One of the key
outcomes of my work on Cloud Cosmology ( CC ) has been to understand that
consciousness itself is to physical as in time and space, but is also evolving
to reflect the steadily improving knowledge content of the physical.
I have
personally little doubt that a sequence of distinct steps will lead to the
creation of life and that we will figure it all out. I also expect that we may be able to
demonstrate that the probability is below any meaningful threshold.
In the
meantime, far too many scientists are lab technicians with a profoundly narrow
perspective who are also blinkered by their training. Thus empirical evidence actually confuses
them if it is outside their own paradigm.
It takes effort to break out of that straitjacket.
We now have
enough examples and a general history of the interaction of this class of
researcher with interesting data to know that we are doing something seriously
wrong. His item tells us the tale.
Bye the bye,
in my manuscript ‘Paradigms Shift’ we recognize that biology will recognize an
environmental opportunity and directly adjust its DNA to allow offspring to
take advantage of it. From when I penned
those ideas a decade ago, there has been a steady move toward this position in
the labs and in papers and occasionally posted on here.
October
24, 2013
Ask any
scientist where life on our planet came from, and they’ll usually give you a
one-word answer: “Evolution.” Immediately thereafter, they will usually give
you a condescending look that also implies you’re an idiot for not knowing this
“scientific fact” that everyone else has accepted as true.
It turns out,
however, that the scientist is suffering from a delusion. Evolution doesn’t even encompass
origins of life. Rather, evolution (i.e. “natural selection”) explains a
process by which species undergo a process of adaptation, fitness and
reproduction in response to environmental, behavioral and sexual influences. No
rational person can deny that natural selection is ever-present and happening
right now across bacteria, plants, animals and even humans, yet natural
selection can only function on pre-existing
life forms. It does not give rise to non-existent life.
Darwin, in other
words, did not study the “reproduction of rocks” because there is no such
thing. He studied animals which were already alive.
Thus, the
“Theory of Evolution” utterly fails to address the ORIGIN of where the first
life forms came from. How did natural selection have anything to work on in the
first place? You can’t “evolve” life forms from dead rocks, after all… unless
the evolutionists are now embracing the theory of spontaneous resurrection of
dead objects into living organisms.
So the question
remains: Where did life ORIGINATE?
Evolutionists
prefer to skip over that all-important question. So let us pick up their slack
and explore this subject with honest skepticism.
Evolution as a theory
of the origin of life is a FAITH, not science
According to scientists, you can never argue
with scientists because they uniquely have a monopoly on all knowledge. Their
beliefs can never be questioned because they are beyond any need to be
validated. “Scientific truth” is true because they say it is, and the
faith-based belief that evolution explains the origins
of life cannot be questioned either.
Yet question it we will! So let’s see how this
goes: The entire cosmos starts out as an unimaginably dense point that explodes
in an event cosmologists call the Big Bang. All the physical matter we know
today has its origins in that event, yet, importantly, there was no
life in the Big Bang. No biological organism could have possibly survived
Inflation, for starters. And before Inflation, the density of matter would have
crushed anything resembling biological life.
According to physicists, the Big Bang itself
followed no pre-existing laws of the cosmos. In fact, all physical laws that we
know of — gravity, electromagnetism, etc. — came out of the Big Bang. Even the very fabric of reality was
created by it (space and time).
The Big Bang is the faith-based miracle of
modern science. “Give me one miracle,” they’re fond of saying, “and we can
explain everything that follows.”
Except the miracle of the Big Bang itself goes
entirely unexplained. How could everything suddenly come from nothing? How could
an entire universe come into existence without a cause? These
questions are routinely ignored. Instead, we are told that we should believe in
the Big Bang as a matter of faith and trust that it is the
only exception to the laws of the universe. This is, of course, a matter
of faith, not fact.
And what about the origins of life in all
this? Today, supposedly 13.8 billion years later, we see life all around us.
Logically, somewhere between the Big Bang — where no life existed — and today,
life must have appeared.
But how?
Scientists believe in
magic
Again, if you ask most scientists about the
origins of life, they will blindly and dutifully answer “evolution!” Yet
without life already existing, there is nothing to evolve. So where did LIFE
come from?
Ultimately, the answer given by scientists is
that life spontaneously sprang from lifelessness. Seriously, that’s
their real answer. They have more technical-sounding names for it, and there
are hundreds of books written on various theories that might explain it, but
ultimately, scientists believe in magic. Because “magic” is
the only way you can really explain life rising from lifelessness.
So evolution really doesn’t explain the
origins of life after all. Magic does. Life arose from lifelessness in exactly
the same way the Big Bang suddenly happened without cause: it’s all done by
magic! (I guess that makes two miracles, not one, but who’s counting?)
All of a sudden, the idea of a Creator who
seeded the Big Bang or seeded the universe with life seems a lot less whacky
than the “magical” explanations of many conventional scientists. It is far more
feasible that our universe was created by an omniscient, highly-advanced
consciousness than it somehow springing into existence for no reason
whatsoever.
Atheism, soullessness
and permanent death
Conventional scientists, of course, will go
through tremendous contortions to try to remove any idea of a designer,
engineer or Creator from their worldview. That’s because nearly all of them are
devout atheists who also disavow any belief in consciousness, free will, the
soul, God or spirituality. According to their own explanations, they themselves
are mindless biological robots suffering from the mere delusion of mind created
as a kind of artificial projection of mechanistic biological brain function.
See my mini-documentary “The God Within” for a
more detailed exploration of this:
The twisted
philosophy of many scientists also raises bizarre ethical lapses, such as their
belief that killing a lab rat, or a dog, or even another human being is of no
ethical consequence since all those creatures are not actually “alive” in any
real way. This is why drug companies, vaccine manufacturers and science in
general feels no remorse for conducting deadly experiments on
children, blacks, prisoners or minorities.
The worst trait
of conventional scientists is not merely that they are wildly self-deluded into
believing they have no real consciousness; it’s actually the fact that they are
simultaneously wildly
arrogant, even combative about
forcing their twisted beliefs onto others.
Their faith-based beliefs are always described
as “facts” while they proclaim other people’s beliefs are “delusions.” You
cannot argue with any group of people who are wholly convinced their beliefs
are facts because any critical thinking you might invoke is automatically and
routinely rejected as a matter of irrational defense.
The vaccine faith test
As an example of this, ask any doctor or
pharmacist this question: “Is there such thing as an unsafe vaccine?”
The answer you will be told is a condescending
“No!” In the faith-based beliefs of the scientific status quo, no vaccine can
ever be harmful by definition.
Vaccines are beyond questioning in their belief system, and so the very
question of asking if a vaccine could possibly be anything less than 100% safe
doesn’t compute. It contradicts their faith, in other words.
It’s like asking a devout Christian whether
there might be no God. The question is so contradictory to their belief system
that it cannot be processed.
You can test this further by asking a
vaccine-pushing doctor, “Is there anything that could be added to a vaccine
that would make it unsafe?”
After careful thought, an honest doctor might
answer, “Well, sure, there are all sorts of toxins that could be added to a
vaccine that would make it unsafe.”
Ask them to name some examples. Sooner or
later, they should stumble onto the self-evident answer of “mercury,” a deadly
neurotoxin which remains present
in many modern vaccines.
Ask the doctor, “Has any safe level of mercury
ever been established for injection into a child?”
The answer, of course, is no. Logically, no
vaccine containing mercury can be considered “safe” regardless of the level of mercury it contains.
Thus, by merely asking a few direct questions, you can easily get an honest
doctor to shatter their own false belief about vaccines — a belief based on the
faith-driven delusion that there is no such thing as an unsafe vaccine (no
matter what it contains).
If, at any point in this questioning process,
you get stonewalled by this person, recognize they are abandoning reason and
reverting to their faith in “Scientism.” Scientism is a system of belief in
which all creations of pharmaceutical companies, biotech companies and chemical
companies are automatically assumed to hold God-like status. They are beyond
questioning. They are supreme. They can never be questioned or even validated.
In fact, no validated is required nor even desired. Who needs to validate
“facts” anyway? Everyone already knows they are true, right?
All drugs are assumed to be safe and
effective unless proven otherwise. This is why doctors warn patients
that their dietary supplements are “interfering with their medications” and not
the other way around. The drugs are assumed to have originated from a higher
order, as if they emanate from a place of sacred, divine status: Big Pharma!
Many scientists are
incapable of recognizing their own logical fallacies
Many scientists, sadly, do not grasp the
chasms in their own belief systems. They are incapable of realizing that many
of their own beliefs are based in a
system of faith rather than a system of rational
thought.
When scientists talk about evolution, they do
so from an all-encompassing arrogance that assumes they are correct by default.
Anyone daring to debate with them must prove they are wrong, yet they
themselves have no obligation to prove they are right. The faith of Scientism
requires no proof, only faith. It is assumed correct as a key principle of the
religion of Scientism.
This is not unusual in religions.
Christianity, for example, assumes God exists and does not need to “prove” it.
His existence is accepted as a matter of faith. This is neither right nor
wrong; it is characteristic of a belief system that science claims to reject.
Yet science follows the exact same pattern.
Even the theory of natural selection based on
purely mechanistic genetic inheritance contains enormous gaps in logic and is
therefore a matter of faith. For starters, there isn’t enough data
storage in the human genome to fully describe the physical and
behavioral inheritance of a human being. The massive failure of the Human
Genome Project also comes to mind: Here’s a project that promised to solve the
riddle of the origins of nearly all disease. Once the human genome was fully
decoded, disease would be eliminated from humankind, we were all promised.
These promises are now little more than
laughable examples of delusional thinking from a failed Scientism project that
mostly yielded bankrupt biotech companies rather than miracle cures.
Most scientists
believe all people are mindless robots
Another glaring contradiction among many
scientists is their comedic belief that everyone else is a mindless
biological robot except themselves!Yes, they alone have intelligent thought
based on free will, inspiration and creativity. We should read their books
alone, as their books came from original thoughts powered by unique minds.
Yet this very belief contradicts their entire
view of everyone else. All “minds” are illusions, they claim, and there is no
such thing as consciousness. If you believe what they say, then all the books
written by Dawkins, Hawking or other devout Scientism worshippers are,
according to their own claims, worthless drivel produced via an “automatic
writing” process powered by mindless, soulless chemical reactions housed in a
mechanistic mass of neurons floating in a skull. Their books, therefore,
utterly lack all meaning and serve no purpose. The words they contain are
merely “knee-jerk writings” from humanoid automatons.
How can consciousness
have evolved if it serves no purpose?
And there’s another huge contradiction in the
scientific community. Most conventional scientists claim that consciousness is
an illusion which somehow arose out of natural selection so that individual
members of a species could operate under the illusion of free will. Yet, at the
same time, they claim this false “mind” has no actual impact on the real world
because it is, by definition, an illusion.
So how can an illusory phenomenon drive
natural selection and evolution if it has no impact on the real world?
This is a stinging contradiction demonstrating
the false beliefs of the materialists (i.e. mainstream scientists). Given
enough time and effort, I could name a hundred more obvious contradictions they
shamelessly promote as “facts.”
In truth, many scientific “facts” all boil
down to “beliefs.”
Today’s twisted
“science” is just another kind of religion
Why am I covering all this here on Natural News? Because if we are to
move forward as a civilization, we must transcend the silly belief that
anything pursued under the flag of modern-day “science” is automatically and
factually superior (perhaps even divine) to all other forms of understanding.
Any system of thought which cannot tolerate
questions or challenges to its beliefs is no science at all.
For your amusement and explorations, some
useful questions you can ask Scientism followers to quickly exposed their false
beliefs include:
·
Is there such thing as an unsafe vaccine? Or
are all vaccines automatically safe by definition?
·
Do you beat your dog? If animals have no souls
and no consciousness, then do you agree it is of no ethical consequence to
torture dolphins
and elephants? What about primates? Cats? Neighbors?
·
If free will does not exist, then no one can
be held responsible for their actions. All actions are, by definition,
“automatic” and of no fault of the person because there cannot be any “choice”
in an unconscious brain. If you believe this, then do you also support freeing
all murderers and rapists from prison because they are not responsible for
their actions? What purpose does punishment serve if violent criminals have no
“choice” because they have no free will?
·
If the human genome doesn’t contain enough
information to describe a complete human form, then how is inheritance purely
mechanistic?
·
If consciousness is an illusion, by what
mechanism does the brain create this illusion? And for what purpose? What
evolutionary advantage could this serve if the “illusion of consciousness”
cannot have any “real” impact on behavior? By definition, natural selection
should de-emphasize useless brain functions. So how did consciousness survive for
so long?
·
If natural selection can only function on
pre-existing life forms, where did the first life come from? How did it arise?
(Magic?)
·
What caused the Big Bang? If nothing caused
it, how do you explain a universe governed by “laws” which, itself, sprang into
existence by not following laws?
·
If the laws of the universe came into
existence during the Big Bang, and if other parallel universes might have
different constants governing variations of the physical laws we know and
understand, how does our universe “remember” its selected laws? Can
physical constants change? Can the speed of light change? Does it vary in a
repeatable pattern?
… and so on. With questions like these, it is
a simple matter to expose conventional Scientism believers as incompetent
thinkers.
It’s time to dethrone
the High Priests of Scientism
If we are to move forward as a civilization we
must dethrone the high priests of Scientism and get back to a
process of real science where questions are welcomed, humility is restored, and
discovery, not arrogance, reigns supreme.
This is the process I embrace here at Natural
News, and it is why millions of readers across the world now turn to Natural
News instead of arrogant science publications like Scientific American, a faith-based Scientism magazine that now
functions as little more than a corporate sellout propaganda “Bible” for
believers. Any publication that says people should not know what’s in their
food (GMO labeling) is, of course, not engaged in real science because real
science is the pursuit of knowledge, not the burying of facts for corporate
interests. No legitimate science would want the public to be denied knowledge.
Bottom line? Modern-day “science” is riddled
with enormous contradictions and knowledge gaps. The most devout followers of
this “science” define themselves as meaningless, mindless biological robots
living out purposeless lives. They all believe that murder, rape and even child
molestation have no ethical considerations whatsoever because no one is
responsible for their own actions due to free will being “an illusion” as they
explain it. Jerry Sandusky is ethically equivalent to Mother Theresa, according
to the soulless beliefs of modern-day science.
These Scientism followers will never
acknowledge any gaps in their own knowledge, as they believe they are uniquely
gifted with a divine, irrefutable truth which cannot be questioned and need
never be validated. No evidence is required to support their core faiths such
as “mercury in dental fillings is harmless” or “chemotherapy saves lives.” All
pronouncements of drug companies, biotech firms and chemical companies are
automatically accepted as The
Word of God in that they are all-knowing, all-powerful and never to
be questioned.
To succeed as a civilization, we must
collectively recognize the fallibility of this faith-based system of false
belief and return to a process of true discovery that transcends the failures
of modern-day science.
And don’t even get me started on the rise of
killer robots and artificial intelligence. That’s another case where the
arrogance and delusional thinking of modern-day science may quite literally
result in the apocalyptic, permanent destruction of humankind.
About the Author
Mike Adams (aka the “Health Ranger“)
is the founding editor of NaturalNews.com, the internet’s No. 1 natural health news
website, now reaching 7 million unique readers a month.
With a background in science and software
technology, Adams is the original founder of the email newsletter
technology company known as Arial Software. Using his technical
experience combined with his love for natural health, Adams developed and
deployed the content management system currently driving NaturalNews.com. He
also engineered the high-level statistical algorithms that power SCIENCE.naturalnews.com,
a massive research resource now featuring over 10 million scientific studies.
In addition to being the co-star of the
popular GAIAM TV series called Secrets to Health,
Adams is also the (non-paid) executive director of the non-profit Consumer Wellness
Center (CWC), an organization that redirects
100% of its donations receipts to grant programs that teach children and women
how to grow their own food or vastly improve their nutrition. Click
here to see some of the CWC success stories.
In 2013, Adams created the Natural News Forensic Food Laboratory,
a research lab that analyzes common foods and supplements, reporting the
results to the public. He is well known for his incredibly popular consumer activism video blowing the lid on fake blueberries used
throughout the food supply. He has also exposed “strange fibers” found in Chicken McNuggets, fake academic credentials of so-called
health “gurus,” dangerous “detox” products imported as battery acid and
sold for oral consumption, fake
acai berry scams, the California raw milk raids, the vaccine research fraud revealed by
industry whistleblowers and many other topics.
Adams has also helped defend the rights of home gardeners and
protect the medical freedom rights of parents.
Adams is widely recognized to have made a remarkable global impact on issues
like GMOs, vaccines, nutrition therapies, human consciousness.
In addition to his activism, Adams is an
accomplished musician who has released ten
popular songs covering a variety of activism topics.
No comments:
Post a Comment