Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Colisicopitus And Why You Should Care If You Have It

I have already detailed what evidence is, but religious people are still failing to comprehend this very basic principle of making claims no matter often it is explained to them. Often the burden of proof is shifted to the ones dismissing the claims made, but without evidence supporting the claim no contradicting evidence can be, or need be, presented to dismiss said claim.


There is a reason they shift the burden like this, it allows them to rationalize the rather idiotic notions and protect their delicate and precarious ideologies from doubt. It is the same reason none of them read their religious books honestly, or at all. Most christians have not once read the bible, no more than what's reprinted in a leaflet handed to them by their preachers.

If they did read it completely and honestly they would have to face just how ridiculous the stories are, and how much the claims contradict rather easily understood facts of reality. It is a pitiful state, and one that is only perpetuated by the christians salesmen, sorry, I mean preachers.

Religion is often described as a snake oil, the adage is very apt. Like snake oil, religion is a cure for an imaginary ailment, and like snake oil, religion never actually cures the ailment it claims to. So the salesmen can continually profit from those poor saps who are so easily fooled by offering a cure for an ailment that cannot be cured due to it's lack of existence.


Consider if someone told you have colisticopitus and they had this medicine made of dragon scales. If you take this medicine and believe it will work you will be cured of this horrible disease, but only this salesman can tell if it's been cured, no doctors or technology can detect or even diagnose it.

You ask what the symptoms are and you are told they are the most horrible things you can imagine, you will experience them many decades from now, but if you don't take the medicine now you will regret it. You ask how you catch it and the salesman says everyone is born with it, this disease is why you have to east food and sleep.


So you hand the salesman your credit card and let him keep charging you every week for a dose of this miracle cure for this horrible ailment that will cause horrible things to you someday in the distant future. You have just joined a religion.

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Republicans Are Not Conservatives

The Republican party in the USA has not been conservative for many decades. Let's look at the ADA first, yes, the Americans with Disabilities Act was a Republican policy that the first George Bush signed in 1990.

This particular law was so intrusive that it opened the doors for many frivolous lawsuits, from people with disabilities, like me. This created a fear in companies, so they started not hiring disabled people as often, using things like credit scores as an excuse. Anyone disabled for a long time will have a horrible credit score, it comes with the disability.

The ADA was never a conservative policy, it was a Republican one. This act alone has caused a lot of USA citizens to fall through the cracks and vanish, even today many still cannot find any real help, and most of us do want to work but this deadly label hangs on us regardless of what we do. Republican supporters love living on the government dole though, it is an art form to them, attack what they enjoy doing to make themselves look superior.

The ADA is just one of many examples, several examples fit into one category; oppressive copyrights. Many voters here are under the misconception that cheaper labor costs are what have made China our source for products. This is not true, those labor costs are balanced out by the expensive shipping costs to get it to the USA.

What makes China appealing for companies is that they don't have the excessively strict copyright laws the USA has. Now both parties are guilty of supporting the laws in the USA that make it impossible to make key components or use vital procedures to make products here, but the Republicans are the ones who should be fighting to balance out these laws and keep them sane.

Conservatives know that oppressive copyrights can destroy an economy, and all true conservatives will oppose copyrights to balance out the liberal desires to protect a person's right to be paid for their work. The Republicans do not do this, because they are funded by some corporations in the USA that produce entertainment.

Yep, Disney and FOX, for example, are two corporations constantly pushing for stricter copyrights. Most music labels and Hollywood do as well. So what damage does this do?

Consider someone finds and formulates a cure for cancer that depends on a particular method of refinement. Getting their money for research back was a good way to encourage such research, so the basic copyright law of a few years was helpful in encouraging advancement. After those few years other companies can produce it and the cost will fall as the supply increases.

That was the idea behind copyright laws, but with the changes made by our government that one company has exclusive rights for that procedure forever. This means that those who need a cure for cancer must pay the company whatever price they decide to charge, for as long as that company exists. Apple and Microsoft take advantage of these copyright laws as well, thus the price hike before Google came up with a marketing strategy for Linux that broke their monopolies.

The Republican funders have a vested interest in copyright laws, they can now produce unpopular garbage and still get paid for the prime entertainment they produced several decades ago.

Sunday, August 10, 2014

The Actual Definition of Biological Evolution



Here it is, an end to the lies and rumors, I will define what biological evolution is and give away the greatest secret scientists have been keeping from the general public. But first, let's look at what biological evolution is not.


Biological evolution is not morphing, one species does not turn into another species in any way. If such a thing did happen most biological theories would have to be radically altered to account for something which defies even the theory of evolution.

Many series of fiction use evolution to describe morphing, usually because the creators did not know better or it just had better response from the target audience. Such a genetic change in an organism would cause the body to be overtaken by cancerous tumors, the physiology would be so chaotic that organs would fail and poisons would be produced instead of the necessary chemicals.


Transitional forms do not look like one organism with the traits of two distinct organisms. I say "look" to mean appear, most small changes would have no change in the organism's appearance. A small change in the DNA is up to several hundred genetic changes, compound/colony species such as humans can and will have more than single celled animals.

In human DNA, upwards of five hundred changes in the DNA will result in less than 0.001% difference in the genetic make up. Each offspring has several hundred mutations in their DNA, most have absolutely no effect either because those markers are "switched off" or the new chemical produced has no effect on the cells.

When a marker or chromosome is "switched off" it means the DNA has a chemical bound to that location which prevents it from acting as a template for other chemicals. DNA is actually pretty simple to understand, it's like a chemical template, that attracts other chemicals in a sequence that causes them to bond then separate and react with other chemicals. The effects of these chemicals are the complex part of genetics, one that we are still working out.


Biological evolution is not one species giving birth to another completely different species. The number of changes required for this would result in a cancerous tumor instead of an offspring. We're talking about at least 1% of the DNA changing before an organism can even be almost another species, many species are separated by more than a 2% difference and can still breed with each other.

What actually defines the species barrier is virtually arbitrary, it depends on the species and how many different single celled organisms make it's whole. The chemicals produced by the DNA interactions determine the compatibility for producing offspring, not the DNA itself. Each cell is made up of chemicals produced by DNA, and incompatible cells, ie chemicals, cannot mingle.


Now, for the moment you have all been reading for, I shall unveil the true definition of biological evolution that is used by the highest levels of academia and scientific research. Be ready to make note of this momentous occasion for you may not likely ever read it again.

Biological Evolution: the change of frequencies of allele within in population.

Stereotypes - The Root of Racism

The problems of racism are obfuscated by really bad arguments, and justified anger and fear. Racism is alive in the USA, though it is less wide spread than the outrage makes it seem.

The latest police misconduct stories have demonstrated that it does still exist, and is fueled by stereotyping. The problem is deeper though, as a culture we tolerate stereotyping "as long as it's not about me." This is giving them permission to stereotype you as well, if one form is valid all forms are seen as valid.

One such example is our worshiping of the opinions of psychiatrists, a profession built on enforcing stereotypes into the population. Psychiatrists are the biggest problem, if you don't fit the stereotype then they get you medicated until you do fit the stereotype. This has caused most people think these stereotypes are accurate as well as perpetuate discrimination of all types.

The police are feeling the full weight of this now, most cops are not bad and many are just as outraged by the actions of those in less advanced locales. But these officers who are outraged are ignored and silenced because they don't fit the stereotype the general public holds.

To end racism, one famous actor said we just need to stop talking about it. This is actually a good idea, but not on the surface. We must continue to talk about the effects of racism to keep our eyes open to it, but we must end all stereotypes for everyone.

That includes stereotypes for gay, transgender, black, white, cop, soldier, actor, everyone. For when one stereotype if acceptable, they all become acceptable. End the discussion by eliminating the source, yes, be rid of psychiatry.

Psychology is science based, psychiatry is woo woo. Psychiatrists are only interested in engineering our society to fit their stereotypes, the very stereotypes that give excuse to cops shooting unarmed black kids, the very stereotypes that give excuse to a group of teens killing a gay man, the very stereotypes that give excuse to consider actors as less intelligent.

Friday, August 8, 2014

Humans Kill For No Reason - The Failure of Counter Arguments

I often here the counter argument about survival instincts of other species causing them to kill without cause, which is completely incorrect. I'll counter the three main examples and lay this matter to rest.

First they often cite chimp or gorilla behavior, the often violent reactions to perceived invaders. There, I just explained why they kill each other without even touching on the science and why this example is not valid. But I'll continue anyway.

Every species has evolved a certain set of traits that help it's survival, not as individuals but as an entire species. Territoriality is one of those very effective traits to help a species, even humans have this trait but I'll get into that at the end. It is a method of ensuring there are enough resources for the group, often maintained by closer relatives and any others who threaten the resources are seen as enemies.

Us failing to see a valid reason for these behaviors is not proof that there is no valid reason. We anthropomorphize far too often, and in doing so we attempt to apply human logic to actions which are often instinctive.

A better example would be how the gorillas treat kittens when there is plenty of resources and security, many videos and stories of this type permeate the internet now. They are kind and gentle, even forgiving to a fault. Remove the instincts and they behave much more humane than most humans.

The second example are male lions killing cubs, another instinctive behavior. Again, that alone demonstrates that it is necessary, they do not have the social structure that allows the luxury of any other behavior, unlike humans. Male lions also do not kill them all, their instinct even has limits.

This behavior allows them to strengthen the pride and keep it stronger. It is a trait resulting in thousands of years of natural selection, because it works to help with their social structure. When placed in a situation which lacks the pressures of the wild, the instinct rarely kicks in, their environment is different and favors different traits.

So yes, both of those examples are not relatable to human logic and human caused suffering. They are both instinctive and cause by environment, by altering the environment the instinct is not triggered and they do not harm others without reasons easier for humans to comprehend. So stop anthropomorphizing before coming up with some counter argument.

The third, and I saved the best for last, is the domestic felines' tendency to play with their prey. Another example of anthropomorphizing, and one that is regularly misused. The "toying" is actually caused by a suppressed instinct to hunt, we selectively bred them like this so it's our own fault anyway.

When in the wild, felines have to battle for food, they have to chase and strategize to capture their meals. We selected the most playful felines for hundreds of years, playful being how we viewed this instinct, and bred them to a point in which this instinct is no longer bound to the need for food.

Yes, we made domestic felines sadistic to suit our own desires. We altered an instinct that was refined by natural selection without considering the long term consequences of this genetic engineering. There are many more examples of this problem in other domestic species and even ourselves.

So thus is not an example of animals killing needlessly, it is an example of why genetic engineering needs to be more scientific than it once was.

As humans we have one rare trait, seen in only a few other animals, it is the ability to alter our own instincts through knowledge, understanding, and willpower. We have no excuse to harm any other animal without a good reason, none. This us very important because of our population growth, too many humans causing unnecessary harm will destroy the ecosystems and make the planet uninhabitable for our own species.

We needs these other animals to survive, plain and simple. Nature needs the diversity to ensure the survival of these other animals. Our interference in any way will always cause more harm than good.

We have engineered some species for our food supply, there is not need to hunt the wild species now. So yes, humans are the only animal that causes unnecessary harm.

GMO, Homeopathy - The Real Scams

"All natural," "organic," and "artificial" are both misnomers, for much the same reason. Better descriptives would be "unprocessed," "processed," and "manufactured." Let's use the medicine as the example here as I have been facing a few homeopaths and anti-GMO folks recently who could benefit from this lesson.

Yes, all of the chemicals we use in medicine are found in various other organisms, primarily plants. These chemicals rarely manufactured for pharmaceuticals, a claim I often hear from homeopaths, yet even if they were manufactured there would be no difference from those found in plants.

There is a huge difference in the compounds though, and this difference is why homeopathic medicines have, at least, twice the number of side effects. The processed chemicals are mixed only with inert agents, to preserve the chemical structures when stored in pill forms. These inert agents have no side effects, and are most often sugar.

For a plant with the same chemical you have at least three or four additional active ingredients, in pill form you still have the inert agents processed chemicals have as well. These additional active ingredients offer more side effects and a larger risk of drug interaction.

Now here's the real problem, the manufactured dosage is scientifically determined based on body mass and physiology, very little guess work done. The homeopathic remedies are miniscule dosages of the desired chemical, and not scientifically tested nor managed, mostly guess work.

Most homeopathic remedies have less then 100th of a percent of the desired active ingredient, the majority is a collection of undesired (often unknown) active ingredients that can alter you physiology in unpredictable ways. This is only the beginning of the problems, mind you.

Many homeopaths will tell you to take something that has no actual benefits to your ailment as well. They will cite studies that were either inconclusive or incorrectly reported as supportive evidence to convince you it's a good idea. This is your cue to ask for a real doctor.

Now, back to the processed pharmaceuticals. Most often they process the plants and remove all the undesired chemicals, leaving only the active ingredient you need. Lately we have been improving our chemical technologies and are manufacturing many of the chemicals from scratch.

Now, the manufactured ones are no different from the processed or unprocessed chemicals, they all have the same atoms. The manufactured ones have a huge benefit, less risk of an unwanted active ingredient getting into the mix.

The reason I mentioned anti-GMO in the beginning is because this is the same thing they do for pesticides and herbicides that are demonized, the pesticides and herbicides labeled as "organic" are actually worse, they are indiscriminate poisons with a lot of undesired active ingredients. The manufactured pesticides and herbicides are targeted poisons, they only kill what is needed and leave the rest unharmed.

The next time some quack or nut tells you that "big pharma" is out for a profit, ask them how much they paid for their Russian roulette style medicine, chances are they paid three to ten times what a processed medicine costs. Then ask them to list off the possible side effects for laughs.

Thursday, August 7, 2014

Social Media, Activism, and Justice - Our Greatest Achievement

Social media has altered the face of the global society in so many profound ways, yet I still hear and see people saying negative things about it. Not to say there are no flaws in this form of communication, but whenever I rarely hear or see a valid flaw being mentioned.

So what good is sharing cat photos, posting what you are eating, or just saying hi? A lot more than one may think. Any successful business person will tell you that it is not what you know, but who you know, that determines your success. What you know only determines how much you can potentially contribute to your species and society.

While I was growing up we were constantly reminded of this, one teacher I had even explained that one should learn for the sake of learning, but socialize with the goal of succeeding. I only recently discovered that this was the key to being influential.

The big problem was, when I was in high school, we had no way to connect outside of our neighborhood, and thus became victims of circumstance. Needless to say, I was never very successful.

Today we have an excess of contacts now, people from across the globe and in different societies connecting in ways we never dreamed possible in the past. I have also admitted we have a problem of information overload many times, the next generations are becoming far more capable of adapting to this though.

The benefits really do outweigh the flaws, and a few select people cannot stand the benefits. The largest group are religious leaders, who only stay wealthy when people are ignorant. These religious leaders are even willing to make, and maintain, hundreds of fake follower accounts to spread misinformation. With how much followers pay these con men for working only one day a year, they have plenty of time.

Many in the governments do not like this connection to information either, now everyone in the USA knows the USA is not the best country, and many of the troglodytes in  power were only able to keep power so long as we didn't know any better. So they do everything they can to undermine the flow of information, even restricting those who have access to the internet.

The mainstream media and many outdated corporations are also against this freedom of information, competition they can't compete against. These dinosaurs are dying fast though, and soon they shall be extinct.

So why all the hatred for social media specifically? Activism. Yes, activism has become stronger by social media, and the proof is in the pudding, as they say.

Since activists started utilizing social media, our societies are changing for the better at an unfathomable of rate. Sane environmentalism has cleaned up much of the environment, from better innovations because of more minds working on problems, to demonstrating what information is bad. Even China is now seeing the need to change their ways, and that was a huge stumbling block for a long time.

People wrongly prosecuted or persecuted are getting aid that they need to fight back, like an atheist wrongly placed into a psychiatric hospital for being an atheist or the transgendered teen wrongfully imprisoned. These are but two of the successes I have seen in the last three months, yes, in less than three months we saw justice for these two when in the past it would take years.

The trick of it is to hit corporations and leaders where it hurts, their pocket books. Someone recently asked what good petitions are, they were trying to justify their own bloodlust and desire for war, but the answer is simple, political activism creates lasting effects while violence merely perpetuates violence.

Sea World is one of the recent targets of social media, and the results are encouraging. People are telling companies that support the business of nonhuman species being used for entertainment that their customers won't use their products or services if they do not stop. Many major corporations are pulling support for Sea World now.

With social media we are enacting long term changes without violence or destruction of the very things we want to protect. This is the greatest achievement of humanity to date, organizing our information and choosing our leaders instead of blindly following those we have been told to follow. We get information that would otherwise be hidden from us, from science to business records.

So the next time you hear or see anyone claiming social media is a bad thing, ask them what they have to hide.

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

Animal Rights Cannot Trump the Environment - So Called Sea Shepherds

There is a problem with Greenpeace that I don't like, they don't do enough to actually battle pollution. Recently though, I discovered another group I cannot stand, worse than Greenpeace, they call themselves Sea Shepherds.

Now, you may be asking what is wrong with them, like Greenpeace, they ignore the forest for the tree, forgetting that the very thing they are trying to save needs a clean environment to survive in. Unlike Greenpeace, "Sea Shepherds" also use the fight for animal rights to wage wars, yes, actually destroying ships at sea.

A ship in operation releases a ton of pollution, and companies are seeking alternatives to reduce this. A sunken ship releases even more pollution into the oceans for longer, and more steady, periods of time.

Any marine biologist can attest to this, a sunken ship also disrupts currents and alters delicate sea environs. So what these so called Sea Shepherds are doing is guaranteeing there is no future for the very animals they claim to be saving.

The idiocy does not stop there, they show no concern about the animals we have in jails for our entertainment either. Something many of us animal rights activists are fighting against, and have been battling for a very long time, and making progress on thanks to social media.

Yep, social media is causing more change than any act of violence has ever effected. The reason, overlooked by the terrorist type activists, is that businesses will do what earns a profit, even if it means buying more ships and defending themselves more violently. With social media we destroy the value of what they sell, forcing them to look into more sane products.

So the so called Sea Shepherds' claim that petitions from Greenpeace have no effect are not only baseless, but complete lies. Petitions, combined with social media campaigns, causes long lasting changes for the better. The old adage of "hit 'em where it hurts" illustrates this.

So I have essentially come to the conclusion that these so called Sea Shepherds merely want war, and that is something we do not need as a planet. Yes, as a planet.

The entire ecosystem is as important, not any one single species is necessary for the whole, but the whole is necessary for any individual species. This is why fighting for a better environment is more important than fighting for one species at this time, and why destroying the environment for one species is just plain evil.

There, I said it, the so called Sea Shepherds are evil to the core. Selfish and arrogant, thinking only of themselves and looking for an excuse to harm another animal just for the sake of looking cool.

This does not mean I endorse Greenpeace, but between the two, Greenpeace does some actual good.

Monday, August 4, 2014

Evolution and Why There Are Still Things

Can we stop with the whole "why are there no monkeys turning into humans" and "why are there still monkeys" arguments? Please, it is pathetic now. These kind of arguments only demonstrate a complete lack of education and tell us that you are not interested in facts.

The first one, if any species ever evolved more human traits it would still not be a homosapien, it would be a completely different species from us. This is also assuming that our set of traits is always beneficial for all species in all environs, and that is laughable at best.


Evolution has no direction, none, humans are not the goal. Our particular set of traits contain a lot of vestigial traits and many flaws. It is only by our intelligence that we have over come these flaws before we were driven extinct, and then many still plague us. The real advantage we have is the combination of traits, all our individual traits appear in other species in varying degrees.

Your first hurdle with the argument of why nothing else evolves into humans is that you have to demonstrate evolution is directional. The whale demonstrates how lacking in direction evolution is, so you have a lot of work to do before you can convince anyone you have a point.


The second one is so ignorant I feel pity for those who ask why there are still monkeys. This argument is the same as asking why you have aunts, uncles, cousins, and distant relatives. Yes, monkeys are very distant relatives, chimps are closer, and other apes are practically the same family.


This leads me to the third idiotic argument, sorry religious nuts, we are apes. We are animals, because our traits are what we use to define such things. Evolution has nothing to do with us being apes or animals, this is just basic biology.

Sunday, August 3, 2014

What it is Not - The Brain

Often when trying to improve our world we fall into a trap of saying what something is not, instead of seeking actual solutions. I find myself falling into this same trap, I know what is not a green city, but have few answers as how to improve things.

The reasons for this are because of how our brains learn. Typically described as a difference engine, the brain learns more from mistakes and errors than from being correct. Because of this, we tend to notice the flaws before we notice the advantages.

I recently read that they were working on "spray on" solar cells, to make it possible for any surface to be made into a solar panel. I love this idea, and it is the solution to why I don't like solar or wind farms. Spraying the outside of all the buildings is a perfect way to avoid claiming more land space.

To find such solutions, a person must rewire their brains to focus more on possible solutions, enter the inventor. Inventors are capable of learning from their mistakes, as well as able to see successes. They either have a rare trait, or have broken free of the reptile brain more than others.

So we return to the difference engine, the reason we have an easier time seeing what is wrong instead of what is right. When we make a mistake, the brain notices that the result was not desirable, so it alters the neural pathway values so the next time it encounters that same event a slightly different response is generated.

The structure of the brain results in similar inputs following similar paths, so when one is adjusted it effects the outcomes of other stimuli. But what happens when an outcome is desirable? Well, there is an increase in the chance of that same response happening. This means that there is a larger number of possible "bad" pathways for any stimuli recorded than good.

Think of it this way, when facing five doors and no one tells you what is behind them you open the first and see a pile of trash blocking the way. The next one you open you find a bunch of alligators. Then the third one you try opens to a place you feel safe.

The next time you come to these same doors you are more likely to open the one you know leads to a safe place than to try one of the two you don't know yet. This demonstrates the difference engine's effect on our perception on the world.

This also explains the sad state of affairs in the world today. We see many people simply unwilling to alter their behaviors, remaining with what they see as working out safe enough for them. We need to, as a species, break away from this pattern of comfort, to break away from the difference engine, and learn to make ourselves uncomfortable for the sake of advancement and learning.

So every month, try to find something you have always been afraid to do, something which has a small risk of hurting you or making you uncomfortable. Seek out the new things, new ideas, and new frontiers to explore. Expand your mind so it no longer dwells on the flaws and failures.

I have been taking this adventure since the beginning of the year, seeking out new things to try every month. Because of it I have found many new foods, friends, and experiences that make my life better. Post your stories in a blog, or record them on camera, encourage our future generations.