Now divorced for the second time at age seventy, I've had considerable time to read and reflect. Your assessment squares perfectly with my own, which means of course that you are spot on.
Last evening I watched an online video of a Japanese girl living in Singapore, interviewing Chinese women-on-the-street concerning their thoughts about Western men. I was struck by the contrast between these thoughtful, quiet, feminine women and Western women's silly vapid TikTok videos extolling their requirements for their prospective husbands to have six figure incomes, six-pack abdominals, six-hundred horsepower car, and six inches in the pants. Should I ever suffer Biden-level brain damage and search for another mate, Western b-babes - and I don't mean "boss" - need not apply.
Mr Chantrill, please take a moment to consider my comment below:
I always get so disappointed, when I read a very thoughtful and intelligent piece such as this one, but then suddenly the writer refers to evolution and humans 'diverging' from a common ancestor, as if it is an obvious fact. It is not obvious, nor is it a fact, and in my humble opinion, the idea of human macroevolution from a common ancestor is one of the most insidiously destructive lies ever perpetrated on humanity.
Without even looking in to the biology which makes the impossibility of abiogenesis and neo-darwinian evolution apparent - (simply because it is much more difficult and time-consuming to explain) - just consider the following:
Look in to the 'scientific research' regarding how fossils and rocks are dated, then you will see that every single assumption which results in giving dates of billions of years old (which evolutionists require for their theory), is totally unjustified. Not to mention the circular reasoning of dating fossils by the rocks in which they are found, but also dating the rocks by the fossils they contain!
Once you see all that, the evolutionary story quickly becomes obsolete and embarrassing.
The method used for separating and quantifying isotopes in rocks may be totally flawless, but the assumptions of a closed system, the 'clock set to 0' when the rock is formed, and steady decay rates are all wildly incorrect. The the only evidence is actually against all those assumptions.
There is no convincing evidence of an old earth or universe, which is what evolutionism uses to justify its claims. Also in cosmology, the red-shift/expansion interpretation used for the 13.8 billion year age of the universe is similarly unjustified, though less well-known.
Even Edwin Hubble, after whom the doppler interpretation of red-shift was named, thought that expansion and doppler effect was the least likely explanation for red shift. The research of Halton Arp, one of Hubbles protégés, clearly disproved the doppler red-shift interpretation, which is the reason he was hated and shunned.
Besides the scientific problems, also consider the implications of teaching all children in public school that the big-bang and evolution story is where we all come from (which is what I was taught in middle school in the late nineties). It entirely removes any meaning to ones existence, and one of the consequences is a total disregard for life, since life is just an accident. In my opinion, this worldview is one of the reasons we have so many school shootings.
Thank you for your time and reading my comment, Mr Chantrill. I enjoy your work otherwise.
It is only obvious if you read and study with an open mind and are unencumbered by religious dogma. The real power of evolutionary theory is that it is able to predict - "gaps" in the evolutionary charts so celebrated by religion-apologists are invariably filled as more data become available. "There should be a 'missing link' here," and when the cuttin's done, sure enough there IS!
As for the "Big Bang," with new data from the James Webb telescope, it looks as if that theory may not be true. But then, that's the difference between real science and religion - science always reserves the right to change its mind in the face of new data rather than just hang or burn the heretics. (Although as a retired physician I am horrified at my colleagues' attacks on those who dared to doubt the gub'ment propaganda during the PlanDemic.)
I'm the most Christian/Jew friendly atheist you'll ever meet - not because any of it is true, but because the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and I believe that if we survive after this coming November it will be because of the inner strength that comes from Believing. What is Useful is not always readily Apparent.
Now divorced for the second time at age seventy, I've had considerable time to read and reflect. Your assessment squares perfectly with my own, which means of course that you are spot on.
Last evening I watched an online video of a Japanese girl living in Singapore, interviewing Chinese women-on-the-street concerning their thoughts about Western men. I was struck by the contrast between these thoughtful, quiet, feminine women and Western women's silly vapid TikTok videos extolling their requirements for their prospective husbands to have six figure incomes, six-pack abdominals, six-hundred horsepower car, and six inches in the pants. Should I ever suffer Biden-level brain damage and search for another mate, Western b-babes - and I don't mean "boss" - need not apply.
Mr Chantrill, please take a moment to consider my comment below:
I always get so disappointed, when I read a very thoughtful and intelligent piece such as this one, but then suddenly the writer refers to evolution and humans 'diverging' from a common ancestor, as if it is an obvious fact. It is not obvious, nor is it a fact, and in my humble opinion, the idea of human macroevolution from a common ancestor is one of the most insidiously destructive lies ever perpetrated on humanity.
Without even looking in to the biology which makes the impossibility of abiogenesis and neo-darwinian evolution apparent - (simply because it is much more difficult and time-consuming to explain) - just consider the following:
Look in to the 'scientific research' regarding how fossils and rocks are dated, then you will see that every single assumption which results in giving dates of billions of years old (which evolutionists require for their theory), is totally unjustified. Not to mention the circular reasoning of dating fossils by the rocks in which they are found, but also dating the rocks by the fossils they contain!
Once you see all that, the evolutionary story quickly becomes obsolete and embarrassing.
The method used for separating and quantifying isotopes in rocks may be totally flawless, but the assumptions of a closed system, the 'clock set to 0' when the rock is formed, and steady decay rates are all wildly incorrect. The the only evidence is actually against all those assumptions.
There is no convincing evidence of an old earth or universe, which is what evolutionism uses to justify its claims. Also in cosmology, the red-shift/expansion interpretation used for the 13.8 billion year age of the universe is similarly unjustified, though less well-known.
Even Edwin Hubble, after whom the doppler interpretation of red-shift was named, thought that expansion and doppler effect was the least likely explanation for red shift. The research of Halton Arp, one of Hubbles protégés, clearly disproved the doppler red-shift interpretation, which is the reason he was hated and shunned.
Besides the scientific problems, also consider the implications of teaching all children in public school that the big-bang and evolution story is where we all come from (which is what I was taught in middle school in the late nineties). It entirely removes any meaning to ones existence, and one of the consequences is a total disregard for life, since life is just an accident. In my opinion, this worldview is one of the reasons we have so many school shootings.
Thank you for your time and reading my comment, Mr Chantrill. I enjoy your work otherwise.
It is only obvious if you read and study with an open mind and are unencumbered by religious dogma. The real power of evolutionary theory is that it is able to predict - "gaps" in the evolutionary charts so celebrated by religion-apologists are invariably filled as more data become available. "There should be a 'missing link' here," and when the cuttin's done, sure enough there IS!
As for the "Big Bang," with new data from the James Webb telescope, it looks as if that theory may not be true. But then, that's the difference between real science and religion - science always reserves the right to change its mind in the face of new data rather than just hang or burn the heretics. (Although as a retired physician I am horrified at my colleagues' attacks on those who dared to doubt the gub'ment propaganda during the PlanDemic.)
I'm the most Christian/Jew friendly atheist you'll ever meet - not because any of it is true, but because the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and I believe that if we survive after this coming November it will be because of the inner strength that comes from Believing. What is Useful is not always readily Apparent.
Yeah. I believe that life, the universe, everything, is a mystery. And we humans try with science and religion to figure it out.
Only, I say, the more we know the more we know we don't know.
Agreed.