Saturday, November 13, 2010

Darwin's theory not supported by geological history

Paul Hamaker

Charles Darwin's theory of gradual evolution is not supported by geological history, New York University Geologist Michael Rampino concludes in an essay in the journal Historical Biology on November 9, 2010. In fact, Rampino notes that a more accurate theory of gradual evolution, positing that long periods of evolutionary stability are disrupted by catastrophic mass extinctions of life, was put forth by Scottish horticulturalist Patrick Matthew prior to Darwin's published work on the topic.

Examiner - Dawrin's Theory not supported by Geological History

"Matthew discovered and clearly stated the idea of natural selection, applied it to the origin of species, and placed it in the context of a geologic record marked by catastrophic mass extinctions followed by relatively rapid adaptations," says Rampino, whose research on catastrophic events includes studies on volcano eruptions and asteroid impacts. "In light of the recent acceptance of the importance of catastrophic mass extinctions in the history of life, it may be time to reconsider the evolutionary views of Patrick Matthew as much more in line with present ideas regarding biological evolution than the Darwin view."

Matthew (1790-1874), Rampino notes, published a statement of the law of natural selection in a little-read Appendix to his 1831 book Naval Timber and Arboriculture. Even though both Darwin and his colleague Alfred Russel Wallace acknowledged that Matthew was the first to put forth the theory of natural selection, historians have attributed the unveiling of the theory to Darwin and Wallace. Darwin's notebooks show that he arrived at the idea in 1838, and he composed an essay on natural selection as early as 1842—years after Matthew's work appeared. Darwin and Wallace's theory was formally presented in 1858 at a science society meeting in London. Darwin's Origin of Species appeared a year later.

In the Appendix of Naval Timber and Arboriculture, Matthew described the theory of natural selection in a way that Darwin later echoed: "There is a natural law universal in nature, tending to render every reproductive being the best possibly suited to its condition…As the field of existence is limited and pre-occupied, it is only the hardier, more robust, better suited to circumstance individuals, who are able to struggle forward to maturity…"

However, in explaining the forces that influenced this process, Matthew saw catastrophic events as a prime factor, maintaining that mass extinctions were crucial to the process of evolution: "...all living things must have reduced existence so much, that an unoccupied field would be formed for new diverging ramifications of life... these remnants, in the course of time moulding and accommodating ... to the change in circumstances."

When Darwin published his Origin of Species nearly three decades later, he explicitly rejected the role of catastrophic change in natural selection: "The old notion of all the inhabitants of the Earth having been swept away by catastrophes at successive periods is very generally given up," he wrote. Instead, Darwin outlined a theory of evolution based on the ongoing struggle for survival among individuals within populations of existing species. This process of natural selection, he argued, should lead to gradual changes in the characteristics of surviving organisms.

However, as Rampino notes, geological history is now commonly understood to be marked by long periods of stability punctuated by major ecological changes that occur both episodically and rapidly, casting doubt on Darwin's theory that "most evolutionary change was accomplished very gradually by competition between organisms and by becoming better adapted to a relatively stable environment."

"Matthew's contribution was largely ignored at the time, and, with few exceptions, generally merits only a footnote in modern discussions of the discovery of natural selection," Rampino concludes. "Others have said that Matthew's thesis was published in too obscure a place to be noticed by the scientific community, or that the idea was so far ahead of its time that it could not be connected to generally accepted knowledge. As a result, his discovery was consigned to the dustbin of premature and unappreciated scientific ideas

My Comments:
What I find noteworthy is that so-called scientists can create theories, or formulas to support them, and people go along with it without question. This article brings up some really good questions, and asks, what were we thinking, when we said it made sense, then began to teach this to our children and theirs in the schools. The idea of mass extinction must be looked at with a serious eye. If even that was the case, where did the species of "left-over" beings go, and how did they survive, and how come we still seem to have some of the same species that we had thousands of years ago? And why did it take just a few thousand to accomplish what millenium took to accomplish, and how do you explain people coming from all over the planet? And how do you explain specific animals in specific reasons, particularly after the cataclysms. I'm a scientist, because I ask questions. My questions are valid in light of the many distortions we have received from our "paid scientist" Maybe I am generalizing too much, but I can't help but wonder, how certain scientists hit the big time, while others are relegated to the back room, of antiquity. Too often Europeans cannot get outside of their own illusion that they "created the thinking mind" and forget that there were researchers back to antiquities who knew much much more than scientists know today. Not to mention how much scientists don't tell us what they know. It reminds me of a political debate where neither side is telling the whole truth. And then there is this huge chasm between the scientific world and the spiritual world!! Okay, let me get off my soapbox.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

New Reality Transmission

November 11th, 2010 at 11:11pm EST

We're striving for one million poeple acorss the gloabe to hold it down for all humanity. Join us in a global meditation sending love, peace and positive vibes to the universe for a healtheir, happier planet earth and population. You can meditate on peace, tolerance, the end of environmental destruction, etc.


I was beginning to wonder and rant and wonder and rant some more. It is all about intention, and some folks get so caught up in the 11:11 that they miss the real deal. It is only 11:11 because we said so, we follow an illusionary clock that gives us no accurate "time" at all. Time is an illusion, yet we are tied to it as if we cannot live without checking in on the time....
For real for real, it will be 11:11 in enough places for about two days, I am guessing... And if I want to, I will create my 11:11 and feel quite happy about it. yes, yes, yes, active/lucid dreaming counts because if you can do it in a dream, it is a piece of cake here in this reality which is really just another layer of the DREAM.
I surely do want world peace... but do we know what that is?? Would we recognize it if we saw it? What are we willing to give up? How much does the status quo, the everyday life, we live impact on the peaceful existence of others in the world? Are our heads merely in the clouds? Are we ready for the changes, the overall changes that would entail? and do we realize that we live in a polarity... so chaos must exist for us to know peace, some say.
And how do we get this out to everybody? Folks who don't have internet, who live on a farm or in the bush? Are they not necessary for this? And if not, then how is this process any different from any other 144k projections of the some, and not the many. I am just wondering, because frankly, after watching the video, it did not seem to include most of the people I know.
And what about free will??? Do we simply pray/meditate for the others whether they want us to or not? Personally, I believe that Peace is a constant personal journey. If we do not find peace/harmony/love/respect within our own selves and our own lives... we would be remiss to make this happen on a larger scale. How many of us, just need to focus and visualize balance in our own backyards??? How many of us need to stop fighting with our close friends and family and loved ones?
World Peace is certainly and ideal, a goal, but that Peace comes with the disruption of many, many long standing things.... that I am wondering are we aware of. Cause if we are not prepared for the disruptions... then we will not see CHANGE TOWARDS PEACE, PEACEFUL AT ALL!! Which takes me back to inner Peace, one person at a time, and World Peace is the only consequence when each person takes responsibility for their addition to and subtraction from Peaceful existence on this planet.


I just needed to get this out of my system... I hope I sound sane, because I am, but it may be a little weird coming from me, and then maybe not.

Someone posted this New Reality transmission thing in my messages. For starters, I really get a little irritated... by all this New Age mumbo jumbo that is going around these days.

It gets me that in their presentations, there is hardly any people of color; indigenous; poor; muslim, hindu, buddhist, etc., not to mention folks of traditional African spirituality.

That's number one.

Then they try to persuade us, each having their own path and mission to the Chamber. They are literally in-fighting amongst themselves, some saying their dog is bigger, better, mightier than the other. To me, how can this be about the co-mingling of minds and energy when they are so exclusive? Some of them charge so much money, it ain't funny, and others are just not reachable. What if you don't have Internet? What if you don't have access to funding to take a trip to East Jablip? What if these concepts are simply over your head and you cannot grasp, what the heck they are talking about? What if you are your average Joe Blow from Kokomo? Then, would it not seem that you will just be "left behind?" No access to Ascension?

Anyway, I could barely get through this video... This thing about time and meeting at a certain time, 1 million people, meet at 11/11. Or else, you won't be a part of the wave......? We all know that time is an illusion, but to try to make folks get to it at exactly 11:11 PM is a big stretch to me, and then starting with Eastern Standard Time, which ain't standard at all!!

I'm just saying!!! This new age movement has been hijacked by the Cointelpro... and they are asking folks to "re-program" this New World Reality into their new world view..... Well, that smells fishy to me, and I just can't by it. They are asking for 1 million people to join the wave, then they want you to sign up, so they can see who you are. Then they can use their EMP projections to move your reality around, and put you under their "spell".

Now I may sound a bit paranoid, but I am not gonna sit down and open my mind in a union with a bunch of people I don't know for a cause that does not include my folks!!!!

I love the libations for the Haitians, and I particularly love the way you are having us focus on our heroes. But that is totally different then sitting in front of a computer and having images being flashed into my brain!!!

I just don't trust it in my gut, my Sister, that's all I am saying.

This New Age Disclosure stuff is sooooooo old, the Ancients knew about other worlders, or off worlders, or whatever you want to call them. They knew about those who were harmful and those who were helpful, but now that "they" have found them, they are legitimate, after years of this knowledge being illegitimate, backwards and primitive. You feel me??

Okay, thanks for reading this. You got to be the one to listen to one of Nana Baakan's rants... Don't you feel special????? LOL

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

BBC News - 'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists


'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists

Synthetic cell (Science) 
The synthetic cell looks identical to the 'wild type'
Scientists in the US have succeeded in developing the first living cell to be controlled entirely by synthetic DNA.
The researchers constructed a bacterium's "genetic software" and transplanted it into a host cell.
The resulting microbe then looked and behaved like the species "dictated" by the synthetic DNA.
The advance, published in Science, has been hailed as a scientific landmark, but critics say there are dangers posed by synthetic organisms.
Some also suggest that the potential benefits of the technology have been over-stated.
But the researchers hope eventually to design bacterial cells that will produce medicines and fuels and even absorb greenhouse gases.
The team was led by Dr Craig Venter of the J Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) in Maryland and California.
Continued: ....... 


Hot debate on this article.. 
My interjections are and have always been, with all that highly evolved technology, i.e, pyramids, etc what happened??? Why is there no sign of that civilization? Natural disasters?? And who suffered the...m and who survived? One thing that I think we all tend to forget, is that we are all human/melaninated or not. And there is something deep inside of each human being; that when put to the test, will face their own destructive shadow. They can give into it or refuse to act on it, but the shadow exists. Societies/civilizations have risen and fallen due to greed, covetousness, invasions, conquering, enslavement and hoarding/claiming another's property. These highly evolved civilizations had the master/slave reality. In order for the Masters to keep their wealth, positions and dominance they had to have slaves and use intimidation, wars, and invasions to keep them afloat in their golden boats. No civilization has been spared this terrible reality. 
So now we see the European doing what its predecessors have all done. If we want to go back and claim Africa as the mother of all nations, let's take that step with true honesty. Yes, to begin with, there was a strong link to Nature, but then somewhere along the way that link was broken and replaced with avarice and fear. Instead of human beings having just what they needed, they became so obsessed with hoarding; that they had more and more of what they wanted and the masses had less and less. The secrets where held among the elite class. Over time, the masses rebelled, as is always the case in any society where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Too often we look at the Glorious History, but never ask the poignant question of what happened?? 
How do we find the balance of living in harmony with nature without destroying her every step of the way? How do we care for one another, with...out hoarding or preventing others from moving forward. How do we resist the need to compete against one another and support one another instead? How do we change the way we go about creating a world where all things can exist in harmony? How often do we look back at these Great Civilizations and ask the question, why did they fall? In fact, let's take it to another level, and ask, what is the definition of a Great Civilization? 
Does a Great Civilization have the balance of power and wealth among the masses. Does being a great civilization directly equate with how "much" wealth they have. And in order to amass this wealth, does a Great Civilization destroy the environment in the process? I look at this each day in our own world and I am reminded too often of the imbalance. 
How one rich man could feed so many starving people, and yet they do not. What is this thing about humans, who need to have themselves expressed through the things they have and not the service they provide? So in getting a key link to how to create a so called living cell, does this mean that this technology will be hoarded for the rich and any medical advantage of it will be deprived from the poor. In fact, with all the money that is used (worldwide) and subsequently wasted, how is it that it is not discovered how to bring harmony to the planet, harmony among its people, and balance between nature and science?