Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Intelligence vs. Fanaticism;
Education vs. Indoctrination

Video: Expelled: Ben Stein’s Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Super Trailer)   
Source: YouTube: http://youtu.be/xGCxbhGaVfE
“All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
- Arthur Schopenhauer

The evidence haunting the materialistic Darwinian scientific establishment is mounting; and so, as in all other such cases in times passed, the establishment is making a concerted effort to snuff out the possibility of even considering alternative paradigms—particularly those related to the origin of life.

No one described it better than Arthur Schopenhauer, the tragicomedy of the human condition that we tend to vehemently oppose that which threatens our established belief systems.

Today, GenesisEcoFund is doing just that, and intends to support all scientists in their endeavor to evolve our understanding of biology and the origin of species beyond the established, dogmatically held theory known as Neo-Darwinism.

To start with, like Ben Stein, we are appalled and disgusted at the hypocrites who call themselves “champions of evidenced-based objective truth”—materialist scientists and their backers with very particular economic interests and agendas—who systematically suppress the debate; not just on intelligent design, but also on the nature of consciousness.

Clearly, both intelligent design and consciousness are interpreted as being “euphemisms for religion” by mainstream scientists—hear that? Interpreted…subjective, selective analysis—though truly, nothing could be further from the truth; and there is evidence to back that assertion up.

Any debate, if it is backed by experiential evidence, is worth having; particularly if the new evidence—or past evidence re-examined in light of new knowledge—lead to a more accurate conclusion and understanding of our nature and the nature of reality.

This evidence is not only physical. The word “experiment” shares the same root as “experience” and are usually conducted in a “laboratory” which has as its root word, “labour” (“work”—a word that is intimately connected to experience). In other words, pure science is meant to be experiential.

The conscious experience of the laws of nature are the basis for evidence—the word means “to have experienced.” To limit accepted evidence to empirical evidence is to limit the debate, and any hope of understanding. For starters, we experience less than 1% of the electromagnetic spectrum:

Image: The electromagnetic spectrum, showing range of visible light spectrum

This is what we experience. As for the rest, we experience effects of the remainder of the spectrum only. Our so-called evidence is limited to how certain types of unseen energies on the spectrum affect material reality—that part of the spectrum we can directly experience.

For example, we have instruments which detect and measure types of radiation. We have machines which generate types of radiation, etc. Yet, our understanding of such energies is completely limited to their material effects; and, of course, the mathematics and physics equations which describe them.

As for our theories—like the theory of evolution as it relates to the origin of species (which has never been proven)—they exist only as belief systems. Interpretations of the empirical evidence at hand.

But there is another kind of knowledge which relates to pure experience; conscious experience. It is what science originally began as, with greats like Sir Isaac Newton consciously observing motion, gravity, etc. and comprehending the underlying forces at work responsible for their behavior. He then described said forces mathematically and thus were born our comprehension of the Laws of Motion: Mechanics.

But Newton didn’t then extrapolate his experience to say that Mechanics were the cause of movement, or the origin of mechanical objects. That would be absurd. There is no evidence to support the theory that mechanics account for the origin of matter.

Yet that’s exactly what Darwin did. He rightly observed the phenomenon of evolution: the gradual change of a species over time through the process of natural selection. The Law of Evolution and Devolution is a real Law. Mind you, Darwin only observed half of it: evolution; to this day scientists have not bothered to look for devolution, and thus it remains a mystery to them.

Then, having observed and explained evolution by natural selection, he chose, quite arbitrarily, to subject all of life and the question of the origin of life itself to the same law. This was, is, and shall forever remain a subjective act of intellectualism—a belief. It is no more pure science than any religious fable about the origin of life. That is why the origin of species by evolution remains only a theory. It has never, ever been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, and can and never will be proven. It is incorrect.

What is our basis for such a bold—if not downright arrogant—assertion? Evidence. Experiential evidence. Our knowledge of ecosystems comes not from theory, nor from the authority of “peer-review” (pure science is not a democracy; experience is not a consensus question or statement of majority condition).

Anomalies can very well be real. A million people failing to see/hear something because of the condition (and conditioning) of their consciousness tells us nothing about reality.  One who sees/hears something they cannot is not automatically “wrong” because of the state of the million. The anomaly is not “imagined” because the million assumes the one’s condition must be the same as their own (and then the statisticians come to talk probabilities, the psychologists come to talk about motive, etc). Meanwhile, it’s precisely the individual’s different condition which allows him/her to experience what a million cannot.

Of course, the reverse is possible. Not everyone speaks the truth; and not everything that we experience (particularly under the influence of mind-altering substances) is reality—far from it. But if that is the case, what about the reality we experience through the framework of material existence and 5 senses?

Our mental condition is conditioned by existence within an experiential framework of electromagnetic energy equal to less than 1% of what’s currently detectable; what we “know” exists…here and now.

But what if, by some miracle, we could expand our consciousness to begin to experience reality beyond the 1% of visible light? What if we could experience, consciously—or perhaps better put, “access”—other laws at work, here and now, which do, in fact, have a direct impact on physical reality, but are more subtle; that is, their effects are not detectable empirically as such.

Consider the Fibonacci sequence and its impacts on physical reality…

Image Collage by GenesisEcoFund Fibonacci Foundations

This somewhat simple mathematical phenomenon (known as a recursive sequence, following the simple rule that to calculate the next term you sum the preceding two)… 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, etc…produces much of the phenomena we observe in nature. Not just beautiful geometric patterns like the ones we see above, but also growth patterns for everything from plants to rabbit populations. (Source: Light Grid: The Fibonacci Sequence, the Golden Mean and the nautilus shell).

It’s simple, subtle, yet to the Greeks and many other ancient cultures—foundational.  Mathematicians are fascinated by it and other such equations which begin to describe phenomena in nature which have huge implications on the reality we know.

Another example? How about E=MC2? An equation which allowed us to—on a very primitive level—work with the energies within the atom…

Image: Atomic Bomb; Fukushima Disaster

We’re inching closer to the question at hand. But first, let’s bring it back to biology for a moment and a look at the CELL…the smallest unit of life (as defined by empirical biology).

The film Expelled briefly touches on this, but we feel it’s important to highlight it for the obvious questions it raises.

Video: Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version Credit: Harvard

Now, if watching that you are not questioning the likelihood/possibility that such an intricate and complex world could arise spontaneously or by accident, then consider watching the narrated version of the same video

Again, Neo-Darwinism would have us believe that the super-complex mechanisms taking place inside the first living cell spontaneously and naturally self-organized via random interactions of molecules.

The simple fact is there are forces, subtle yet utterly foundational forces, responsible for the operation and management of a living cell…a living organism…a living ecosystem. These forces are not yet detectable by empirical science, and thus it ignores their possibility of existence

This, despite the fact that all living things possess an electro magnetic field existing beyond the physical light spectrum…a field scientists choose to assume is generated by the matter existing on the physical spectrum, as opposed to even considering the reverse: that the invisible spectrum of energy present actually precedes and is foundational to the material, physical, visible matter constituting the body of the living thing.

This, despite the fact that physicists know that all matter is energy, and that at the heart of every atom of matter, there is no matter as such. But why don’t we let someone more qualified speak through the ages on the matter…
As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.

From evolutionary biologists to neurologists, most will admit in private that they can’t begin to understand how life emerged from insentient molecules, or how consciousness emerges from something as unconscious as matter. These are some of the “hard problems” known very well to science.

But they are problems which are quietly and expeditiously swept under the carpet, along with anyone trying to do any sort of rigorous scientific exploration—pure science—to get at the answers. Like a mother yelling at a child to stop picking at a scab, for fear of uncovering a lot of pus.

Maybe it’s because the establishment is infected. But what’s really scary is that the establishment has control over education. That means whatever it is infected with, it is almost certain to infect the next generation with (this, by the way, is an example of the law of devolution in action).

There’s really only one way out of this quandary; and that is to expand the scope of the current paradigms…but not just the paradigms, but the metaparadigm in which all other paradigms exist and condition established ways thinking—and permit/disallow alternative approaches.

Watch Peter Russell’s excellent talk, The Primacy of Consciousness to get a much better handle of where we’ve been in terms of established world views science, and where it’s all headed, despite the current effort by the establishment at “epi-cycling” its way out of the anomalies which it cannot ignore and it cannot deny. Here’s a taste of said talk:

Video: Peter Russell - The Primacy of Consciousness (Excerpted)

No comments:

Post a Comment