Dream A Little Dream

I recently replied to an ABCTales story which started out with the following quote from Dick Dawkins. "Religion is a insult to human dignity. Without it you have good people doing good things and you have evil people doing evil things but, for good people to do evil things, it takes religion." Richard Dawkins Typical simplistic black and white thinking but it could be true... Science is the main religion nowadays and scientists invented all the world’s WMD! I wouldn't suggested they were evil though - simply misguided. Ah, that must be what Dawkins' means when he says good people doing evil things... misguided. Dawkins has a big chip on his shoulder... not good for a scientist or a balanced opinion. I suppose he doesn’t see trying to take away people's faith and hopes and replace them with one of his myopic theories as evil or cutting up lab animals, LD50 or making them smoke hundreds of fags as a day! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose Ironic if he is reincarnated as a lab rat :O) Good and evil are relative to what you believe and Dawkins believes in Dawkins :O) I didn’t think any more of it until I happened upon a video about the Anti-Christ. It insisted that there was not one single anti-Christ but many and that they were to be recognised not by being apparently ‘evil’ but by their denial of God. The video maintained that John’s ‘Revelations’ which most people think of when they hear anti-Christ actually predicts two anti-Christ’s. It wasn’t until the video started talking about people being swayed by the miracles of the ‘Beast’ that it occurred to me that the only well publicised miracle are the so-called miracles of science. Maybe Mr Dawkins is more representative of scientific thinking that I had thought but I hope not. http://richarddawkins.net/archive/videos/latest At least it is reassuring to note that he was FORMERLY Professor for Public Understanding of Science at Oxford. I have always been of the opinion that science was open minded and that it was searching to understand the Universal Laws that govern the Galaxy. Since there is at least as much chance that these Laws were imposed as happened by accident (somehow arose out of chaos by an unknown principle) then, at the very least, it seems just as probable that there is a God as that there is not. Dawkins is blaming human nature on God but surely that is a consequence of ‘free will’ and it’s hard to blame the last two great World Wars on religion. It is also hard to see how communist countries that have no religion are superior to those countries which do. People are people and they will always find an excuse to explain their selfish wants and desires and influence others to support them - isn’t this how wars arise? Blaming it all on religion is like blaming global weather change on science. It is probably true but only because science is seen as the innovation of technology… but that innovation is not the real culprit it is how people choose to use technology. As we know, it is often used to kill, subdue and spy on us all - but that is not the fault of science rather those who feed and manipulate our paranoia to convince us that all this is necessary and then attempt to blame it all on Religion, or Communism, or Terrorism, or what ever the favourite flavour of the fascist monthly is!

You can be sure that the Emperor must be wearing clothes because he always has and in fact he has never looked better... The rare reports that he looks naked are due to the fact that some uneducated eyes have not quite learned to see the full glory of the subtle yet sublime Starshine ™ cloth that not only keeps the Emperor looking splendid but also automatically keeps his body temperature at optimum. It has been noted, however, that the result of negative thinking by the ignorant causes a local quantum field reversal within the immediate vicinity of the ignorance which interacts with the invisible force field resulting in the Starshine ™ cloth appearing to be transparent... THIS HAS BEEN SOLVED BY ONLY ALLOWING IGNORANT PEOPLE TO LOOK AT THE EMPEROR WHEN THEY ARE WEARING A BLINDFOLD. However, we do, of course, tell them what they would be seeing were they not ignorant. The initial reports of people seeing ‘goose pimples’ were again reports from the ignorant who were simply seeing an optical illusion caused by the effect of sunshine on the Dark energy flowing through the cloth and interacting with spontaneously generated micro, mini-black holes used in the process of reclaiming the energy used to create the Starshine™ effect in the first place :O)

It’s interesting that Dawkins chooses the 'Parrots The Universe And Everything' to support his view of evolution because the Kakapo, as Adams explains it, only excels at being bad at sex and it is very difficult to argue that a ‘blind’ survival of the fittest would somehow realise that the fittest for survival were actually the birds worst at sex. Note that I’m not arguing that being bad at sex wasn’t a survival characteristic I’m just asking how natural selection could know that! The problem with believing a theory is that you tend to unintentionally make things fit it. No-one seems to consider that the Kakapo parrots might simply not want to have children to live in the hostile environment that they now face! http://richarddawkins.net/videos/475715-douglas-adams-parrots-the-univer... Perhaps more importantly, can we parrot Kakapo and learn to be bad at sex too - or are we going to become extinct? I watched the original Matrix again last night and it struck me that Agent Smith made a few good points. My favourite was his little tête-à-tête with Morpheus during which he commented on the activities of what he called ‘the stinking humans’. Naturally Morpheus was very restrained at the time :O) It went something like this - “Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops an equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern… Do you know what it is? A virus. You are a plague and we are the cure!" I asked Mystic about Dick Dawkins and he said every man has something that defines him... For Dawkins it is the Meme - Me!Me! The problem with some scientists is their faith in logic. They believe, despite constant proof to the contrary, that a logical solution, a solution of the ’head’, is always superior to a solution of the heart. However, if you look around the world you can quickly see that it is hate and paranoia that lie at the heart of the main problems and not religion. You can’t heal hate with logic! Paranoia is deaf to anything that disagrees with it. Paranoia insists that once it has enough power it will subjugate its enemies and all will be well. As I keep saying - In the struggle between the mice and the elephants - the elephant generals are always saying ‘If only we were bigger!’… so more guns, more tanks, more missiles… What we need is not more supercilious solutions or empty threats but BETTER LEADERS! The solutions to the world’s problem do not lie within science but within ourselves! “What the world needs now is love sweet love.”

I don’t know about you but I have always assumed that if Dozy Dick Dawkins was correct in his theories regarding Evolution then the joy of sex must come high on the list of survival characteristics, or, at least some sort of incentive or compulsion to mate a lot. However, as I’ve mentioned earlier Dawkins used to use Douglas Adams’s 'Parrots The Universe And Everything' to support his view of evolution. I pointed out that, the parrot in question, the Kakapo, as Adams explains it, only excels at being bad at sex and it is very difficult to argue that a ‘blind’ survival of the fittest would somehow realise that the fittest for survival were actually the birds worst at sex… Now, it seems that Dawkins' has rediscovered the 'missing link' - http://richarddawkins.net/videos/475715-douglas-adams-parrots-the-univer... Note that I’m was not arguing that being bad at sex wasn’t a survival characteristic… just asking how natural selection could know that! The problem with believing in theories is that you tend to unintentionally make things fit them and no-one seemed to consider that the Kakapo parrots might simply want to die out rather than learn to live in the modern world. Thinking about birds and survival it also makes you wonder just how those birds that ‘mate for life’ managed to beat their ‘less fussy’ competition somewhere along the road to diversity, who surely would have had a lot more entries in the 'let's make an egg competition' than the faithful! Doesn’t it make you wonder if there is some sort of ‘higher intelligence’ involved in this ‘survival of the fittest’ process, something beyond blind chance? Something that, in many ways, can see the ‘Big Picture’ a lot clearer than those so called intelligent apes that monkey around with theories that simply support their blinkered vision of a world in which they are gods, or at least have fame and fortune and no God (they care to admit to) themselves. How did the process of NATURAL selection become the process of ‘blind’ selection - is it natural to be blind? Doesn’t sight itself suggest Intelligent Design? Not just the ‘camera’ that creates the copy of the world of light from the particular position that the eye views it from - but the incredible ability to discern so much information, so much beauty, so large a vista through so small a portal. Now, I feel I ought to give some credit to the sheer depth of scientific discussion that currently graces the Dawkins’ web site : What do Intelligent Design advocates say about human toenails? Updated: Monday, 10 October 2011 at 2:32 PM “Clipping my nails today, I thought, "What function do these things serve?" From an evolutionary standpoint toenails make complete sense. They are a leftover from when feet were used more like hands, serving a similar function to fingernails, helping to open vital food objects, strip bark to build structures, protection, etc. This seems to be yet another dagger to the ID stance. Thoughts? http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/643443-what-do-intelligent-design-... Well, that’s it then… there it is in black and white… Irrefutable proof that Intelligent Design wasn’t used in the creation of the Richard Dawkins site :O) It’s obviously true that Intelligent Design would have taken into account the fact that toe nails cause holes in socks and consequently would have abandoned the idea of toe nails and adopted hairy Hobbit feet that required neither socks nor shoes :O) Actually, really Intelligent Design would surely have given us wheels... No need for bikes and cars we could speed down the highway without the need for oil... without a care in the world save for punctures ;O) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Can you really believe that you, and everything around you, came into being by chance? Well, of course, probably, most of the things around you have been made by machines and display various levels of Intelligent Design. If there are any signs of evolution in your obviously manufactured surroundings it will most likely be in the areas of fashion and technology. Now, although it might seem, to most people, that the evolution of technology is always, arguably, positive whereas the evolution of fashion is more hit and miss - would you argue that this was related to the designers? Would you say that the better designs were all done by better designers and as the designs of technology tend to be each a bit better than the last, then, so logically, all the best designers must be in the area of technology rather than in fashion? Essentially, do you think that the design of the human body is excellent (considering the manufacturing process) and the fashion of having fairly unobtrusive nails that can be painted and worn long or short is not really relevant to the central design concept? I do agree with Dozy Dick, or is it his chum, that certain animals find their more robust ‘claws’ to be useful ‘tools’ but surely our Designer realised that if we needed such tools then it would be a lot more convenient if we could pick them up and use them then put them down when we were finished. Personally, I’ve never envied Wolverine his extensible claws nor even cats for theirs but I fail to see that having them proves that every other members of the cat species once had identical claws, extendible or not - some cats have no tails does that mean that eventually all cats will be tail-less? . Intelligent people should consider whether Dick is definitely proof that Intelligent Design isn’t always quite as intelligent as it might be… ;O) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Megavirus, a newly discovered giant virus has hair-like structures, or fibrils, on the exterior of its shell, or capsid, that probably attract unsuspecting amoebas looking to prey on bacteria displaying similar features. A study of the DNA of the Megavirus shows it to have more than a thousand genes, the biochemical instructions it uses to build the systems it requires to replicate once inside its host. Viruses need a host cell because they cannot copy themselves and therefore they need to invade a host cell if they want to replicate. In the lab experiments conducted by Professor Claverie and colleagues, in which they infected fresh-water amoebas, Megavirus was seen to construct large trojan organelles - the "cells within cells" that would produce new viruses to infect other amoebas. "Everything is initiated from a single particle, and then grows and grows to become this virion factory," explained Prof Claverie. "That's why it needs all these genes."‘ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15242386