent that the current dataset cannot solve all of the taxonomic and phylogenetic questions relevant to the evolution of Equus. In light of these findings, we propose a rapid DNA barcoding approach to evaluate the taxonomic status of the many Late Pleistocene fossil Equidae species that have been described from purely morphological analyses.

I am ignoring many of the assumptions of time, macroevolution, & other unsupported assertions in this study, & will focus on the known facts.
  1. many aspects of equid phylogenetic relationships and taxonomy remain unresolved. That should be obvious. the former definitions, based on 'looks like!' morphologies are often blown up with the hard evidence of genetic lineage. The former lines of equus, popularized in textbooks, nature shows, & slideshows have been pretty much debunked by genetic science.
  2. a need for major revisions at the generic, subgeneric, and species levels. Clearly. Simply relying on 'looks like' homologies for taxonomic classifications won't do it, anymore. We have hard data, now, with genetic 'markers', & lines that can be followed in the dna.
  3. the other bolded items say pretty much the same thing. our former beliefs about equus are not accurate. Genetic research has shot some holes in the commonly held beliefs about equus & equidae.
What the study found is hard data linking some haplotypes with more recent haplogroups. The old world asses & horses are clearly related to the new world ones. Even though there has been some major genetic drift, & narrowing of the traits available to the particular subspecies, even to the point of near reproductive isolation, the descendancy is evident.

Here is the graphic most of us learned from school & other ToE indoctrination centers:
Image result for horse evolution tree

The original linear model of gradual modification of fox-sized animals (Hyracothere horses) to the modern forms has been replaced by a more complex tree, showing periods of explosive diversification and branch extinctions

The 'updated' knowledge about equus is not based on imagined sequences, of purely 'looks like!' descendancy, but has the genetic basis for a family or genus based classification. the first graphic, or those with a circular hub & expanding branches are more accurate, even though the older notions are still promoted as 'settled science!' by many in the ToE indoctrination camp. The earlier belief was a line of evolution, starting with smaller, simpler strains, then getting bigger & more complex. But this is not indicated by the DNA. Many of the formerly held 'ancestors' of equus have been discovered to be not related at all. The imagined sequence of 'evolution!' is only that: Imagined. Here is a more accurate picture of equidae:
[​IMG]
There is a central, Nuclear genetic type that all other equids come from. They then branch out, diversifying in regions, ecosystems, & climate. But as far as the original ancestor of equidae, not much is known. We can follow the diverse line, but any speculation about the origin of the original equid is just speculation. Here are some key points about equidae:
  1. All equids are from an original ancestor. They did not originate distinctly from different parent genotypes.
  2. Equids should ONLY be classified as equids if they can be evidenced to be part of this genetic haplogroup... that is, if they contain the mtDNA marker to indicate descendancy. Big dogs, or other 'looks like a horse!' morphological taxonomies should be discarded in favor of the harder science of genetics.
  3. Some equids have changed their chromosome numbers, but still can reproduce.. sort of. A donkey with 62 chromosomes can mate with a horse with 64, but produce a sterile mule.
  4. However, not all odd chromosome matings result in infertile offspring. So there is something else going on to produce a barrier.
  5. Note in the wiki graphic below that a fox & skunk have the same chromosome count as the horse, but that does not indicate descendancy. The donkey & horse, though, even with different chromosome pairs, have clear evidence of descendancy. IOW, the number of chromosomes is NOT an indicator for evolution or descendancy. It is the MAKEUP of the chromosome that indicates it. The phylogenetic & haplotypes that have the same kinds of genes, structure, & functionality are the indicators, not the number of chromosomes.
  6. As a reminder, genes, dna, & chromosomes are not like lego blocks, randomly put together in different strands, to make different organisms. Each strand of DNA is unique to the clade it comes from, & can only generate others in the same clade. They can branch out to form different haplotypes, or narrower subsets of the clade, but they are all descended from the same parent stock.
  7. It is possible that at some time the donkey with its 31 pairs of chromosomes branched off from the horse with its 32 pairs. Chromosomes CAN split & join at the telomere level, but descendancy is still seen in the structure of the 'arm' of the chromosome. Even though there has been some splitting or joining of a chromosome, the basic structure has not changed.. only the length of the telomere, as it has fused or split from the original. All the other genetic information, genes, & structure are the same.. just the connections along the telomere have varied.
Here are some chromosome pairs numbers from wiki:
Fennec fox [​IMG] Animals Vulpes zerda 64
Horse [​IMG] Animals Equus ferus caballus 64
Spotted skunk [​IMG] Animals Spilogale x 64
Mule [​IMG] Animals 63 semi-infertile
Donkey [​IMG] Animals Equus africanus asinus 62

Here is another graphic from the study, showing the descendancy from the mtDNA for the groups sequenced.
[​IMG]

They even got a few sequences from extinct genotypes. But they are all descended from the same clade, & their relation is evidenced.

Chromosomes & Equidae

I think an understanding of the chromosome & some of the terminology would be good to clarify. So much of the misunderstandings about genetics & living organisms are due to flawed beliefs about the DNA, how it is assembled, what it does, & how it can change. I noted in an earlier post that equids have an apparent ability to 'adjust' their chromosome number to produce more variety. You do not see this with canids, or hominids. They remain constant in their genetic line, or 'haplogroup'.
[​IMG] 
We have evidence that the equid line has changed chromosome numbers. It is theorized that at some point, a chromosome pair detached at the centromere, & reattached at a telomere, presumably at the fertilized egg level. We have mtDNA to indicate actual descendancy, but the chromosome pairs are different. But, under further examination, the structure of the chromosome 'arms' are the same, just rearranged at the centromere/telomere level.

This is not absolutely proven fact, but is merely a theory for HOW the equid line changed at the chromosomal level. it does fit with the more empirical evidence of mtDNA descendancy, however, so it is a pretty good theory. But, we do not see a lot of the same thing with canids.. some, but not as much. Nor do we see it with hominids, especially humans. So a particular trait from one genotype does not mean it can be universally applied to ALL genotypes. Each genomic structure is different, with different rules governing their propagation.

Also, as i noted in the earlier post, the number of chromosomes is not an indicator of ancestry. 

Here are some chromosome pairs numbers from wiki:
Fennec fox [​IMG] Animals Vulpes zerda 64
Horse [​IMG] Animals Equus ferus caballus 64
Spotted skunk [​IMG] Animals Spilogale x 64
Mule [​IMG] Animals 63 semi-infertile
Donkey [​IMG] Animals Equus africanus asinus 62

We have mtDNA evidence that asinus & caballus are related. But there is nothing to indicate any genetic relationship with the fox or skunk. So the mere number of chromosomes is not a significant indicator, but the GENETIC structure in it, is. Both the asinus & caballus are from the same root haplogroup.. they are descended from the same ancestor. Their genetic STRUCTURE is the same. the fox & skunk are not. They are a different genotype, from a different haplogroup.

Saturday, March 4, 2017

Evolution and Race

When i was in junior high school... WAY back mid 20th century.. there were white supremacists that had flyers. They had cute little graphics that 'showed' the inferiority of negroes.. they illustrated, with the 'march of progress' chart, how humans have evolved to the modern pinnacle of perfection. Neanderthal was used heavily for this propaganda of aryan elitism. They held to the belief that it was an ancestral species, that modern homo sapien evolved from. This has been a central point of the ToE from early on.. it was refuting the Enlightenment notion that 'all men are created equal'. It was an elitist view of man, with the 'modern' man at the top of the heap.. more fully evolved than the dull, lower, inferior races. These were the kinds of graphics that accompanied this teaching:




See how they correlate the 'lower' evolutionary rung for negroes? Is this anything but a racist meme, for white supremacists?

But the same 'graphics' are presented now, only whitewashed for political correctness. They give the older ancestors a whitish hue, to hide the implications of race. But they cannot hide the skull shape.. just ignore the implications.


The euro white skull is hailed as the pinnacle of human evolution, from purely a morphological perspective. The lower forehead, thicker skull, & other 'neanderthal' features are presented as lower or less evolved on the human evolutionary scale.



All these fossils, skulls, & imagined drawings are presented as 'proof of human evolution!', but everyone seems to ignore the racial implications. They promote what is clearly a racist meme, that the nazis used, as well as the bolsheviks in russia, & the progressives in early 20th century America, with the Eugenics movement.. closely affiliated with progressivism.

That is why the ToE is such a damaging, negative ideology, as it is taught in schools. It brings the implication that darker skinned races, or those with a different skull shape, are lower on the evolutionary scale. But that is ALL based on the ASSERTION that the morphological differences mean something.. that they really mean we are 'evolving'.

The facts do not compel such a view of humanity. Skull shape is merely a variable trait, in the human animal. It is no different than height, bone structure, eye color, skin, or any other of the variables within homo sapiens. It is only arbitrary distinctions, made for elitist purposes, that promote such a view. Those are just prejudicial, bigoted perceptions from those who feel THEIR body type, or skull structure, or skin color make them superior.





The ToE started as a 'manifest destiny' justification.. but it became the basis for a naturalistic view of the universe. But it is still the antithesis of the Enlightenment beliefs of man being a unique, sovereign, free moral agent, equal to all other men. Jefferson said, '.. the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them..' laying out the enlightenment view. You can call it 'God', if you want. Or, 'Laws of Nature'. You can call it Fred. It does not matter WHAT you call it, the point is, Man is separate & equal.. not subject to the domination of a ruling, superior elite.

Now, i know i have stooped to philosophizing here, and showing the implications of a particular belief system. But it is important to see where the ideals come from, in any ideology. If you don't know your roots, and you can't see where you've come from, you probably can't see where you are going, either. It is also important, imo, to differentiate between philosophical BELIEFS, & empirical science. This concept is a dying one, in our current culture, as the line is blurred, & beliefs are stated dogmatically as 'settled science!'

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Fake Science

You've heard of 'Fake News', this is about fake science. There are many who use the name of 'science' to promote an ideological agenda. They are not producing scientific evidence, or arguments, or anything that even resembles Real Science, which follows the scientific method, but agenda driven propaganda, shrouded in pseudo scientific terms to fool people & dazzle them with obfuscating terminology. Let us examine some of the traits of this Fake Science trend, & the basis that it is built upon.

1. Mandated Conformity. Instead of producing facts & evidence, & letting them compel a conclusion, the fake science advocates prefer to mandate belief in their decrees, & pretend the facts support their position. It is contrary to the scientific method & open inquiry.
2. Appeal to Authority. Fake Science believers have a pool of experts that they appeal to, based on credentials, rather than facts or evidence.
3. Bandwagon Fallacy. Instead of science, they claim, 'Everyone who is smart knows this is true'. It is a claim of universal knowledge, when the facts have not even been presented.
4. Poison the well. Any criticism of the facts, data, or conclusions from the Fake Scientists is met with an attack & discredit for the source of the criticism. The points of science or reason are not addressed, but the source is attacked to try to discredit it.
5. Ad Hominem. This is a favorite tactic of the Fake Science crowd.. they do not reply to any reason or facts, but deflect with name calling & insults to the critic of their pet belief, whatever it is.
6. Other logical fallacies. False equivalence, straw men, begging the question, circular reasoning, & just about any fallacy you can name is used by the Fake Scientists, instead of reason & scientific methodology.
7. Fake Data. For the fake scientists, the agenda is all important, not Discovery, or building upon the human knowledge base. Data is manipulated, faked, contrived & declared, with no examination allowed, & no criticism permitted.
8. Indoctrination. The agendas of the Fake Scientists are not driven by reason or facts, but by propaganda & forced indoctrination. Progressive indoctrination centers & every human institution that is controlled by the Fake Science adherents promote their propaganda with religious zeal.
9. Propaganda. Make the lie big, tell it often & loudly, & eventually people will believe it.

Fake science is the New Science of the day. In the dark ages, this kind of science was the status quo, & it took a revolution, beginning with Copernicus then built upon by Kepler, Newton, and many others that saw the birth of modern science, empiricism, & the Age of Reason. It reached a pinnacle in WW2, where technology & science seemed almost magical, & changed the world with dazzling displays of technological derring do. Machines could fly. Huge monuments to Man's Power were built everywhere, & the Ability of Man seemed limitless. Knowledge & science were worshiped like a god.

But since that era, we have slowly been 'devolving' as a society (in America, at least) to put technology in a sacred realm, where only the high priests could go. It was the holy of holies, where the common man could not go, & it is blasphemy for him to dare to challenge the decrees of the Elite Knowledge Keepers, who know all things, & should be trusted to care for him.

Here are a few of the Fake Science Beliefs of the day:

1. Global Warming. This is actually the poster child for Fake Science. It meets all the criteria: agenda driven, ridicule for any critics, ad hominem, contrived data, mandated belief, & relentless indoctrination.
2. A woman can do what she pleases with her body. This ignores the scientific evidence of a unique, individual human being growing inside the woman, which is the mammalian way of reproduction. The new person is no long 'a part of the woman's body', but a new life, growing inside her. It is fake science to claim it is a 'blob of tissue', or other orwellian redefinitions.
3. Evolution is settled science, & is proven to be the origin of man. This is flawed in every way, & is also Fake Science. There is NO evidence that this is even possible, much less that it DID happen. It is merely an indoctrinated belief
4. Guns kill people. Statistics are given, from juggled data sets, & deceptive studies, to try to demonize the firearm, which is also a great deterrent for evildoers. But only the negatives are presented, to try to promote a false perception, & to promote a phony narrative.
5. White people are evil. The race obsessed, divisive left is constantly revising history, promoting false narratives of 'white privilege,' 'black lives matter', & other hysteria based racist memes. It is not supported by facts or reality, but is a phony narrative, used to instigate violence, sedition, & division in society.
6. A nation should have open borders. This is historically & logistically false & impossible. Any nation that has any attraction to immigration must have some kind of orderly system for immigrants. Open borders only create chaos, crime, & overload the system. The reasoning & arguments for it are completely irrational, fallacious, & based on deceptive data.
7. If you are low on money, just print some more. This is the absurd belief that monetary policy should be based on decree, rather than production. But all decreed money does is devalue, as inflation eats up the wealth of the working man, & transfers it to the ruling elite.
8. Govt can enable everyone to live off of everybody else. This is the 'Great Fiction' that Bastiat wrote of, & ignores the more basic problems of production of food & other necessities, which 'govt' cannot produce. Only working people create the necessities of life.
9. America is evil. America is the only successful experiment in self rule, in the history of man. Those who hate it as a system usually suggest some kind of marxist solution, which has a terrible record for the common man, for rights, opportunity, prosperity, or anything else.
10. You can be what you want to be. This ignores scientific reality. It pretends that biological reality is somehow a choice, or an option you can make at any time in your life. But it ignores the genetic & biological reality of gender.
11. Love Trumps Hate. This is a favorite slogan of the progressive left, which they demonstrate by rioting, burning cars, & committing acts of violence on those who disagree with them. It is merely orwellian 'New speak', which redefines reality with opposite terms.
12. Islam is the religion of peace. This is also demonstrated, almost daily, with suicide bombers, attacks on civilians, & terrorist attacks, with the left constantly defending them while attacking other beliefs as 'bigoted'. 

There are many more, & i could go on. These are all sacred tenets of faith, in the religion of Progressivism. Almost all progressives hold to all of these, all at once, with little departure from the mandated belief system. These are not based on reason, facts, or empirical evidence, but mandated, indoctrinated propaganda. The American culture has turned from an empirical view of reality, with freedom of belief, to one of fantasy, mandates, & indoctrination.

Unless there is another cultural revolution in America, & unless empiricism & scientific methodology returns to its rightful place as an arbiter of knowledge, we will continue down the slide of madness & folly, where truth becomes a lie, & lies become 'truth.' It is a return to the dark ages, where Fake Science originated.

I'm looking forward to a revival of scientific inquiry.. it usually happens, after a period of mandated conformity by the status quo. A few bold heretics will post a controversial study, or make a shocking claim that rocks the Fake Science world. Like Galileo, Copernicus, Pasteur, & others, the Truth of some sacred cow of the institutional status quo will be examined more critically, & it will eventually crumble under that scrutiny. I'm actually shocked, that something like the ToE and AGW has been going on for so long, in our alleged 'scientific' culture. It just goes to show that science is no more immune from human manipulations than anything else. The ruling elite have been doing it for centuries, if not millennia, & will likely continue into the future. The fantasy belief that we are somehow immune to this, because we are at the pinnacle of human knowledge, is charmingly naive, absurdly arrogant, & dangerously ignorant.

Science, or scientific methodology, is not tasked with explaining the mysteries of the universe for philosophical comfort. Facts, evidence, & Truth are the goals, not offering alternative explanations for unknown mysteries that are beyond the realm of scientific methodology. Evolution has become a religion.. a belief system, with NO scientific basis. For the true scientist, exposing flaws, & critically examining the claims are the main tasks. Attempting to prop up a worldview, or cater to a belief system has NO PLACE in scientific endeavor. Yet that is what Fake Science is all about. Truth & Facts are not sought, but validation for some hare brained 'theory'.

They are propagandists.. ideologically driven beliefs are all they have. There is NO EVIDENCE that 'species change over time, in the basic genetic structure. The only 'changes' that occur are on the micro level, or in mere variability. The postulation that organisms can move easily between one genetic structure to another is not possible, from anything we know today. That is 'Fake Science', that indoctrinates this belief system into people as though it were 'settled science'. It is not. It is not even science. It is a religious belief.

I know there are not many scientifically minded people out there. Most people are content to leave that to the 'experts'. So they 'trust' them, believing them to be conflict free, & sincere seekers of scientific truth. But these are human beings, & as such, are subject to the same biases, prejudices, & self interests as anyone else. Anybody involved in the realm of research knows this.

I like this quote, from 1961, about the increasing conflict of govt funding & scientific research. It should be obvious, & how many people have been up in arms over the years over some phony report from 'govt scientists', telling us to chill & trust them, they are the 'smart ones', & have everything under control. DDT? It's safe, they assured us. Nuclear testing? Not a problem.. just rattles the windows, some. Margarine vs butter. Cigarettes. GMOs. Coffee. Sugar. Coal. Nuclear power. Name your controversy, & there was a govt funded study taking whichever side the ruling or moneyed, or academic elite preferred. It is the classic case of mixing politics with science, & it has always been a problem. Whenever you take science away from individual pursuit, or bind it under some institutional directives, you get Fake Science. Oh, they may come up with a few solutions, using technology in some way, but seldom does govt funded research bring anything radical to the knowledge base. They may build on it, some, but they do not do breakthroughs.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

The bolds are mine, & the quote is from Eisenhower, 1961. It is interesting to me how little things change. This could have easily been someone speaking to the current problems with scientific research, & the conflict of money, influence, & agenda.

Fake Science is real. It has been with us forever, & it takes skeptical, keen eyed critics to see through the bluff & arrogance of the elite, to continue the holy curiosity of inquiry.

Monday, February 27, 2017

Neanderthal

Anyone remember charts like this?


How many of us were raised with this little evolutionary progression chart? The neanderthal was in that sequence. But now, even the proponents of evolution are changing their minds. They won't change the cute little evolutionary sequence, since that is canonized into the major tenets of the Religion of Evolution, but they now realize the neanderthals were probably just humans.. no fanfare.. no major announcements.. just sheepishly admitting that the facts do not support their fantasy.

..for a long time paleoanthropologists have viewed Neanderthals as too dull and too clumsy to use efficient tools, never mind organize a hunt and divvy up the game. Fact is, this site, along with others across Europe and in Asia, is helping overturn the familiar conception of Neanderthals as dumb brutes. Recent studies suggest they were imaginative enough to carve artful objects and perhaps clever enough to invent a language.

Neanderthals, traditionally designated Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, were not only “human” but also, it turns out, more “modern” than scientists previously allowed. “In the minds of the European anthropologists who first studied them, Neanderthals were the embodiment of primitive humans, subhumans if you will,” says Fred H. Smith, a physical anthropologist at LoyolaUniversity in Chicago who has been studying Neanderthal DNA. “They were believed to be scavengers who made primitive tools and were incapable of language or symbolic thought.”Now, he says, researchers believe that Neanderthals “were highly intelligent, able to adapt to a wide variety of ecologicalzones, and capable of developing highly functional tools to help them do so. They were quite accomplished.” source

Neanderthals were human. They buried their dead, used tools, had a complex social structure, employed language, and played musical instruments. Neanderthal anatomy differences are extremely minor and can be for the most part explained as a result of a genetically isolated people that lived a rigorous life in a harsh, cold climate. source

Since drawing about 60% of neanderthal dna, a lot has been discovered about them.
  • They interbred with homo sapien. ~ 2 Billion people have neanderthal genes in them.. mostly european & asian. What does this tell us? They were the same species. Separate species cannot interbreed. They were merely a 'tribe' of humans that had unique physical features.. like many tribes today. Their genetic 'line' can be traced. They did not evolve separately, nor were they a distinct hominid species. They just 'looked different' than whatever normal 'homo sapiens' looked like.

This was a problem for those in the evolution field.
“We were suspicious of the result,” Reich says. “We found signals of mixture and then worked very hard to make them go away.”
He tried for a year, to no avail. Finally, Reich and his colleagues had no choice but to conclude that Neanderthals had mated with humans. They estimated that the DNA of living Asians and Europeans was (on average) 2.5 percent Neanderthal. source

So, if the 'experts' were mistaken about neanderthals, & they were merely humans like pygmies or aborigines, why do they continue to try to prove evolution with shaky data? Why do they start at the conclusion, looking for data to prop up their flimsy arguments? Why not admit we don't know, & let the data speak for itself?

But in many of the 'science' forums, sites, nature programs, & other evolutionary indoctrination centers, Neanderthal is STILL pitched as an 'ancestor' of modern human beings. 





Almost every time i 'debate' the ToE, neanderthals are thrust at me as 'proof of evolution!' So the facts have not caught up with the beliefs, or perhaps the beliefs have not caught up with the facts. Much of what is still taught as 'evidence' for the ToE is refuted, yet it still hangs on like it means something. The desperation is great for SOMETHING to base this belief upon. We have no evidence that man has 'evolved' from a common ancestor, or that species have evolved from simple organisms to the complex varieties we see today. ALL of that is conjecture & fantasy, with no supporting evidence from science.

I was spoon fed the ToE from infancy. It is the defacto standard for origins in every public arena, media, & mainstream science source. It was not until i began to examine the claims with more skepticism that i began to doubt the pop science of our modern culture. Just like the status quo used to think the world was flat, & that leeches took out 'bad blood', or that neanderthals were stupid, subhuman brutes, i began to doubt the 'experts' & their confident assertions. Using common sense, logic, & just the facts, i came to the conclusion that the ToE is flawed in many ways. It is a valid belief system, which i acknowledge. It might even be true. I just do not see any logical or scientific facts that compel that conclusion. It is a flimsy theory at best, & a deceptive hoax at worst. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the holes in the theory, just be a rational, skeptical person with average reasoning skills.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Fallacies of Evolution

Here is a list of fallacies for the Theory of Evolution (ToE) as it is commonly taught in schools.

  1. False Equivalence. We can observe simple variability within an organism. Colored moths adapt to changing tree bark. Rabbits adapt to their surroundings. This is an observable, repeatable science, also known as 'micro evolution'. The fallacy is in making an equivalence between minor changes in physical traits, to extrapolating large changes in the genetic structure. But that is NOT observed, & cannot be tested. It is a false equivalence, to equate minor changes in micro evolution with the major ones in macro evolution.
  2. Argument of Authority. 'All really smart people believe in the ToE.' This is not a scientific proof, but an argument of authority, as if truth were a democratic process. Real science must be proved, via the scientific method, not merely declared by elites.
  3. 'Everybody believes this!' This is an attempt to prove something by asserting it is common knowledge. It is obviously not true, anyway, as many people do not believe in the ToE, in spite of decades of indoctrination from the educational system, public television, & other institutions intent on promoting this ideology.
  4. The infinite monkey theorem. 'Given enough time, anything is possible.' is the appeal here. If you have infinite monkeys, typing on infinite typewriters (lets update this to computers!), eventually you would get the works of Shakespeare, etc. This is an appeal to measure the ToE with probability, rather than observable science. We still cannot observe or repeat the basic claims of the ToE, so the belief that anything is possible, given enough time is merely that: A belief.
  5. Ad Hominem. This is a favorite on the forums. If you cannot answer someone's arguments, you can still demean them & call them names. It is an attempt to discredit the person, rather than deal with the science or the arguments.
  6. Argument by Assertion. Instead of presenting evidence, assertions are repeated over & over, as if that will make up for the impotence of the arguments.
  7. Argument from Ignorance. This is claiming that evolution is true, because it has not been proven false. But the burden of proof is on the claimant, not the skeptic, to prove their claims. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" ~Marcello Truzzi
  8. Circular Reasoning. This is the argument that evolution is true, because we see all the variety of living things that have evolved. It is using the assumption of evolution to prove itself. Taxonomic classifications are often used in this manner.
  9. Equivocation. This is similar to the false equivalence. It is using the terms 'evolution' when talking about variability within an organism, & changing the context to macro evolution. It is comparing horizontal diversity in an organism to vertical diversity in the DNA. But one is obviously visible & repeatable, while the other is not.
  10. Correlation proves Causation. This attempts to use similarity of appearance (looks like) as proof of descendancy. But morphological similarity can often display wide divergence in the DNA, with no evidence there was every a convergence.

The ToE has not been demonstrated by scientific methodology, only asserted & claimed. It is, in fact, a belief.. an almost religious belief in the origins of living things. It is an essential element for a naturalistic view of the universe, & for that reason, it is defended (and promoted) with jihadist zeal. But it is too full of logical & scientific flaws to be called 'science'. It is a philosophical construct, with very shaky foundations. There are many other flaws in the ToE, regarding the dating methods, conjectures about the fossil record, & other conflicts with factual data.