Taking It To The Streets

I am forced to push science forward by kicking people in the head.  I am more sympathetic to the top intelligent design people.  Maybe about five of them would pass my quality control.  But secretly I am still pro-evolution.  So its time.

Time to take a few Evolution advocates and lead them by the nose. I call this process. Taking it to the streets. They don’t know me but I’m their brother.

GMB Sez:

Are we still insisting that the abiogenesis must have happened on the surface of the early earth? Or have we woken up to the reality that we need a venue change yet?

James Downard sez

I don’t recall if I mentioned it in this video specifically, but I have in others noted that the trend in the research is to focus on ocean vents etc, not necessarily very deep, but outside any surface worry about unfiltered UV radiation, but close enough to draw on the organics brought to earth in comets and asteroids.

GMB sez

It has to be a “reducing environment” so we might want to go deeper and not be restricted by either a one planet operation or some young universe creation myth like the big bang. You guys are going to get slapped around if you keep toeing the line on crap oligarchy directed cosmology and physics.

The assumption is all these reducing gasses. And you have a disconnect between all these reducing gasses and what people think they know about the early surface of the earth. But if you might find out that deep on a moon, and without much of an atmosphere, you can have an electrically reduced environment, then you don’t need to be so dependent on a “just so” grouping of gasses.

James Downard sez

@GMBCATASTROPHE The origin of the universe in the Big Bang is separate from the origin of life on earth, and it is not a myth but the only model that accounts for the data. “You guys”? by which you mean the actual scientists? Perhaps you should offer some sources on what you think accounts for the first life. And also when you think that was.

James Downard sez

@GMBCATASTROPHE Sources please on what you think you’re talking about, G
Reply

GMB sez:

No the Big Bang in no way accounts for the data. You guys in chemistry, organic chemistry and micro-biology, you are proper scientists and yet you allow yourselves to get pushed around by top-down bullshitartistry. The Big bang is such bad science it has to be assumed to be a psychological operation. It takes one proxy and misuses it. It takes a single proxy and uses it to replace three unknown data-sets. Thats science fraud.

In all the rest of science you need at least three proxies to find one unknown dataset. Even if one of these is just a tie-breaker. You are always going to be lacking in credibility if you insist on bad cosmology, leaving you with a one-planet young universe view of evolution.

James Downard sez

@GMBCATASTROPHE Sorry, your assertion counts diddly, G. Please offer sources on this.
Reply

GMB sez:

Come on man. You know I don’t need sources since you know what I’m saying is true. The Big Bang is an appeal to pure magic. Really obvious Voodoo. The most irrational creation myth, not excluding those involving tortoises.

Now another couple of items that will help you get your thinking together here. The conservation of matter is not merely wrong its a logical contradiction. If matter were conserved there would be no matter ever. There is no getting around the logic of that.

Likewise the conservation of energy is not merely wrong. It cannot be true since otherwise there would be no energy. This reality cannot be overcome.

Plus there is no such thing as a wave where nothing is waving hence aether theory is appropriate for physics.

Once we get that far this evolution business isn’t so difficult after all.

GMB sez:

No no. Attempt to be a scientist. Take every assertion I’ve made here. I’m right, if you disagree with me on even any of these basic logical ideas you are wrong. The people who run physics and cosmology have decided that they are above and beyond logic. Once you deep-six their logical contradictions and ponder the matter for awhile you wind up with a cosmology where evolution is much more credible. And you don’t need to be in denial of what is necessary to get the development of proteins and so forth.

25 thoughts on “Taking It To The Streets

  1. So far Downard has been shocked and stymied. He must think I’m the biggest arch-crazy out there. And yet he will be quite disturbed. Because he CANNOT overcome the logic of what I have said.

    “the trend in the research is to focus on ocean vents etc, not necessarily very deep….” Yes good call. If there are electrical effects near these vents, that is a great place for existing life to grow in sophistication. But its no good for the initial development of amino acids. For that the experimenters have always required reducing gases. Lots of hydrogen, methane, ammonia and all this gear. But close to ocean vents is usually acidic. The basic proteins would get dissolved and oxidised right away. So the venue move is a start. But it doesn’t go far enough. There is a certain mental stickiness going on here.

    Like

  2. Very clear animation. But he skirts over the difficulties:

    While he’s telling the truth, he isn’t saying that there is no specific venue known, outside the lab for this molecular self-assembly. What is needed is the reducing gasses, some elements without the pollution of others, and a source of electrical energy. But if you are in a pond, or near an oceanic volcanic vent ….. you haven’t got the right environment. You either will lack the electrical energy, you will have acids, or you’ll have materials extra to what is needed …. pollutants to muddy up your experiment.

    There are promising indications but you’ve got to be able to move from venue to venue. You cannot go get yourself stuck in one area. And you ought to bring in planetary recycling and an old universe. Or you cannot really be serious about this.

    Like

  3. This fellow is right about the meteors. But he’s wrong that we’ve found any surface area on the current earth or the early earth where we have an appropriate venue for these proteins to be built AND PROTECTED. But I need to show you these simplistic pro-Evolution demonstrations so as to make the issues clear in your mind.

    Like

  4. Here’s a bit of a statistical reality test here showing that moving venues conceptually is non-negotiable. You cannot simply let your mind fog over and say ….. “Ho ho …. But the planet is four billion years old …. Ho ho.” No we need the right electrical conditions and venues to alter the environment way beyond the need to for number-crushing improbabilities to be neutralised.

    The problem is the pro-Evolutionist crowd is demonising this sort of talk as (aaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhh !@#$%^&*) Christian.

    But these are not merely Christian critiques. They are scientific critiques.

    Like

  5. Truly its a pleasure to listen to a scientist trained in both philosophy and biology. Now its pretty clear that this fellow cannot come back from the intelligent design side of the argument without changing the cosmology. Because without a radically different cosmology the evolution story cannot work.

    Like

  6. Making new proteins from scratch. What you need:

    Methane, Ammonia, Water Vapour, Hydrogen and Hydrogen Sulphide ……… These are massively top-heavy in the hydrogen atom. And they all imply a deep planet genesis. Particularly the free hydrogen gas. Which can never be found on the surface of ANY PLANET. Free hydrogen gas can only ever be found naturally in the deep planet or in the outer atmosphere of a planet or a star. For the most part this is also the case with methane but thats not such a drastic impediment. For example Titan may have methane right at surface level. But even Titan WILL NOT have hydrogen at its surface. So the location of this protein production …. the list of possible suspects isn’t very large. Meaning I can tell you right now where it went on.

    On our planet currently there is no free hydrogen to speak of outside of the outer atmosphere. Methane doesn’t stick around long either. Its up up and away. What comes out of ocean vents? Mostly water vapour, CO2, minerals and sometimes ore grade minerals. But in our mature expanding planet all the Hydrogen is incorporated into the magma and bubbling gasses where we detect it already. So the need for hydrogen, and the top-heaviness of the hydrogen, points to the deep interior of a smaller planet that has only just started new matter creation.

    We immediately see the location of the original production of all these hydrogen-biased compounds. They are in a smaller colder planet and one that has only just started up new matter production. The venue for pristine protein production is just outside of the fusion zone. To find out where that is you have to circle back to earlier threads on this blog. Earlier threads that show the structure of new matter production in the centre of a planet.

    This is such a winner. And it explains why you had to hear it from me. So if Pluto and Europa have begun their new matter production phase, then I expect this protein-building to be going on outside their fusion zone in the middle of these planets.

    Like

  7. I am not by any means worried about the planet losing population. Quite the contrary. If its the planet taken as an whole I’d like to see a very slow decline for many centuries. But these guys reckon there will be a bit of a problem mid-century. Its a good time to sort it out that ones grandchildren are coming online mid-century. Genghis. Time to get started I’d say. I will try and get started soon. I got tipped off about these guys from Club Troppo:

    India down to 2.1 births per girl. Just down to replacement now. Thats great news in my view because India really is over-populated.

    Like

  8. How can we see this as a global problem? Its good news really. Its good news globally but it may be bad news locally. What would be worse if our local population was dying out and at the same time the global population was sky-rocketing. I was born into a planet just shy of 4 billion people. Soon we will be 8 billion people. I hope we reach a peak mid-century and have a very slow decline over a few centuries down to less than 2 billion people. That would be my preference.

    Like

  9. What the hell has gone wrong with Ken Parish? Fucking idiot lawyer is always threatening to put people in jail for the mildest of infractions. How old is Fraser Anning? He is just shy of 70. If a 70 year old, assaulted by a teen, can get a good punch and a kick in, the kid is no victim, and the 70 year old is no criminal. There is such a thing as respecting your elders and if not you may have to respect your betters, as John Wayne put it.

    Turnabout is fair play you ass-clown. So are you fair game for me to egg you next time I stopover in Darwin on my way to South East Asia? So supposing I stop by and assault you with a raw egg? What can we say about that you complete clown? We can say that you won’t have the satisfaction of getting a punch in dopey.

    Like

  10. I can barely get over the malevolence and idiocy of Ken Parish. Its only two left jabs from a 69 year old for the love of dopey lawyers everywhere. What the hell is wrong with that? Two left jabs. And they weren’t the forceful left jab of Sonny Liston. Just standard, if exceptionally well-aimed left jabs without any full-body Sonny Liston force behind them.

    The kid can thank his lucky stars he didn’t try that on the Streetfighter Andrew Bolt. Bolt would have had him careening over tables with a much more ferocious counter-attack. The old man just looked around, sized up the situation and let go a couple of good Christian left jabs.

    Like

  11. “On the next day, 16 March 2019, at a meeting of Anning’s Conservative National Party, after a 17 year old egged him, Anning punched him twice in the head.[43] Supporters of Anning then separated the two of them and tackled the boy. As he was pinned to the ground, several of Anning’s supporters choked him, and grabbed his face, while holding him in a headlock.[44][45] The boy was removed by police but subsequently was released without charge.[43]”

    Sounds like good dealings all around. The kid gets off and thats okay, because he was adequately punished on the spot. Anning could have thrown the book at the kid.

    Did somebody say “final solution” (aaaaarrrrrrgggggghhhhh) Good grief. We are going to let that little Jew Hitler cramp our prose now?

    Like

  12. Oh I see I’ve taken it all the wrong way. I went to Ken’s threads and what he is saying now makes a great deal of sense. Well good show Ken. But you don’t need to gratuitously put the boot in when you are making a point of this nature.

    Like

  13. Is Whale evolution in 9 million years just a case of artistic license? When the Darwinists get a few bones, they then knock up a full animal and some artist makes a go at producing the entire animal. Then next they make up a series of these animals to make it look like one has morphed into another.

    Now is this reasonable? I don’t know because I don’t have the source bones to inspect. I think the whale evolution is the best example of new-niche evolution that we have. But even then it may not be that great. Plus they found an intact whale that they dated to older than the evolving whale. So thats a bit of a spanner in the works. But its not proving anything one way or another because the dating mechanism is only a proxy and we ought to have had 3 proxies in every last case. So the database needs a serious re-working.

    Its not something that I can judge. But what I can say is that though the whale may have miraculously evolved in 9 million years, he didn’t do so, merely by way of mutation-and-natural selection. That mechanism is dead. Its natural-selection-plus-other-information-sources.

    A full-blown refrigeration system for the testicles coming out of mutations, in only 9 million years? Come on guys. Please get a better theory of new information in evolution? You are making fools of yourselves. Not with evolution but with the information system.

    Like

  14. So two cheers for whale evolution. A good example of what I call “New Niche Morphing Evolution” And one of the few examples of a stunning dearth of what we call “intermediate species” Its two cheers but not three cheers. So I decided to go and troll the Richard Dawkins believers a little bit:

    “This the best example of intermediate species we’ve got and its pretty dubious and could be put down to artistic license. There isn’t plenty of intermediate species. There is some sure, but its not like we are overwhelmed by such examples. And it may be the case that these are barely related species. It may be the case that the whale had 100 million years to evolve and not merely 9 million years. Relying on fossils …. Its an okay thing to do but its not that great really. It would be different if we had the genetic information to cross-reference, but our oldest genetic information is a one million year old horse in the Yukon. So the evidence Richard is citing here is good. But not that great really. And they need a new information source other than mutations. Mutations is a reduction in information. We better find out if larger animals can absorb new genetic information from the plankton or the microbiome. Since mutations are devolution. Not evolution. They are a loss of information.”

    Like

  15. Whistling dixie when it comes to the evolution of the blow-hole. You guys think I’m pushing it. But these public sector workers aren’t that fantastic with the way they go about things.

    Like

  16. The people involved in this racket ….. They not only extrapolate heavily on very lame evidence. They also have a tendency to systematically bury anything that doesn’t fit their narrative. If they have a dinosaur and a bunny rabbit in the same dig, its the modern animal that has to go. So the fossil record has to be judged at this stage as fundamentally incoherent. The source data must be subjected to an whole new reworking to see what is usable, what has been arbitrarily thrown out. Its not encouraging to think that we have to begin again with a truncated database but thats the way it goes.

    Like

  17. For the moment I would merely suggest that the whale evolution business has been subjected to excessive extrapolation. And its likely that the whale had antecedents that allowed for a great deal more than 9 million years to get all its changes into place. Thats a guess but we don’t really have anything else but guesses.

    If the data is polluted you have to throw it out, not let yourself be influenced by it, and start guessing all over again. So for example when we found that the usual suspects were polluting the data for global warming, after throwing most of it out and finding out what was left, the only conclusion to be had was that the 1930’s were the warmest decade on record. Not the 1990’s. Not the 2000’s and not the 2010’s. The 1930’s. If you think otherwise I guarantee you you are relying on dirty data.

    So the same thing applies here. Throw out the excessive extrapolations and begin again. And then the guess would be that the whale had more than 9 million years to develop. Maybe the development goes nearly all the way back to the appearance of the mammals themselves.

    The mainstream view isn’t disproven. Its just a stretch. Its just people reaching to fit the narrative.

    Like

  18. Forget about intelligent design for awhile. Its okay to set that aside, without ruling it out entirely. But lets set it aside. I myself don’t take it into account but I cannot be down on people who do.

    But just consider what Sternberg is saying here. Surely the Darwinists aren’t so stupid as to realise they need to do better than mutations with natural selection? You would think it would be a friendly amendment. But no. You will be shunned if you point out the obvious need for theoretical development. I thought these people were scientists. But if you try and come in with friendly amendments they will go through a process of group shaming. I would say that unskeptical Darwinists are NOT true scientists. Thats something completely different than being a full-blown intelligent design advocate. But you cannot be pushing mutations as the driving force for evolution and be a serious scientist.

    Like

  19. The evolution crowd are about the worst example of public sector laziness as can be imagined. The best of the intelligent design crowd have raised all these great objections to the mainstream formulation of evolution. Now you would think the other side would rise to the challenge and start proposing new ideas in order to bridge the gap. But no they are asleep on the job. Or making cheap shots.

    I want this argument to keep going, and on two wings. A bird flies better using both wings and we are ground down to a halt if only one side is arguing in a rational way. I don’t want to admit defeat in the face of theology, respectable as it may be. Maybe we need a team of people to go around with cattle prods. Dispersing electrical shocks to the other side to wake their asses up.

    “The pro-evolution crowd, if they weren’t fundamentally lazy, would shift the venue to another place. The substances they need are hydrogen gas, ammonia, methane, hydrogen-sulphide, water vapour and electrical energy. Now there is no planet that has hydrogen gas on its surface. Not now and not ever. Hydrogen will always escape. Any oxygen and just about anything else that gets mixed up with this will degrade the protein as you say. As will UV.

    So why have they not abandoned the idea of evolution starting on the earths surface? Its a real dog-ate-my-homework story. So now you see them moving the beginning of proteins to some shallow water volcanic vent. Well that may be a place for existent cellular life to pick up some sophistication ……. maybe.

    But no, try again dummies. Because these volcanic vents are acidic areas that in no way have the reduced (electron rich) environment for protein-building. So why do they waste our time with such bullshit? I don’t know but its a terrible case of public sector incompetence.

    I want them to do a better job so they will one day be able to meet your very sound objections.”

    Like

  20. Sometimes I am lazy and sometimes I beat myself up for being lazy. But then I could console myself that I’m never going to be as lazy as a professional Darwinist. Those guys are such bludgers if they had a pet bird it would be a bludgerigar.

    Burning the noon-day oil.

    The professional Darwinist on a particularly fruitful day.

    Like

  21. When does new matter creation happen in a small moon or planet? Ceres is the largest object in the asteroid belt. Its only got a radius of 473 kilometres. Now I’ve described for you the setup for new matter creation as I envisage it. So I wouldn’t have thought there would be much of a void within Ceres, and so not much room for new matter creation. But we know that new matter creation is going on. How do we know this? The reason we know this is that Ceres has one small OCCASIONAL volcano.

    So supposing we have the new matter creation happening but its basically 99% hydrogen, since its so lame. So lets say we are making one kilo of hydrogen every minute? Its so cold up there that you’ll get a buildup of pressure and then this occasional explosion of volcanic activity. No it won’t be hydrogen coming out. The hydrogen will be well-mixed with all sorts of other gear by that stage. You’ll just have that pressure buildup and release.

    If you think I’m bullshitting check it out. The usual suspects have no explanation for this “volcano” because they don’t follow logic in science more generally. So they are just clueless in the face of this feature.

    So now just think again what we needed to build proteins for life? Water, electrical energy, hydrogen (H2), methane (CH4) Ammonia (NH3) And Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) ……..

    So all these gasses and liquids are ….. all they amount to, is what hydrogen becomes as it makes its way from the centre of Ceres, through to near the surface of Ceres. It doesn’t stay pure it picks up other materials as it works its way out towards the surface.

    Now supposing it takes Ceres 50 billion years to get as big as Mars, but with an ocean. Thats 50 billion years of protein building potentially.

    Now how long did that take me? Was that so hard? Darwinists are so fucking lazy.

    Like

  22. All this handwringing about Jordan Peterson letting himself get photoed with a fellow wearing the wrong shirt. This is detracting us from finding out which Jews organised this massacre. There was a massacre of Muslims. Who orders up massacres of Muslims? Its Jews that do this, and its a waste of time worrying about what Jordan Peterson ought to do at the spur of the moment.

    Four people have been arrested with regards to this. Thats called a conspiracy to massacre Muslims. There was a conspiracy to massacre Muslims. Are you following me? Am I going too fast for you? WHO carries out conspiracies to massacre Muslims? JEWS carry out conspiracies to massacre Muslims.

    This fellow has had NO KNOWN JOB FOR SEVEN FUCKING YEARS. Now get it together people. He hasn’t been in Australia copping dog whistles from Jordan Peterson or any other mildly conservative individuals. Slap yourself out of it and pay attention to what is going on around you. He hasn’t had the sort of job for seven years that could allow him to plan and carry out a military attack in a foreign country. This takes time and money and more wages then he’s been caught working for.

    Its time to put the J BACK IN WHO.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s