Archive

Posts Tagged ‘mainstream science’

The Dangers of Atheism, Narcissism and Secular Science

March 29, 2014 4 comments

I’ll try to make this short and to the point. Atheism is a dangerous mind set because it is a delusional state of mind in which a person has convinced themselves that morality comes not from a God who may send you to suffer forever in Hell if break his morality/by disobeying his commandments/laws, but from man, and is therefore something that is not permanent and in which there is no danger of eternal suffering for disobeying. I can give all kinds of horrific examples of how then an atheist could then justify what most people would call psychopathic behavior. As in what most people would call evil acts committed without showing any guilt over it. I say “most people”, because most people are not atheists, unless you count Buddhists of the East, though Buddhists at least have some sort of commandments, but how well they adhere to it, who knows: www.sacred-texts.com/bud/busc/busc11.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Precepts#Ten_Precepts

Clear examples of atheism leading to murderous psychopathic behavior were given by the atheist leaders Stalin, Hitler (who, being a clever atheist, used religion to mask his agenda of subjugating everyone), Mao and perhaps Pol Pot, whose atheism though not stated is perhaps evidenced by his complete lack of promoting any religion. The murders of those atheists combined exceed the murders of the Catholic cult for the past 1000 years. In just 100 years those atheists murdered or killed over 50 million people. There are about 300 million people in the United States, imagine if 50 million of them were suddenly wiped out by some disease spread by an atheist biologist going around the country releasing his virus into water supplies.

I met one narcissist atheist who regularly trolls the internet – he’s a stalker of mine, who claimed that it wasn’t the fault of atheism, but communism. In other words: just ignore that they were atheists and focus only on communism. Talk about “intellectually dishonest”. Just imagine the field day atheists would have if a communist Christian had murdered 50 million people. They’d ignore the communism and trump up, “He believed in those horrible ten commandments!” Actually no they wouldn’t, because they conveniently ignore the ten commandments, knowing they are good, at least instinctively, so would more likely say with pretentiousness, “See what good religion is?! It lead to such a great loss, oh the tragedy. Religion is the cause of all wars.” In other words they’d be vague, ignoring specifics, pretending all religions are the same, ignoring what type of Christian this person was (meaning failing to examine if he was someone who misinterpreted the Bible and had a very warped understanding of it, or simply didn’t care if he was disobeying it). Most atheists I encounter off or on the net are either mentally ill or are very stupid and ignorant and think in this way. “Religion is to blame” is their excuse for their hypocritical behavior. Kind of like saying, “Religion made me do it/hurt that person.” Consider the irony of that excuse! An atheist is more likely to blame religion for their evil behavior than a religious person is likely to blame their religion I imagine.

People with the permanent mental disorder known as narcissistic personality disorder seem more likely to be atheists than of some traditional type of Christian religion like Catholicism, Lutheranism or the Calvinistic branches. That is because those religions teach that God’s commandments should be obeyed and worshiped. Catholicism however is polytheistic in that if adds gods to be worshiped of a sort, like Mary, angels and so called saints. Though they deny it it’s clear they do and in their “Catholic Bible” the commandment about not making or bowing down to idols has been removed. Consider the blasphemy of doing that. The Bible also says that anyone altering Scripture like that has a curse put on them. A narcissist DOES NOT want to worship anyone, but to have himself worshiped or rather have whatever he says don.

A narcissist is permanently bent towards an evil disposition, and so if he is also an atheist, becomes a criminal-minded person. Such people, horrifically, can rise all the way to leadership of countries with millions of people and have: Stalin, Hitler, Mao and possibly others. It seems impossible to many I imagine, that people who would seem to be so mentally unhealthy could gain such power, but it is possible because there can be those among them that have just enough patience, cleverness, know-how when it comes to lying to pull it off. And consider that it is probably not the hardest thing in the world to form a gang which can grow in power through theft, murder, stalking, bullying and technology, including through gun use till it takes over and takes a part of a large country. Consider also the “psychopath/serial killer” next door, who by pretending to be a normal good person by his behavior and words, imitating those he or she instinctively senses are the opposite of them, manages to blend in, while secretly, sometimes when alone or with a partner they think or is like themselves, tortures or murders others in darkness or isolation from the rest of civilization.

Some might think that in a world where governments are plagued with narcissists and psychopaths, that the world can still get by advancing till it weeds them out, and they look to the present state of the world as an example I imagine. For example Hitler was eventually gotten rid of, even if he did manage to escape to Indonesia, and George Bush Jr. was not elected again, and Popes given to murdering their opposition are no longer in power, seemingly, and the Dalai Lama (who was part of a long line of very evil oppressors in Tibet) was ousted by China (yet many Tibetans want him back!). But I think rather than it isn’t that such evil has been done away with or is being done away with, or being coped with successfully, I think what has happened is that more clever narcissists have come to power, ones who having studied history, seeing what keeps a person in power or not, have learned how to mask even better their evil personality and evil intent. A certain clever narcissist in power of the most powerful country today works in a very stealthy and slick way to pick apart what he personally does not like, which besides being the world in general, is mostly those who are for capitalism, a republic and Christianity.

A major problem in attempting to eliminate narcissism and atheism is that such people have already corrupted many others with their beliefs, including theists, so much so that they still support them even when they do great evils. For example Hitler, Mao, the Dalai Lama and I’d bet Stalin, all still have many supporters. It’s similar to how the ancient Jews under Egypt’s oppressive rule chose in their evil disposition to lose patience in their time of freedom WHILE SUFFERING to then, nonsensically, want to go back under a time of oppression WHILE FEELING GOOD, like eating after doing work, and so on. And many see the teaching of evolutionism and Big Bangism as having freedom them from oppression (and perhaps they instinctively sense that those teachings are what helped bring to power such evil leaders), and think that if they are gotten rid of, that “bad religion” would come back into “the schools” and “brainwash” everyone into being “slaves” again (slaves of what?) or technologically backwards (as if ipods, phones, cars and telescopes to play with didn’t exist because of Moses, Christ and the apostle Paul – but it’s disobedience to God that hinders technological progress actually). So, many people suffering now in America, Russia, Tibet or China, due to their poverty or being oppressed by current leaders desire to go back to an even worse time with worse leaders, who they rationalize as being better because, “At least they did such and such like Putin/Obama etc. and did not do such and such like those men.” But they ignore or don’t see that such times were hardly, if at all, better than now. Though I can probably easily argue that the early 1900s were much better than now (more traditional Christian values were upheld throughout the world, Darwinism and Big Bang propaganda was not so wide spread or rather did not have as many believers), I can just as easily show it was about as bad as it is right now in 2014. Examples: WW1 and WW2 and other wars besides those, the many cults that existed then most of which still seem to be around and even larger now, the many deceptions being spread and bad policies, like the Prohibition, lies about hemp and marijuana, so it’s not hard to show that the recent past was not much better. I’m sure too that there were many crimes being committed by police from 1900 to 1945, when traditional Christian values were nearing a slow but severe erosion in America and Europe, starting at about 1958 it seems to me. That was a time when Elvis rose to power and the U.S. “military-industrial complex”.

“Don’t ask, ‘Why were the old days better than these?’ For it is not to be wise that you would ask such questions.” – Ecclesiastes 7:10, King Solomon

A Letter to Dr. Jason Braithwaite

October 29, 2012 Leave a comment

To Dr. Braithwaite (and Fortean author Nick Redfern),

I study logical fallacies, not sure if that is your field since you say you’re a lecturer in cog psych as opposed to philosophy. I also study theology and psychology, specifically anti-social personality disorders, I teach those subjects too. I noticed in what seems to be an old version of your Seven Fallacies of Thought article you saying that science it he most openminded of knowledge systems. There’s a problem with that statement, which perhaps you realized and so removed, but in case it for some reason was still there and wasn’t being found I’ll explain why (and this is also meant for Nick Redfern whom I listened to on Coast to Coast AM, listened to him say that we should always be open to things that are contrary to what we believe):

It’s a fallacy to think you should be open minded to anything, it’s related to the fallacy that there is no absolute truth, that you can never reach truth and so should never commit to a belief being 100% true. In fact mainstream science is logically fallacious (and you saying that demonstrated partly why) because the philosophy of it (which is only exposed when its proponents are caught in an error despite using “science”) is that “we’re still learning” aka “still improving” in other words always endlessly learning and “correcting when needed” which is a bait and switch phrase for, “you can never have the absolute truth but must keep searching” aka “be open minded”. Now suppose that is just a bad fall back mainstream scientists make and that MAINSTREAM science (which is illogically referred to them as simply, “science” (no offense)), and that really it’s not about being open minded to no end, but, as its proponents say, about hypothesizing, experimenting, verifying (and adding to the knowledge of science), that may be so, but the problem is they inject their own bias and additional philosophy into it, hence, making it so called, “Mainstream” (in other words “mainstream” has come to mean,

“Belief that science cannot verify the existence of God, that the big bang is true, abiogenesis (whatever it may be) is true, Darwinian evolution specifically is true (not other evolution theories even if they don’t rely on a god or God or alien), that relativity is true and anyone who says they are not is not a true scientist or is less trustworthy than an ms scientist and is illogical or ignorant of the facts or delusional.”

It’s a well known fact among the world that that is what mainstreamers believe, or at least state openly in various ways so as to shield themselves from attack and persecution from their “peers” or those who believe things contrary to that biased philosophy.

So, it’s wrong in that many of its members at the very least, deny absolute truth when caught in mistakes, and for the other reasons I stated, and those other reasons are wrong for various obvious reasons which I won’t explain, because they are obvious or can be easily looked up (I made it easier by making a portal for that at https://eternian.wordpress.com/evidence): experiments that contradict the claims that the universe is older than 6,500 years, living fossils, data that contradicts the big bang, contradictions in relativity, biblical prophecy (which is verifiable scientifically as is archeology and psychology, the whole bible is scientifically verifiable in various ways as are the whole of facts of archeology and psychology, though they may not be a single book or a few similar versions as the Bible is conveniently).

As you probably already know, but in case don’t, or forget, you shouldn’t be open to anything, but only that which is in agreement with the facts, with truth, and with what is logical. So if someone says, “Be open minded that 2+2=4 is false” it’s not something to consider, and for me, if someone says, “Be open to (MAINSTREAM) science being superior to any other way of obtaining knowledge of what is true or false real and not real, I automatically know that is false, because it’s a bait and switch: mainstreamers are the ones who usually say that, and they mean MAINSTREAM science, not simply “science” and make another bait and switch fallacy by confusing the meaning of the word science even further, by meaning both “the method” and “the field of knowledge obtained by science” which are two entirely different things. The method has nothing to do with “You can’t prove God with science”, and even the field of science itself has no say on that, it’s just an accumulation of knowledge put together in some way. It’s not some single book magically kept one way by some mainstreamer or mainstreamers so that there are no other science-based knowledge that says, “God has been shown to exist by various characteristics of the universe, for example the instinctive knowledge of living things is knowledge that can be deduced through thought experiments showing that such knowledge must have been deliberately created rather than by chance (etc)…”.

A person’s mind should only be open to a thing being true (meaning, willing to consider a thing as being true) if they don’t have any knowledge which is plainly true that contradicts that thing being true. For example is someone said, “Be open to an all powerful, all knowing, perfectly logical, loving and vengeful being called ‘Yahweh’ and who is also called ‘God’, exists,” to someone who has no clear facts that an all powerful, all knowing, perfectly logical, loving and vengeful being, ‘God’ exists.

If we are not closed-minded to that which is clearly false, then we would be opening ourselves to the endless learning of the same things over and over again, no matter how simple and obvious or vexing, like “one plus one equals two” or that “deliberate abuse of and murdering little kids is immoral/not good/evil” or some particular crime that was plainly a crime because everyone saw the act committed (and yet the criminal repeatedly appeals to everyone to “have an open mind that he really didn’t commit a crime and that the crime was just an illusion, and that the blood that was spilled on the ground was fake, and that no one died and was buried, and that all the witnesses and investigators are imagining things, and the photos and videos even are false). If that is true, then there really is no point in going to get water to quench your thirst, because your thirst could be just as false as true, and water just as much existing as not; life would be a confusing mess and the pursuit of anything all like trying to accomplish something in a dream: futile.

Daniel

The Boyd Bushman Hoax and Appeal to Authority Fallacy

July 11, 2012 3 comments

Boyd Bushman being interviewed by the mathematician, UFO investigator, theoretical physcist and New Ager, David Sereda

An image of one of Boyd supposedly demonstrating anti-gravity


David Sereda, idiot New Ager genius

I saw this comment on YouTube, which was in reply to someone who said that a former employee, a scientific researcher and inventor, in other words a research and development worker, named Boyd Bushman, was a fraud. Whether he really was an employee of Lockheed I don’t know, but he does have at least one patent. But so, in reply to the one calling him a fraud, someone made an illogical comment and perpetuated/parroted a common logical fallacy used by Big Bangers and Evolutionists/Mainstream Science cultists/anti-fundamentalist Christians (fundamentalists are also known as Reformed Christians aka Calvinists and wrongly as conservative Christians who are usually Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodists, and Free Will (Arminian) Christians, though some Reformed Christians do call themselves conservatives, which I think is confusing):


“Don’t you love all the experts on youtube who think they are smarter than a senior scientist from lockheed martin.. Yea, all the while they are working at mcdonalds, yet when they are on the internet they suddenly become expert physicists, describing how experts from Lockheed are wrong and are frauds.. Google patents – Boyd Bushman

My reply:

Just because someone works for Lockheed or performed odd experiments doesn’t mean they know what they are talking about or won’t do deceptive things, AT ALL. A good example is mainstream scientists: they spread bad theories like the big bang and evolution, and stars-from-gas using the good base of the scientific method, why?: money and fame, and many of them have narcissism disorder (narcissists tend to be at the front of the face of everything in the world, including governments. That is because of their ill desire for large amounts of attention and praise).

Boyd even, in one video deliberately talks very vague in a childish and unhelpful way, childish in that he’s not saying anything specific but what it is common for any seasoned scientist like David Sereda who interviewed him, rather, Boyd said “watch nature”. Well what scientist DOESN’T OBSERVE NATURE?! Hello: NEWTON, EINSTEIN, GALILEO and on and on, and biologists regularly attempt to copy God’s work, looking for new industrial or medical chemicals in plants and animals.

Leedskalnin, was he a scientist? Do you know who he is? He was the “McDonalds cashier” scientist as a narcissistic scientist  might say, but despite being a “nobody” lacking college degrees still made an enormous monument using what seemed to be by a combination of antigravity and the use of a traditional weights, levers and pulley moving method. To use the McDonalds cashier insult is a bad stereotype, since genius and truth spring as much from idiots and the lowly as much as the wealthy and elite-schooled; it’s a very wrong stereotype.

Another reason it’s not wise to make fun of McDonald’s employees, is because, supposing for all you know you’re making fun of someone who only has a part time job is an employee there and yet has expertise in some field of physics or some other science field, like logic, theology, maths or physics (and does it take a great imagination to consider that many McDonald’s cashiers are college or university students in some science class, including physics?) and may even be a paid teacher of any of those, maybe even a theoretical physics teacher, which is are types people like yourself usually exalt above as superior persons. And in this so called “bad world economy” it’s very likely that many people of prestige have some second lowly job, especially being that theoretical science isn’t an easy job to profit from. If you hadn’t noticed Michio does a lot of interviews, do you think he does them all for free? Someone of prestige with many high degrees could have some second lowly job just to get rid of the last few payments they own on a loan or to get a loan, or make the final payments on whatever or to help care for a new baby or adopted son or daughter they have to live comfortably.

Back to Leedskalnin: you could reasonably think of him as a type of Boyd Bushman, because tho he was able to pull off amazing things, he didn’t say anything useful enough to be able to duplicate his feats, instead he gave a theory which was so vague (like Boyd) it amounted to vain showing off. That is the case with Boyd. Boyd, Leedskalnin, Maurice Ward (supposed inventor of Starlite) and Hutchison are, in comparison to the inventor Morgado, the inventor of the MYT Engine and Tesla useless people, and shameful even.

Rather than mocking McDonald’s cashiers as being stupid and unreliable for scientific truth and as none being people with any expertise in science, it’s Mainstream Scientists, including any atheist, humanist, pagan, Armininan, New Age, Hindu, Buddhist or Muslim ones, who should be mocked, who should be called “kooks” or “crackpots”. But you shouldn’t say that to just anyone’s face, because you wouldn’t want to unnecessarily insult someone or provoke a violent person to harm you or someone else. They should be called those things if they teach their bad beliefs or endorse them by name, like saying, “Yes being a Muslim is good” or “There’s nothing wrong with being a pagan” or “Fundamentalism is bad (fundamentalism is just belief in basic teachings of the Bible necessary for being a good Christian).” I’m not saying that just because someone is a kook or crackpot or stupid that they can’t come up with anything useful or don’t do anything useful or that nothing useful can be learned from accidental discoveries they make, just that any severely bad teachings they have or believe would make them those things, as opposed to simply having some lowly job at McDonald’s and/or not having any degrees or prestigious awards or prestigious scientists agreeing with you or some popular people.

Also, to attack someone as having illegitimate critique skill or judgment merely because they work at McDonald’s, or as cashier or some other “lowly” job there is called an “Ad Hominem Fallacy”, which is when you personally insult someone for something they do that is far from directly related to what they arguing about, merely talking about or endorsing.

Related Articles:

Autodidactic Hall of Fame – Self-educated People Who’ve Made a Difference

6 Uneducated Amateurs Whose Genius Changed the WorldRead more: 6 Uneducated Amateurs Whose Genius Changed the World (Cracked.com)

1 Cor 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
1 Cor 1:26 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth.
1 Cor 1:27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;
1 Cor 1:28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,
1 Cor 1:29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. – ESV

Psalm 8:2: From out of the mouths of infants and sucklings you have established strength on account of your adversaries, to cause the silence of the enemy and vengeful foe.

Matthew 11:25: “Jesus said, ‘I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from wise and intelligent people and have revealed them to infants.'”

John 7:24: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”

UPDATE: Recently Boyd Bushman was shown in a video as having “disclosed” that aliens and their ships were here on Earth at Area 51 and “24 hours a day working on UFOs”. In one picture he showed what was to me an obviously fake alien, and used poorly made photographs to use as his evidence. The cameraman interviewing him seemed to be doing a deliberately poor job interviewing him and even keeping the camera in focus or used a deliberately poor camera. One commenter on Youtube.com showed an obscenely titled link to a model statuette of the same fake-looking alien Boyd had shown in one of his crappy pictures. Even though that was pointed out in the comments, the one doing so did not get any votes up as far as I could see, rather those praising Boyd and/or while criticizing his and the camera man’s method of presentation were the ones getting votes up. Why is Youtube filled with such gullible idiots? I wonder if the Internet naturally attracts narcissists and those who are gullible and wanting attention, and those who are not gullible and attention-craving abstain from wasting their time voting, in general, to their hurt in many cases. I say that because votes and comments can persuade others to be stupid and evil or wise in a morally good way.

Boyd Bushman Fake Alien (Doll) Hoax Picture Boyd Bushman Fake Alien (Doll) Hoax Picture Comparison
Obviously a doll, and in the second comparison picture it’s obvious the “teeth and smile” are jpeg noise from picture compression. Being that the keywords on the tinypic.com were the same obscene ones as the page of the full picture of the doll it’s obvious this is from the hoaxer, having a laugh at everyone.

By the way, if anyone does want to invest their time or money in a real anti-gravity saucer project, one you can see being made in real time, consider funding my project at http://gofundme.com/deception, which some asshole/s on Craigslist keep flagging away. If you have any mechanical engineering skills and knowledge of physics and would like to apply for a job helping to build this craft attraction go ahead and email me.

Categories: Logic Fallacies Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Liberal Scientists Murder Healthy Baby Natasha, Because ”She Was Handicapped”

February 27, 2012 Leave a comment

Aborted baby lived 45 minutes, but still deliberately terminated by doctors.

2/27/2012 5:52 P.M:

I had a realization about five minutes ago: If abortion supporters justify abortion, the murder of a baby on the inside of another human’s body by saying, “A woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body” or “We have the right to…” then using that logic shouldn’t they also approve of murdering people outside of their own body, since they say they can do what they want with their body? Because doing whatever you want would include ANYTHING, not just anything TO YOUR OWN BODY. And so they should also approve of taking whatever drug we want to, eating whatever we want to, suicide and external torture of others, murder (murdering people outside the body), torture and death penalties. Further evidence of their contradictory justification and hypocrisy is if they claim they simply have been poorly wording their justification and meant what I stated here, which is “OWN BODY” they would be evidently lying, since pro-abortionists ALWAYS SUPPORT using ANOTHER HUMAN to murder the baby OF ANOTHER HUMAN, in other words, using someone elses help, like a practiced abortionist or using the help of the one who got them pregnant if no one else will. No pro-choice person as far as I know in my my long experience in life, has ever said, “You should abort your own baby by yourself.” Although I am sure there are people who though supporting “a woman’s right to choose” who wouldn’t, and who would say something like, “You let yourself get pregnant, be responsible for killing your own baby then and don’t involve someone else who had nothing to do with it, except probably in the case of rape.” But, I no of no one who has ever said that, so I am confident to say all abortion-supporters are contradictory hypocrites who support the worst kind of murder: murdering a defenseless baby while it’s still being formed within it’s mother. Not even attempting to kill a child who can run, and who can be argued has already committed some bad sins, by being unthankful to its parents after a few years of kindness, and being a trouble-maker, but a baby who has barely had a chance to live, who hasn’t even breathed air yet.

Further, it’s now a known fact that most people abort a baby out of “convenience,” making these abortion-supporters all the more evil, since the majority of them aren’t doing it for some noble reason like they might want Christians to think, like, “To keep the population down, so others can live without starving and being in great pain, and to keep people from living miserably from being very poor and being oppressed by the rich,” no, it’s so, “I can live more comfortably.” So, a brutal murder of the most least bad humans of all so you can afford more barbecue or tofu, soy milk, have more carefree sex, parties, relaxation, sleep, an easier time in school and a better social life, just forget about the person you murdered or about to be murdered never getting to experience those things on Earth. And how convenient for the ones that believe in reincarnation: “It’ll be someone elses problem, and eventually someone won’t abort them and they will be born to a well-off family or someone who is willing to suffer dealing with a kid.” And some, especially atheists, justify baby-murder as “punishment of rapists” (and rapists care? all rapists? rapists aren’t interested in sex it’s about making babies?). Using that logic how can they then bash God and the Bible for “punishing the children for the sins of their fathers” as he once did, or punishing anyone to teach someone else “a lesson” or scare them or punish them somehow so they won’t “sin” again? And how hypocritical for the abortion supporters who condemn capitalism and living an “excessive” life-style and who believe in being one with nature, who justify abortion for “convenience”; I’m sure hypocrites like that exist because I encounter incredibly stupid, hypocritical and contradictory people often. There is another point of hypocrisy with pro-choicers: Why do they say, “It’s a woman’s right to choose” rather than “It’s a female’s right to choose” being that as far as I’ve read and heard, they also support the right of a 12 year old to abort her baby. And being that they support that, and being that many of them also support homosexual (gay and lesbian) preteen sex, shouldn’t they also support the right of pre-teens to have sex whenever they want to, and with anyone of any age? Why y if they can “choose their own sexuality, have sex with the same sex while still a preteen, and brutally murder their own baby while it’s even still inside of them without their parents consent” would it be “a sin” or “immoral” or “unethical” or “bad karma” as all these confused and confusing groups say, who can hardly get along with each other at times, draw the line at a pre-teen or teen having sex with someone one or two years older or younger or much older or younger, at some age difference that they can’t agree on? Many don’t even realize that marrying age laws differ from state to state and country to country, and that they simply believe what they do due to cult-like brainwashing and blindly and arbitrarily following perverted old men and women in the government (and the lobbyists who bribe them) who hate them or believe that they are superior to them. They sure do love to oppose them though when these old perverted men when it comes to religion in public and private (free speech issues), same-sex sexuality issues, saving “nature” and baby-killing (and baby killing is okay for many liberal “save the trees, chickens, cows and Lady Gaga” people), but uh oh, bad if a kid wants to have sex with an adult. And many conservatives, libertarians and liberals think or say they think that that isn’t possible, maybe because they’ve been living in underground caves watching CNN, Fox News or Nickelodeon all day and were ugly all throughout their childhood and young adult years and their parents had them playing with stupid toys or studying all day. Either they are pretending they don’t think it’s possible out of some collective paranoia, or they really are that stupid, ignorant and unaware of the obvious. And why for those who call preteens and people up to 21 even, “kids” do they approve of them doing drugs, aborting, and having sex, but just not with someone some arbitrary number of years younger or older than them?! And if they are so against Christians judging others, and saying who should be able to have sex with who, let alone murdering a bay being right or not, why then do they often become infuriated at the thought of a “kid” having sex with an adult or even just flirting with one, or “worse”, if the adult flirts back or allows the kid to have sex with them? Why the crazy standards? Can anyone explain away all these hypocritical standards and judgments? Only a stupid, arrogant, evil person who didn’t bother to read this article carefully would believe they could.

Clearly, to those who aren’t spiritually blind, pro-abortionists have exchanged God for temporary comfort and truth for ignorant “bliss” and have seared their conscience and deluded themselves into thinking to murder the innocent for whatever reason is better than being inconvenienced and struggling in life, and as a result are callous, cold-hearted, shallow and deeply confused.

Categories: abortion, homosexuality, Homosexuals, junk science, karma, liberalism, liberals, Mainstream Science, preteen and teen sexuality, sexuality Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Two Mainstream Science Geniuses Call Skeptic Mainstreamers “Brainwashed”

November 3, 2011 Leave a comment

The Mind, Physics and a “Breakthrough” Theory of Everything

On the radio show Coast to Coast AM, on the second half of the show today (not the upcoming one today), were two Mainstream Science guests and scientific geniuses. George Noory was the host who interviewed them. Here are the biographies of these two scientists:

Bio on Dr Vernon Neppe

Vernon M . Neppe MD, PhD(Med), FRSSAf, FFPsych(SA), FRCPC, MMed (Psych), DipABPN (Psychiatry; Geriatric Psychiatry; Forensic Psychiatry), DABFM, DABFE, DABPS (Psychopharmacology), FACFE, LMACFE, MB, BCh, DPsM , BA is Director of the Pacific Neuropsychiatric Institute in Seattle, WA, Adjunct Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO and formerly Director, Division of Neuropsychiatry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Dr Neppe has contributed internationally in the specialties of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Neurology, Psychopharmacology, Forensic Psychiatry, Anomalistic Psychology and Epileptology. He also is an author, professional speaker, playwright and philosopher. His books on brain medications include Cry the Beloved Mind: A Voyage of Hope and Innovative Psychopharmacotherapy as well as The Psychology of Déjà Vu.

His listings include editions of Americas Top Doctors, Whose Who in the World, Best Doctors in America, Two Thousand Notable American Men, Five Thousand Personalities of the World, Five Hundred Leaders of Influence, Great Minds of the 21 st Century and Americas Top Psychiatrists. He was an International Man of the Year, received a Millennium Medal of Honor, and has recently been honored for his scientific contributions by being possibly the first USA based physician to be elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of South Africa. He has written more than two hundred publications, and lectured in a dozen countries on four continents and at about 90% of the medical schools in the USA. He was educated in South Africa where he obtained both his primary Medical and PhD degrees, and at Cornell University.

Dr Vernon Neppe founded the PNI in Seattle, WA in late 1992. Dr Neppe also does extensive forensic consultations, and records review but does not do criminal medicolegal work.

Bio on Dr. Edward R. Close PhD, PE

Dr. Close studied physics, math, philosophy, and creative writing at Central Methodist College, receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree in Math and Physics in 1963. He spent one year in the graduate physics program at the University of Missouri at Rolla and one year in the environmental engineering PhD program at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. Additional studies were completed at UCLA, UC Davis, Case Western Reserve and elsewhere. He completed his thesis and received his PhD in environmental science and engineering in 1988.

The focus of Dr. Close’s work is the integration of science and consciousness studies. As a physicist, his areas of research are relativity and quantum mechanics. Since 1959, his exploration of the physical sciences has been enhanced by the intensive practice of consciousness expansion techniques. A member of several professional organizations, MENSA, the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE) and Self-Realization Fellowship (SRF), he has traveled extensively and taught mathematics, physics, and meditation techniques. He has recently accepted the position of Science Editor for Telicom, the journal of the ISPE.

Edward R. Close, PhD, PE, is a recognized expert in environmental science, has served as environmental advisor to more than fifteen Fortune 500 companies, and has more than forty years experience in the environmental field. He is the author of numerous technical papers and five nonfiction books, including Nature’s MoldRx – The Non-Toxic Solution to Toxic Mold (2007), as well as the DVD: Toxic Mold – A Breakthrough Discovery.

Dr. Close has more than forty years’ experience in environmental planning and management, engineering, hydrology, hydrogeology, and industrial-waste management with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 1965-1978, and private consulting firms, 1978-1995. While working as a research hydrologist in the Water Resources Division of the USGS, he was chosen from hundreds of employees, nationwide, to become one of the seven scientists selected to form the first Department of Interior, Systems Analysis Mathematical Modeling Group, where he worked with internationally known environmental mathematicians, including Dr. Nickolas Matalas, Dr. John Bredehoft, and Dr. Benoit Mandelbrot.

In 1995, Dr. Close opened Close Environmental Consultants in Southeast Missouri. He continues to serve clients that range from Fortune 500 companies, mid-size and small local businesses to individual property owners as principal consultant with EJC Enterprises. He has worked in eleven U.S. States, on the island of Puerto Rico, and in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Dr. Close is a member of numerous professional societies, including the Indoor Air Quality Association (IAQA), the National Society of Professional Engineers, the American Water Resources Association, the National Water Well Association, the American Institute of Hydrology, the Cape Area Engineers, MENSA, and the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE). He currently serves as Science Editor for “Telecom,” an ISPE quarterly periodical, is a Registered Professional Engineer (PE) in the State of Missouri, a Registered Environmental Site Assessor, a Registered Well Installer, and a Registered Professional Hydrologist.

Dr. Close has on-going interests in language, linguistics, symbolic logic, and consciousness studies. One of his books, Transcendental Physics (1997), explores the interface of modern physics and consciousness and has been cited in numerous publications including Dr. David Stewart’s book The Chemistry of Essential Oils Made Simple.

——————————–

This is the Coast to Coast AM show description (from coasttocoastam.com) of the show they were on:

Consciousness & Reality
Date: 11-02-11
Host: George Noory
Guests: Dr. Vernon Neppe, Edward R. Close, Jerome Corsi

Neuropsychiatrist Dr. Vernon Neppe and physicist Dr. Edward Close discussed their work integrating science, mathematics, and philosophy with consciousness studies to arrive at their new paradigm shifting model– “Reality Begins with Consciousness.” Neppe (who appeared in the 2nd & 4th hours) pointed out how every ‘Theory of Everything,’ such as put forth by Einstein and Hawking, has had major failings because they haven’t factored in consciousness into the equation. He described three levels of consciousness– neurological, psychological, and a kind of meta-consciousness which pulls in information from all sources, and “technically would not require a brain…and implies infinity.”

Meta-consciousness suggests that life-after-death is a reality, as consciousness can exist outside the brain, Neppe noted. “In our model, we cogently argue that time is not just one linear dimension that goes past, present, future, but that there are several different dimensions of time,” and all of existence could be said to exist at the same time because “we have an extended amount of time that always is, was, and will exist,” he continued. Dr. Close (appearing in the third hour) commented that scientific views have been limited for many years, and required a more expansive paradigm or framework.

Using mathematics, Close developed his theory of “dimensional extrapolation,” which suggests the existence of additional dimensions– at least 10, which coincides with what has been said in string theory. There are three dimensions of time, three of space, and three of consciousness, and a 10th dimension that is “transfinite,” he detailed. Humans inhabit all of these dimensions, “however there are also other forms of consciousness that inhabit some of the dimensions” that may or may not impinge on what we experience through our physical senses, he explained. “The universe itself is conscious and intelligent and has an innate order to it,” Neppe added.

According to these two scientists, there was nothing that ruled out the existence of God in their Theory of Everything. One of them also said that their science colleagues were afraid to talk about UFOs because they were afraid their reputation might be damaged and would not get the support they wanted or were getting from the University they were in. I don’t remember if these scientists believed in intelligent design or not. They did however believe in UFOs and psychic phenomenon, and said that those scientists who denied such things were real were brainwashed. And if you read their biography, it’s clear that these are not simple idiots but among the top “wise” of the world. One of them is even an expert in psychology, brain medicines, and even on how the brain physically works! So if they are saying Mainstream Scientists are (in general), brainwashed, and you combine that statement with the claims of scientists who believe in Intelligent Design and/or the Bible and ones who are also accomplished ones (and combine that with the former atheist champion Antony Flew‘s statements against atheism); it puts Mainstreamers in a very bad light and is strong evidence that they are not trustworthy with philosophical or religious truths, let alone ones discovered through the classical scientific method of Mainstreamers. <a href="http://amzn.to/thoeryofeverything“>Dr. Close published a book this Theory of Everything. I’m not sure why Neppe isn’t included as at least an editor since I thought I heard them say they both worked on this theory, or maybe Neppe just “peer reviewed” it. The show can be heard on Youtube, just click here. It’s sad that it will take seeing God himself and being before the entrance to Hell before some will finally believe in God and his justice, and by that time, there will be no more mercy, no more offer of salvation.

Categories: Mainstream Science Cult, philosophy, Theories of Everything (TOEs) Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FTL: New Evidence Against Relativity… From CERN

September 23, 2011 1 comment

[There is an update to this story, the experiment has been repeated and succeeded again click here to read about it]

Faster than light? CERN findings bewilder scientists
By Eryn Brown and Amina Khan, Los Angeles Times
9/23/2011

Physicists at the lab near Geneva say they’ve observed subatomic particles moving faster than the speed of light. If confirmed, it would defy Einstein — and upend our understanding of physics.

The globe of the CERN laboratory shines outside Geneva. A team of experimental physicists there says it has recorded neutrinos traveling 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light. Albert Einstein had the idea. A century of observations have backed it up. It’s one of the cornerstones of physics: Nothing travels faster than the speed of light.

But now a team of experimental physicists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, known as CERN, says that one exotic particle possibly can.

The scientists reached their conclusion after sending streams of tiny, subatomic particles called neutrinos hurtling from an accelerator at CERN outside Geneva to a detector at the Gran Sasso National Laboratory in Italy, about 450 miles away.

The neutrinos seemed to get there too soon — 60 nanoseconds too soon, give or take — than they should if they’d been traveling at the speed of light.

That slight edge, if it holds up under scrutiny, has enormous implications for our understanding of the laws of nature, physicists said – More here

“Basically, all of special relativity would be wrong,” said Drexel University physics professor Dave Goldberg, referring to Einstein’s 1905 theory establishing that light travels at a constant speed, regardless of how fast an observer is traveling, and that nothing in the universe can go faster than it. – More here

More information:

The Great Gravity Probe B Hoax

Faster Than Light? Neutrino Finding Puzzles Scientists

Faster than a Speeding Light Wave

The First Test That Proves General Theory of Relativity Wrong

Was the Speed of Light Faster In the Early Universe?

Speed of Light May Have Varied in the Early Universe

The Decrease in The Speed of Light (Video) Part 1

The Decrease in The Speed of Light (Video) Part 2

The Decrease In the Speed of Light – An Update On Developments

Reports of the Death of Speed of Light Decay are Premature

On the Constancy of the Speed of Light

Starlight and Time

‘Government Really Not Good at Keeping Secrets’ and Other Logical Fallacies of Skeptics

August 16, 2011 Leave a comment

For the second time this week I’ve heard the logical fallacy that the (US) government has no secrets because it’s not good at keeping secrets. If that isn’t circular reasoning than what is? I just heard it repeated again on Coast to Coast AM by Ronald L. Mallett. The show edition is described by the Coast site as,

Time Travel
Date: 08-15-11
Host: George Noory
Guests: Ronald L. Mallett, Lauren Weinstein

Physics Professor Ronald Mallett will discuss his breakthrough research on time travel, as well as share an update on the latest in theoretical physics.

Ronald was responding to a caller who asked if the government was hiding a secret program on time travel. Ronald then immediately contradicted himself by saying, “Whatever the human mind can think of, it can and will achieve.” In other words: “IF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT CONCEIVES OF A WAY TO KEEP SECRETS THEN IT WILL SUCCESSFULLY DO SO.” So, once again, a non-Christian, a Mainstreamer Cultist severely contradicts himself in a breath without even realizing it, and if he did realize it, he should have corrected himself, but failed and allowed others to be deceived. Some might ask, “What does that matter?” It matters because it helps people to be gullible and naive that they can believe whatever the government says, which is utter nonsense. The statement that the government is bad at keeping secrets is also nonsensical in that it contradicts itself, because it’s implying to opposite things: that the government can’t do anything in secret, and the opposite: when it does do something in secret it’s exposed right away. That is what people mean but are vague. Vague as in, how long can’t the government keep a secret? Ronald made it clear, “really bad” at it, so, not long. But what is the evidence that the government can’t do so? That’s also a logical fallacy because it’s the same as saying, “I know that the government can’t keep a secret for long because because it can only do so for a short time because it’s bad at keeping secrets” but saying so without evidence. Ronald is claiming he knows all the secrets and therefore knows all the secret departments of the military, all military secrets, that none have been kept for long, like a year? (vague), everything said in secret by every individual apart of the government, including the FBI, CIA and NSA, and that even when they classify something as above top secret and make UFOs more secret than the atomic bomb (which the military stated it did do), that he would know soon. So then, China and every other country with spies in America must know all the secrets of our government, because it has none, or accidentally reveals it soon after. So can Ronald tell us what the secret craft are that the military has? Can he tell us what happened at Area 51 for the past 40 years? Can he tell us what crashed at Roswell?: Which story out of three conflicting ones that the military gave is correct? What are the names of the many Area 51 workers that are flown and bussed in to Area 51? What are the launch codes for all the nuclear missiles of the USA and what are the names of the ones who possess the launch keys? Ronald’s claim is also logically fallacious and arrogant in another way: he’s negating that any non-government person, no citizen, can find out about the secrets, and only the government and military would in their incompetence or by accident, or that some spy would reveal it (but not a citizen who is spying on behalf of some government like China). In other words: us stupid citizens are stupid, only government and the military is smart and wise, just not smart and wise enough to keep secrets from us… uh wait, but us stupid citizens can’t find out about their secrets because we’re stupid… and there is yet another contradiction from the Royal Mainstream Scientist Ronald Mallett, wannabe time traveler, who’s motivation for going back in time, according to his self-proclaimed Skeptic self, to see his dad again. Can anyone say “shallow”? How much more needs to be pointed out about the Mainstream cult to show that they are very bad at logic in general, and that also effects their effectiveness in scientific research, and therefore can’t be trusted with their fundamental(ist) claims: There was a Big Bang billions of years ago, we evolved from some simple creatures that were created by lightning hitting chemicals (able to reproduce and think and sense what was around them), and that after billions of years, turned into (super complex and much more intelligent animals and super intelligent) humans, with many characteristics (that can’t be reasonably explained without resorting to God as having designed us), and that aliens can’t get here, because… well one guest evolutionist this or last year, on Coast to Coast AM said because it would be too coincidental. And it would be too coincidental that they showed up during this time of our evolution. But why? If there are trillions of planets with possible life and some aliens evolved to become intelligent much sooner then us, then why wouldn’t there be any chance of “just another planet out of trillions” being visited by some alien out of those trillions? Mainstream scientists truly are confused and forgetful of what they study, ever learning and never able to reach the truth. I think that if they would stop obsessing on money and selfish and shallow desires they wouldn’t be so “scatter-brained” and forgetful.

I’ve also been noticing, that recently (others would probably say often) Noory has been asking really stupid questions. During the show he asked Mallet if the time travel he was working on would be MENTAL or physical. What the Hell kind of question is that? George was asking “is your time travel device going to be metaphysical and use spiritual time travel”, because the mind is a spiritual thing, it’s not material. That’s a fact by the way, you materialists, because awareness for example, which you must have a mind for, is not a physical thing, just as actions and information are not physical things. But Ronald Mallett obviously was not talking about a spiritual device or one that manipulated the mind. I wonder if George prepares questions long before the show starts. It doesn’t seem he does, otherwise his questions wouldn’t be so dumb. But, at least God lets me use them to teach profound, deep and useful things.

There was also something else that Ronald implied which is typical of how Mainstreamers, and which shows how their morality leads to things like the 500+ million people killed by atheists (not all atheists obviously): when he said that humans can achieve anything they can think of, he was answering the same caller I mentioned earlier who brought up a stupid example for his question, which was that Suparman’s dad said that going back in time was forbidden and so asked Ronald if God ever forbade it (how about read the Bible and study religion idiot, and ask a religious person and not a materialist Mainstreamer?). Ronald, besides saying humans could do whatever they wanted to, said that if we weren’t meant to do something, then God wouldn’t allow it. That answer implies that if child molestation happens and anything that is obviously evil, it’s good or permitted by God, because we were able to do it. That besides being evil reasoning, is also a logical fallacy: if you aren’t doing something then it can be said you aren’t meant to do anything that you aren’t doing. So then it’s also contradictory. And Ronald was implying that to know if something is permitted by God, you should do it, and he surely meant that, because he also said in his answer, and I’m paraphrasing this part till I can listen again to what he said, that it was wrong to not learn and progress.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. – Romans 8:28

Categories: Mainstream Science Cult, Skepticemia, Skepticism, skeptics Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Great Gravity Probe B Hoax: More Evolutionist (Anti-Christian) Fraud

May 13, 2011 1 comment

Sadly, evolutionists have further wrecked science, spreading more lies in the astronomy field, spreading more confusion and causing more scientific and technological stagnation and religious/spiritual confusion as a result. They have done so this time by making false claims about the Gravity Probe B satellite experiment, which in 2008 NASA had made clear was a failed experiment. But now, in March 2011, it’s suddenly a success. Look at how much propaganda was spread by the experimenters:

78 news articles claiming that the GPBSE was a success, and many blogs, including Michio Kaku’s.

Even Wikipedia is spreading the hoax which is evident from the title of the Gravity Probe B experiment picture they placed on the Gravity Probe B page. It says, “Gravity_Probe_B_Confirms_the_Existence_of_Gravitomagnetism.jpg” (the same picture I used for this post). I wonder if that was the original title or if some weasel retitled it.

At this Google knol link here, physics researcher Michael Suede points out why the claim of success and vindication is false, among other reasons for Relativity being false. He claims that the GPB error data was used to produce a positive result, which the geocentrist Malcom Bowden predicted would happen.

If you hate reading or would rather watch videos of evidence against General Relativity, here are some videos on Youtube:

Einstein Was Wrong – Falsifying Observational Evidence Presented

Quasars: Why Einstein Was Wrong

Related Videos and Articles:

Geoncentrism Evidence:

Hidden scientific evidence for geocentrism

Evidence of Geocentrism 1 of 3

Evidence of Geocentrism 2 of 3

Evidence of Geocentrism 3 of 3

Geocentricism – The Orrery

The geocentric Venus-Mars-cycle – animation

Earth, Venus, Sun: Geocentric Orrery

Geocentric Model with Sun and Venus

Geocentric model of the solar system, demonstrating the celestial sphere and epicycles

Morning Meteors Explain Geocentrism

Geocentricity – Satellites + Mach

GEOCENTRISM – Sagnac’s experiment – an animated explanation

Geocentricity explains the seasons

The Static Earth – The Geostationary Model works!

Geocentric Universe – Celestial Poles

GEOCENTRICITY – An animated explanation of “Airy’s Failure”

Galileo – Quadricentennial Myth vs fact

A written rebuttal against the arguments of Los Almos’ Nieto’s arguments against geocentrism

Big Bang Contradictions:

Technical Paper on Plasma Cosmology and Big Bang

The Big Bang Theory–A Scientific Critique

Fast stars challenge big bang origin for dwarf galaxies

Why we’ve got the cosmological constant all wrong (note the comments too)

New Discovery: Dwarf Galaxies May Nix Theory of Dark Matter in the Universe

Faster Than Light? Neutrino Finding Puzzles Scientists

Faster than a Speeding Light Wave

The First Test That Proves General Theory of Relativity Wrong

Was the Speed of Light Faster In the Early Universe?

Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation

Speed of Light May Have Varied in the Early Universe

Copernicus and his Revolutions

The Decrease In the Speed of Light – An Update On Developments

Reports of the Death of Speed of Light Decay are Premature

On the Constancy of the Speed of Light

Starlight and Time

Categories: Astronomy, evolution propaganda, evolution propaganda, Physics Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Holy Invisible Intelligence: ”Grass didn’t exist back then,” say Mainstream Scientists

March 26, 2011 2 comments

Hands off my leaves! Scientists discover sabre-toothed tortoise
by John Hutchinson
3/25/2011/11:05 AM

With its fearsome canines and a mouth filled with teeth, experts could have been forgiven for thinking they’d discovered another great dinosaur predator.

But this prehistoric tortoise is no more predatory than its latter-day relative.

Rather than being a snarling meat-eater this sabre-toothed beast – that lived 260million years ago – feasted on leaves and stems [and the evidence for this is, or should we all just have “blind faith” in whatever you say?].

Odd: Surprised scientists have discovered the remains of a sabre-toothed vegetarian – which was the size of a dog but has an uncanny look of a tortoise about it

The fossilised remains of the creature, known as Tiarajudens eccentricu and which was the size of a large dog, have been discovered in Brazil.

While apparently unnecessary due to it’s vegetarian tendencies, the dagger teeth will have been very much needed to fight off predators and enemies.

Speaking to LiveScience [another Mainstream Science cult], vertebrate paleontologist Juan Carlos Cisneros at the Federal University of Piauí in Teresina, Brazil said: ‘If you asked me how surprised I was about finding this fossil, I can tell you that finding a fossil so bizarre as Tiarajudens eccentricus, a fossil that looks like if it has been made from parts of different animals, is like finding a unicorn.

‘You see it, but you don’t believe it.’

Discovery: The leaf-crunching animal lived 260 million years ago in what is now Brazil – and used his dagger teeth to ward off enemies

Discovery: The leaf-crunching animal lived 260 million years ago in what is now Brazil – and used his dagger teeth to ward off enemies

In addition to the crayon-size saber canines, the entire roof of its mouth was covered with teeth.

Grasses did not exist at that time

SAY WHAT? “GRASS”?! Yeah because that’s way more complex saber-toothed torti and every other animal.. 0_0 What extremist stupidity! Is there no end to the stupid things anti-Christians will say and do? Only gullible, insane, moron or greedy liars only interested in temporary pleasures and making money (which now is also temporary) say extremely stupid things like that. It didn’t exist back then because: “We can’t see it anywhere,” and just like you can’t see the human fossils and footprints (some along with dinosaur footprints) stuck in “millions of years old” rock, coal and sediment, and on and on and on. At least the Huffington Post didn’t make or repeat such a stupid claim, wouldn’t put it past them though. Learn more about ooparts at s8int.com or read Forbidden Archeology (which includes findings from famous evolutionists themselves).

Update 6:05 P.M.

The Grass That Broke the Pseudo-scientists’ Back

I thought dinosaurs DIDN’T east grass cuz there was none around:  Dung Reveals Dinosaurs Ate Grass (And from guess who?: Livescience! And what’s this article date here?: 17 November 2005 Time: 09:01 AM ET? So, you had SIX YEARS to get your lies straight, but are so arbitrary, careless and money-addicted, you still couldn’t do it. That’s what happens when you get addicted to pleasure and lie too much, you contradict yourself, to no end.

MAINSTREAM SCIENTISTS AND ANTI-CHRISTIAN EVOLUTIONISTS:
YOU, ARE, DISCREDITED.

Those who care about the truth, remember it;
those who don’t, lie.

Torture, starvation and death: how American boot camps abuse [young adults]

The result of atheism, Skepticemia (Insanity of Doubt) aka Skepticism, Free Thinkerism aka Liberalism, Wicca, Witchcraft, Satanism aka Luciferianism, Darwinism, Freemasonry, and “Free Will” Christianity, is lies, confusion, sexual perversion, hypocrisy, torture, and brutal cold-hearted murder:

Torture, starvation and death: how American boot camps abuse boys

Tim Reid in Washington

Thousands of teenagers sent to American boot camps have suffered horrific abuse and some have paid with their lives, according to a shocking new report by the US Congress.

The report, presented with harrowing testimony from parents of three teenagers who died at boot camps, comes as a Florida manslaughter trial opened into the death of Martin Lee Anderson, 14. He was filmed being beaten by camp guards minutes before he died, footage seen not only inside the courtroom but on television screens across America.

Click here to continue.