"Planetary scientists revealed their bad habit of hydrobioscopy again this week. They reasoned, Saturn’s little moon Enceladus has water; it has methane; it could have life! Why is that their focus? Why are
Methane in the Plumes of Saturn’s Moon Enceladus: Possible Signs of Life? (University of Arizona). Writer Dan Stolte in the press office titillates readers with the L-word life in his suggestive headline. “A study published in Nature Astronomy concludes that known geochemical processes can’t explain the levels of methane measured by the Cassini spacecraft on Saturn’s icy moon.” If it can’t be explained abiotically, then there’s only one other conclusion. Maybe it’s alive! (hope, hope, hope).
“Obviously, we are not concluding that life exists in Enceladus’ ocean,” Ferrière said. “Rather, we wanted to understand how likely it would be that Enceladus’ hydrothermal vents could be habitable to Earthlike microorganisms. Very likely, the Cassini data tell us, according to our models.
And biological methanogenesis appears to be compatible with the data. In other words, we can’t discard the ‘life hypothesis’ as highly improbable. To reject the life hypothesis, we need more data from future missions,” he added.
In order to avoid charges of unscientific thinking, the scientists at U of Arizona clarify their wording. They say that life under Enceladus is “consistent” with the observations:
The authors applied new mathematical models that combine geochemistry and microbial ecology to analyze Cassini plume data and model the possible processes that would best explain the observations. They conclude that Cassini’s data are consistent either with microbial hydrothermal vent activity, or with processes that don’t involve life forms but are different from the ones known to occur on Earth.
Two models are consistent with the observed methane output: life, or non-life. The conclusion hinges on that word “likely.”
“It partly boils down to how probable we believe different hypotheses are to begin with,” he said. “For example, if we deem the probability of life in Enceladus to be extremely low, then such alternative abiotic mechanisms become much more likely, even if they are very alien compared to what we know here on Earth.”
While the epistemic modesty in that statement is commendable, Régis Ferrière (associate professor in the University of Arizona Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology) must surely be wishing for some evidence of “evolutionary biology” to show up. Astrobiology (better described as bio-astrology) remains a science without a subject. Ferrière ran some tests on biotic vs abiotic models (not using actual organisms), and concluded that the vents at Enceladus are “very likely” to be habitable to Earthlike organisms.
---But wait. It’s one thing to say that Earthlike microorganisms could live out there, if they were transported from Earth to Enceladus on spaceships and dropped off.
"The Omicron variant of Covid-19, also known as the B.1.1.529 strain, is splashed all over the international headlines.
The new variant, which some claim is three times more contagious, was initially discovered in Botswana before it spread across South Africa.
The news was met with global alarm, prompting financial markets to plummet and new travel bans to be put in place.
According to a public statement by the Botswana government, the new mutation was first discovered in four people who had received both doses of the COVID-19 vaccine.
“The initial investigations on the virus have established that the new
variant has a high number of mutations as compared to the locally
predominant Delta variant,” the task force added.
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, a leading critic of an universal vaccination agenda that ignores natural immunity, is that the mRNA therapeutics being marketed as ‘vaccines’ may help fuel variants. He holds a DVM from the University of Ghent, Belgium, and a PhD degree in Virology from the University of Hohenheim, Germany. He has worked for several vaccine companies: GSK Biologicals, Novartis Vaccines, Solvay Biologicals. He has contributed to vaccine R&D as well as late vaccine development.
Vanden Bossche was hired by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Global Health Discovery team in Seattle (USA) as a Senior Program Officer, before leaving to work with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) in Geneva as Senior Ebola Program Manager. He was also a part of the German Center for Infection Research in Cologne as Head of the Vaccine Development Office.
“As of the early days of the mass vaccination campaigns, at least a
“This already explains why the WHO’s mass vaccination program is not only unable to generate herd immunity (HI) but even leads to substantial erosion of the population’s immune protective capacity,” he goes on. As the ongoing universal mass vaccination program will soon promote dominant propagation of highly infectious, neutralization escape mutants (i.e., so-called ‘S Ab-resistant variants’), naturally acquired, or vaccinal neutralizing Abs, will, indeed, no longer offer any protection to immunized individuals whereas high infectious pressure will continue to suppress the innate immune defense system of the nonvaccinated.”
“This is to say that every further increase in vaccine coverage rates will further contribute to forcing the virus into resistance to neutralizing, S-specific Abs,” he continued. “Increased viral infectivity, combined with evasion from antiviral immunity, will inevitably result in an additional toll taken on human health and human lives.”
“Immediate
action needs, therefore, to be taken in order to dramatically reduce
viral infectivity rates and to prevent selected immune escape variants
from rapidly spreading through the entire population, whether vaccinated
or not,” he adds. “This first critical step can only be achieved by
calling an immediate halt to the mass vaccination program and replacing
it by widespread use of antiviral chemoprophylactics while dedicating
massive public health resources to scaling early multidrug treatments of
Covid-19 disease.” TP/SummitNews
The orange tag is disturbing because it signals to others that they
should personally avoid ... It makes perfect sense if the mandating authority is trying “to publicly identify, humiliate, and isolate” those who don’t obediently follow ze orders." PJMedia
The Bible says that such people have no excuse for adopting a view that excludes God. For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Romans 1:18 says that they are suppressing the truth in their unrighteousness because God’s existence is evident from what He has created (vv. 19ff).
Everyone has the same facts, such as fossils, rocks, etc. How one
Within the secular worldview, intelligent people are feverishly trying to work out clever-sounding ways to try to explain how the universe made itself, life made itself, and the diversity of life-forms on earth also made themselves. This is the grand scheme of cosmic evolution. They expend much energy trying to make it seem that they really know how these things happened. Much of this may even be in an effort to convince themselves—since the suppression noted above is by no means all conscious.
---They claim ad nauseam that this is a ‘scientific view’, but everything making itself from nothing contradicts something that is affirmed by every scientific experiment ever done.
So, it is not ‘science versus religion’ or ‘facts versus faith’ but one
faith versus another faith. It is certainly important to show someone
that their view, whatever it is, is not just ‘the facts’, but that they
have brought certain assumptions (axioms) to the table for which they
have no evidence, and that their presuppositions determine how they
interpret facts that they then claim is evidence for their worldview." CMI
Verses 1-13: The historical basis for this lament psalm was probably Nebuchadnezzar’s destruction of the temple in 586 B.C. (compare Psalm 74; 2 Kings 25:8-21; Lam. Chapters 1 to 5). The psalm contains prayer for the nation’s spiritual needs, curses against the enemies of God’s people, and praises in anticipation of God’s actions.
The psalm helps the believer express his anguish in a disaster when it seems as though God is aloof.
The Lamentation Over the National Disaster (79:1-4).
Verses 1-5: God is complained to: whither should children go but to a Father able and willing to help them?
Dr. Ellis G. ARMSTRONG, a prominent physician of Flora,
dropped dead while standing by the bedside of a patient."
"......when I opened a 2019 special climate issue commemorating the Endangered Earth by simply stating that the scientific fact of global warming is settled and that there isn’t another side....." TIME
How can a theory built on chance be deterministic? It becomes obvious whenever an evolutionist says that some organism “evolved to” gain some benefit. Here’s a recent example:
Taking it easy as you get older? Wrong. (Harvard Gazette). Find the self-refuting fallacy in the subtitle of this press release: “Message of new Lieberman study: ‘Because we evolved to be active throughout our lives, our bodies need physical activity to age well’.”
A team of evolutionary biologists and biomedical researchers from Harvard are taking a run at it (sometimes literally) in a new study published this week in PNAS. The work lays out evolutionary and biomedical evidence showing that humans, who evolved to live many decades after they stopped reproducing, also evolved to be relatively active in their later years.
Honor Thy Grandfather and Grandmother
This is reminder of a persistent conundrum in evolutionary theory called the Grandparent Problem. If reproduction is all that matters for fitness, why should an organism pay the cost of keeping an elder around for years past reproductive age? Evolutionists try to solve this by saying the grandparents give benefits to the next generation by helping parents care for them. One can turn that argument around. Did scientists evolve for evolutionary fitness, too? Evolutionary reasoning cheapens the most precious things in life, like love and truth.
Here is the gist of the Lieberman study:
The researchers say that physical activity later in life shifts energy away from processes that can compromise health and toward mechanisms in the body that extend it. They hypothesize that humans evolved to remain physically active as they age — and in doing so to allocate energy to physiological processes that slow the body’s gradual deterioration over the years. This guards against chronic illnesses such as cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes, and even some cancers.
The fallacy lies in assuming that we must choose to violate evolution in order to obey it. If we “evolved to” age well by staying active, then we would all naturally obey evolution’s influence without listening to an evolutionary professor tell us why we should. For Harvard physiologist Daniel Lieberman to write an article advising older adults to stay active, he must reach for something outside of evolution—some moral imperative—that cannot be explained by evolution. Otherwise, we would all automatically be doing something that we “evolved to” do in the first place.
What Is Good in Evolution?
Why not just say that humans evolved to get cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes and cancer as they age? Lieberman must reach outside of evolution to give his little sermonette:
“It’s a widespread idea in Western societies that as we get older, it’s normal to slow down, do less, and retire,” said Harvard evolutionary biologist Daniel E. Lieberman, the paper’s lead author. “Our message is the reverse: As we get older, it becomes even more important to stay physically active.”
Why is it “important” to stay active? That’s a moral stance. Evolution doesn’t care. Why does he care? Maybe he would reply that ‘humans are most fulfilled when they act in ways what they evolved to act.’ But that only shifts the fallacy over a step. Why is it good to be fulfilled? Evolution doesn’t care if we are fulfilled or not. If our genes, bodies and lifestyles are products of evolution, then whatever will be will be, and we don’t need a sermon on why it is “important to stay physically active.”
Kicking Butt
The study uses humans’ ape cousins as a jumping-off point. The
Again, why is ape behavior worse, just because they don’t live as long? In an amoral universe, evolution might give them 40 years of comfort instead of 80 years of work, workouts and woe. If chimpanzees “evolved to” live that way, then it was their lot, and they’ve had millions of years’ more time to evolve a longer lifetime than humans have. Let them live the way they evolved to live. Will Lieberman now preach to the apes, telling them to get off their butts and get to the gym?
“The key take-home point is that because we evolved to be active throughout our lives, our bodies need physical activity to age well. In the past, daily physical activity was necessary in order to survive, but today we have to choose to exercise, that is to do voluntary physical activity for the sake of health and fitness,” Lieberman said….
The researchers’ advice? Get out of your chair and get some exercise.
As a mental exercise, find the fallacy again. [pause to think].
Lieberman alleges that culture has violated our evolutionary condition. We have smartphones and computers to do the jobs that used to keep us active. That might make sense if we observed apes working out to the day of their deaths. But apes don’t have our conveniences, and they spend much of their day “sitting on their butts, digesting.” If human culture progressed over the last 200 years to the point where we can relax more, then so be it; evolution did that, too, so Lieberman should be saying, ‘In the last 200 years, humans evolved to be sedentary.’ He should stop preaching that we need to get out of the chair and get some exercise. Why? ‘Because evolution determined we need activity to age well.’ And who says that aging well is a moral obligation?
There is no escape from a self-refuting fallacy.
Bless
Daniel’s heart, he means well. We agree that keeping active is good and
advisable, but for different reasons: because determinism (which leads
to self-refutation) is false. Christians believe the honoring God with
the body (What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. I Corinthians 6:19-20) glorifies God, but it is a choice each
individual must make." CEH
