My mother thinks people won’t respect me because like many post-modernists I have made up my own religion. From my point of view people who adopt pre-existing ways of thought deserve the least respect, especially if unlike me they actually believe their religion to be true!
There are certain things in my life important to me – like my autistic need to eat certain things on certain days. So I have found Biblical stories that I can use to justify these lifestyle choices. If I were using the Bible as many do, to be homophobic, sexist or bigoted in other ways then maybe my mother would have a point. But apparently those people are “traditional” and it is some how fine for them to have a made-up religion that they are using to justify their lifestyle choices, which unlike mine harms others and their rights!
It is argued by a Facebook friend, Donn, that people of all religions believe they are right and others are wrong. This is true, but with the exception mine, which in my view lacks any basis in reality whatsoever! It is completely made up, just like all others!
For me as an expert troll making up one’s own religion is a good way to expose the lack of objectivity in people of a different religion. For instance, Atheists are as deluded as the Christians they try to prove wrong. Atheists are as Abrahamic as Christians, Jews and Muslims. They try to use science to prove the Bible wrong, but in doing so are saying the Bible is a legitimate document!
I am of the view that science has an inherent duty to refute every claim in the Bible. If it is not possible for science to prove a claim either way in the Bible then it should evolve to do so. When the Origin of the Species was first published it was as irrefutable as the Bible. Darwin had no proof we descended from the Great Apes, he just put 2 and 2 together and as it seems from the research published in Nature in the last week, he got 5 instead of 4. This is because scientists have now found human DNA that is 300,000 years old, suggesting a different direction of evolution to the Great Ape theory, of which the oldest Human DNA is 200,000 years old. This means that whilst Darwin’s theory of natural selection is correct, which he discovered after Welsh scientist Russel Wallace discovered it, his Great Ape theory is now thrown into turmoil.
Should we now be asking for Darwin’s theories to be taken out of science lessons and taught in history classes along with the Bible? From my point of view, because of this publication in Nature, both the Bible and The Origin of Species are historical documents that provide an insight into the thinking around the Origin of Man at the time they were written, but have no place in the teaching of science, which had found the histories in these books to be unsupported by evidence.
Many people wonder in amazement how the pyramids were built, and other unexplained architectures such as Stone Henge. My answer is simple – There were ancient peoples who were smarter than us. As horrible as that might seem to us, often thinking we are unique, it is what I believe to be true.
In my view climate change is real and has probably happened every 65 million years or so since the planet first formed. It wiped out the dinosaurs – except the ones who could swim or survive the torrential weather conditions.
On that basis I think that any of the ancient wonders that we, indeed, wonder about their creation were not created by primitive people from our evolutionary cycle, but by earlier ones smarter than us. What if they were trolls, like the Mayans’ could have been, leaving weather proof architecture?
On that basis I think there are two possible truths for Stone Henge:
The were moved by the extreme weather during a previous climate change episode from Pembrokeshire to Salisbury Plane, where they were then erected by other peoples.
People with technology as advanced as ours moved them from Pembrokeshire to where they are now and erected them something close to what we have now.
In both cases the reason the stones look as ragged as the do was because of the rough weather conditions from climate change. The next time I come across something from ancient times where humans wonder how it could have happened, my first premise will be that ancient people, likely to be smarter than us, did in it ways more likely to be advanced than early humans would have been capable of doing.
So when climate change wipes us out, maybe some of the following will happen (tongue in cheek):
The Statue of Liberty could float to France
The Millennium Dome and Eiffel Tower could finally be destroyed as planned
People will be wondering what people were worshipping in the US Pentagon
People will wonder if the Angel of the North was who we thought ‘God’ was
I’m certain climate change will wipe us out and in millions of years time there will be people who have evolved like us writing and speaking us in the same way we do ancient species.
I have previously shown how it might be possible, through huge advancements in science to refute the claim that we descended from humanoids (i.e. Adam and Eve) instead of simply being genetically different from chimpanzees purely through natural selection of genetic defects.
I now have a challenge to the world’s biologists. One of them, Paul Myers has already failed the challenge. Even though he can’t provide me with any evidence that my hypothesis is wrong, he has been very abusive because I dared question his religious biases as an Atheist.
It is my view that the Bible cannot be written off as a document until science is able to refute it. Science has already done this in some areas. For instance science has provided evidence to support the claim that Pi is not 3 as the Bible says, but 3.1415…
So, as I shown in the article referred to above it will be possible to show whether what made us split away from our chimpanzee cousins was a humanoid or inherited genetic mutations.
Let me provide you with some facts most biologists will support as accurate:
The main difference between humans and chimpanzees is that chimps have Chromosomes 2A and 2B which in humans have fused as Chromosome 2;
Our earliest descent when we split of was Lucy who had; Better working memory, better able to communicate and work with others, better child rearing capability;
HERVs have been known to have drastic evolutionary consequences, as evidenced by tests on fruit flies who can transfer the virus.
Let me provide you with some facts most Biblical scholars with support as accurate:
Adam and Eve increase their knowledge and reasoning ability through eating the forbidden fruit
Eve had better child rearing capabilities
I therefore ask the biology community to refute the following:
Lucy inherited the mutations that came from a HERV in part causing Chromosomes 2A and 2B to fuse in her which was carried forward to subsequent generations.
Lucy’s differences from chimps are one of the reasons that humans have such a developed prefrontal cortex essential to social function
It is the human prefrontal cortex that gives us our advanced social/emotional skills and impairment in this can lead to problems like schizophrenia, autism, etc. as I showed in this poster published in 2011.
Lucy and her descendants are likely to have experienced many of the symptoms of autism as their frontal lobe would be developing at a faster rate than those primates who eventually became chimpanzees.
I ask the community of Biblical scholars to consider the following:
It is possible that the forbidden fruit could have been infected by a fruit fly carrying a retrovirus causing the mutations in Adam and Eve that were replicated in Lucy, who was a child of their son, whose wife was a primate?
I am not presenting this as my version of the truth, as it is not in that category. I am merely showing one way in which Genesis 3 could be refuted. Real scientists like myself know that refute does not mean disprove, or even prove, but provide evidence that will support or oppose a claim. I argue that the claims above to the biologists are refutable, as science should be able to say whether I have got it right or wrong. I know Fanatical Atheists will shout their mouths off, but if they can’t provide evidence against what I am claiming then their opinion is just an opinion, no more than that.
I have kept this blog password protected all year, but since reading this article on The New Scientist website I feel I can come out of the cold.
When I was 21 I was sworn into the Anglican Church on the basis of a baptism and confirmation of my faith in the values and beliefs of Christianity. All I had read at the time were the Gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. My exposure to science was limited, but I’ve gone on to gain three science degrees – a BSc(Hon), MSc and MScEcon.
Over that period I have decided I do not wish to follow any way of life prescribed by any religion. I do however like the Christian message of tolerance and forgiveness, accept that the Old Testament’s conception of vengeance means that forgiveness can’t exist without it, like black can’t exist without white, or day without night. However, I put my faith in science so that it will be able to answer the questions about God one day, even though it can’t at the moment.
So what I am about to present may not be able to be proven or disproven by today’s science, but one day it definitely will be able to, if my faith becomes fact. When Charles Darwin wrote the “Origin of Species”, his theories were based on the best evidence available at the time, and many have been supported by modern science, others not. I think the ‘Great Flood’ story in the Bible was based on an actual event like a tsunami as historians suggest, and the writer of the story changed it to encourage people to believe in a higher power, called God.
The battle towards science and religion is on the basis that science can’t prove God, so that creates a conflict. Atheists regard this to mean God doesn’t exist. Christians, for example regard this to be that just because one can’t prove a higher power like God exist doesn’t mean it can’t – and they strongly believe God does exist and they see the prophets who gave voice the Bible as proving that. Both of these positions are protected in the UK by the Human Rights Act and Equality Acts.
I would like to suggest a consolidated view of evolution theory and creationism theory, where both can mutually exist and neither be wrong. This may be wide of the mark for devotees, but open minded scholar may find it thought provoking. I invite people to leave comments, and if they’re fair and balanced and non-offensive I will approve them.
Consider Adam and Eve. It is claimed that when they disobeyed God that he forced Eve to have more pains in pregnancy and because they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil they both had better decision-making abilities. Interestingly, scientists have discovered a biological ancestor of ours, called Lucy, who was the missing link between earlier claimed ancestors and more obvious less old findings. The difference between Lucy and primates was primarily that she had better decision-making capabilities (like post-sin Adam and Eve) and better child rearing capabilities (like post-sin Eve). Some coincidence, eh?
The Bible tells us that Adam and Eve and had three sons, who both had three wives – but it doesn’t say where they came from and the vicar of the church I was confirmed at couldn’t say either. It was this passage in Genesis 3 that started the loss in faith I had, as I could only assume at the time they were their sisters, but we all know that that causes evolutionary deformities and birth defects.
However, when I re-read Genesis 1 to 3, I had this strong sense that there was life outside the Garden of Eden. Genesis 1 appears to create beings (maybe Neanderthals) prior to createWhat if it followed that after God banished Adam and Eve from it that with their new knowledge and breeding capabilities they created their three sons, whose wives could only have been primates?
As wild as this may sound, scientists don’t know whether our ancestors species could or could not cross-fertilise with other species. If we have the view that science and religion are both compatible, then we can’t rule this out. It could be that Lucy was the offspring of one of Adam and Eve’s sons being crossed with a primate, and could explain why we have over 99% the same DNA as a chimpanzee, as we share a common ancestor.
As a scientist I think that for evolution theory to be at least 95% provable, it needs to be repeatable. At present only ‘natural selection’ is one of the few premises proven beyond reasonable doubt. But it may be that with advancements genetic science we could one day know whether the split between the primates that led to us and the ones that led to chimpanzees was because of those primates cross fertilisation with an advanced life form?
If evolution theory is to be proven at least 95% right, we will either have to replicating our ancestral path or find examples of other evolved life on this or other planets.
We could, through ‘DNA regression’, match fossil records to a hypothesised ‘pre-human genome’ through advancing genetic research to the extent where we can generate a 3D computer model of what an organism would look like based on its DNA – as with dinosaurs in the sci-fi Jurassic Park. Then we can using this and doing the same with chimpanzee DNA, see what our common ancestor looked like. After that we could using embryonic research replicate it – then we will have the answers!
The other alternative is to find evidence of earlier intelligent life before us, with no links to us, from billions of years before we came into being, even before the dinosaurs, or on other planets. But then again, would this not confirm that Genesis 1, where ‘God’ tells people to go forth and multiply, is at a different point in history to when we existed, as is depicted in our creation through Adam and Eve in Genesis 3.
Original Sin, as it is called, says that the Fall of Man was when Adam and Eve Betrayed God. Go said to them, ‘the day that eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil you shall surely die’.
He was not speaking to Adam and Eve as individuals, but as Man and Woman, who are our evolutionary ancestors as humans that split us off from primates.
Humans will never stop growing until they know as much as God. The Fall of Man was a mere trip over a stone on the garden path, and to think otherwise is to not see the wood for trees. It is human’s pursuit of the truth about a reality we can’t access that drives us, and will lead to the End of Man.
Money can’t grow an economy, but machines, goods and knowledge can. The servant will not become a master by wearing his master’s shoes and walking his master’s path, nor talking and feeling like him. Only by a constant revolution of developing knowledge, goods and machines that will make his master redundant will things become better for him and fellow humans, and lead to humans finding the cure for poverty and privilege.
Man has never stopped trying to know as much as God. He built the tower of Babylon, a co-operative enterprise, to be as tall as God, another fall of Man, but he kept his flag flying, knowing he is not a hopeless case, being lifted up to new horizons by humans, in the hope his dreams would one day come true.
Every thought a human has is an embodiment of the nakedness of Adam and Eve. It is only through science and technology that humans can ever know as much as God. The medicines that cure, the instruments that give precision, are human’s root to knowing all God knows. If other humans cannot see one’s knowledge, then there is no way humans as a collective can know as much as God.
Judgement Day shall not be any date on any imaginary calendar where Man will be lifted from his shadows, but the day that Man will be out of luck. He will have been over the world, and will move nowhere, as he will know so much that he destroys himself and his fellow human beings. All things will fall apart, Man will be brought down to the start, and humans will have to start again to lift Man out of the shadows.