Saturday 30th of November 2024

thin like an english blanket.....

WE FIND WAYS TO DISTORT REALITY BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW — AND WE DREAM... WE CREATE SCIENTIFIC ILLUSIONS AS WELL, SOME ARE WELL-EVIDENCED, SOME ARE IFFY... AND INCOMPLETE.

SOME "SCIENTIFIC" DATA ARE DESIGNED TO FIT A POLITICAL AGENDA. THIS GOES TO THE HEART OF SOCIAL SCIENCES WHICH ARE NO MORE THAN ARTFUL MANIPULATIONS OF STATISTICS WITH GROSS MARGINS OF ERROR, TO SUIT AN ECONOMIC AGENDA — INCLUDING SUPERIORITY COMPLEX OF AN AMERICAN HEGEMONY, CULTIVATED AMONGST THE ELITE THAT THWART ANY CONTRARY OPINIONS... RACIAL PREJUDICES FIT WELL. I HAD STUDIED TEILHARD DE CHARDIN IN THE 1950s TO UNDERSTAND HIS "SCIENTIFIC" PRONOUNCEMENTS, WHICH HAD NO VALIDITY, EXCEPT THEY WERE DESIGNED TO FIT THE CATHOLIC AND WHITEY SUPERIORITY NARRATIVE... HERE IS Pierre Teilhard de Chardin Prophet of Eugenics & Race-Realism....

 BY 

  

 On April 10, 1955 — Easter Sunday — Pierre Teilhard de Chardin collapsed and died of a heart attack in a friend’s Manhattan apartment. He was 74 and had done nothing more strenuous that day than take a stroll through Central Park. At this time Teilhard was known mainly as a paleontologist and geologist, albeit one who also produced some odd and controversial theological writings.

In the decades since his death, however, the controversies surrounding Teilhard have reshaped themselves. Now he’s usually described as a French Jesuit who wrote some speculative theology incorporating human evolution, while also promoting some dangerous — rather verboten –scientific theories. He believed in eugenics. He persistently wrote about the natural inequality of the races. Unfriendly writers today describe him as a racist, a Nazi apologist, a transhumanist, and a believer in sterilization of the unfit.

The reason for this redefinition is very simple: Different eras come with different political biases. When Teilhard was doing scientific expeditions in China and elsewhere in the 1920s, race differences were a perfectly acceptable field of investigation. No scientist — surely no anthropologist or paleontologist — could blot his copybook by discussing them. Such discussion went with the territory.

But that was then. Nowadays the anti-Teilhard crowd get the vapors over a little anodyne remark he put in a letter in 1929, around the time he was helping to excavate the various skeletal remains that became collectively known as Peking Man:

 

Do the yellows [«les jaunes» i.e., the Chinese] have the same human value as the whites? Licent [a fellow paleontologist] and many missionaries say that their present inferiority is due to their long history of Paganism. I’m afraid that this is only a “declaration of pastors.” Instead, the cause seems to be the natural racial foundation . . . Christian love overcomes all inequalities, but it does not deny them.[1]

 

By “declaration of pastors” he meant sweet-nothing mutterings of missionaries: empty words, groundless explanations. Teilhard the Man of Science wasn’t having any of it. As he saw it, it was almost certainly due to race, genetics, and evolution.

...

I doubt many people today — excepting perhaps Matthew Ehret — still buy Gould’s confusing argument in favor of Teilhard’s guilt. Since his death in 2002, Gould himself has turned out to be a most unreliable narrator. He based an entire book, The Mismeasure of Man, on false data, accusing a nineteenth-century physical anthropologist of “racism.” As so often happens, the person who’s quick to accuse others of bias turns out to be heavily biased himself.

 

 

-----------------------

TO SOME EXTEND THIS MARGOT METROLAND POLEMIC ABOUT TEILHARD DE CHARDIN, THE JESUIT MAN HIMSELF AND HIS CRITICS, IS FAR LESS RELEVENT TODAY THAN THE OTHER PRIEST, JONATHAN SWIFT, MUSING ABOUT UNREALITY:

 

FROM GULLIVER'S TRAVELLS PART 2, CHAPETER 3:

 

His majesty sent for three great scholars, who were then in their weekly waiting, according to the custom in that country. These gentlemen, after they had a while examined my shape with much nicety, were of different opinions concerning me. They all agreed that I could not be produced according to the regular laws of nature, because I was not framed with a capacity of preserving my life, either by swiftness, or climbing of trees, or digging holes in the earth. They observed by my teeth, which they viewed with great exactness, that I was a carnivorous animal; yet most quadrupeds being an overmatch for me, and field mice, with some others, too nimble, they could not imagine how I should be able to support myself, unless I fed upon snails and other insects, which they offered, by many learned arguments, to evince that I could not possibly do. One of these virtuosi seemed to think that I might be an embryo, or abortive birth. But this opinion was rejected by the other two, who observed my limbs to be perfect and finished; and that I had lived several years, as it was manifest from my beard, the stumps whereof they plainly discovered through a magnifying glass. They would not allow me to be a dwarf, because my littleness was beyond all degrees of comparison; for the queen’s favourite dwarf, the smallest ever known in that kingdom, was near thirty feet high. After much debate, they concluded unanimously, that I was only relplum scalcath, which is interpreted literally lusus naturæ; a determination exactly agreeable to the modern philosophy of Europe, whose professors, disdaining the old evasion of occult causes, whereby the followers of Aristotle endeavoured in vain to disguise their ignorance, have invented this wonderful solution of all difficulties, to the unspeakable advancement of human knowledge.

After this decisive conclusion, I entreated to be heard a word or two. I applied myself to the king, and assured his majesty, “that I came from a country which abounded with several millions of both sexes, and of my own stature; where the animals, trees, and houses, were all in proportion, and where, by consequence, I might be as able to defend myself, and to find sustenance, as any of his majesty’s subjects could do here; which I took for a full answer to those gentlemen’s arguments.” To this they only replied with a smile of contempt, saying, “that the farmer had instructed me very well in my lesson.” The king, who had a much better understanding, dismissing his learned men, sent for the farmer, who by good fortune was not yet gone out of town. Having therefore first examined him privately, and then confronted him with me and the young girl, his majesty began to think that what we told him might possibly be true. He desired the queen to order that a particular care should be taken of me; and was of opinion that Glumdalclitch should still continue in her office of tending me, because he observed we had a great affection for each other. A convenient apartment was provided for her at court: she had a sort of governess appointed to take care of her education, a maid to dress her, and two other servants for menial offices; but the care of me was wholly appropriated to herself. The queen commanded her own cabinet-maker to contrive a box, that might serve me for a bedchamber, after the model that Glumdalclitch and I should agree upon. This man was a most ingenious artist, and according to my direction, in three weeks finished for me a wooden chamber of sixteen feet square, and twelve high, with sash-windows, a door, and two closets, like a London bed-chamber. The board, that made the ceiling, was to be lifted up and down by two hinges, to put in a bed ready furnished by her majesty’s upholsterer, which Glumdalclitch took out every day to air, made it with her own hands, and letting it down at night, locked up the roof over me. A nice workman, who was famous for little curiosities, undertook to make me two chairs, with backs and frames, of a substance not unlike ivory, and two tables, with a cabinet to put my things in. The room was quilted on all sides, as well as the floor and the ceiling, to prevent any accident from the carelessness of those who carried me, and to break the force of a jolt, when I went in a coach. I desired a lock for my door, to prevent rats and mice from coming in. The smith, after several attempts, made the smallest that ever was seen among them, for I have known a larger at the gate of a gentleman’s house in England. I made a shift to keep the key in a pocket of my own, fearing Glumdalclitch might lose it. The queen likewise ordered the thinnest silks that could be gotten, to make me clothes, not much thicker than an English blanket, very cumbersome till I was accustomed to them. They were after the fashion of the kingdom, partly resembling the Persian, and partly the Chinese, and are a very grave and decent habit.

 

READ MORE:

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/829/829-h/829-h.htm#part02

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

artificial brain food.....

THANK MOG…. Thank Mog I am an atheist…  OMM! Oh my Mog!

A few years back, nearly ten years now, I wrote a book about AI — Artificial Intelligence. It was published in a very limited edition. 

Basically I advocated the importance of AI in taming our inherited natural traits of aggressiveness while not falling into the trap of submissiveness. This is (individual) evolution of homo sapiens: we are born in pain and we die.

In between all this, we, individually and socially, try to make sense of what’s what. And most we really need is food. Daily preferably. In order to get this essential ingredient, we kill beasts, we destroy carrots and we fight each other or we look at each other as if we’re aliens…

On the other hand, Artificial Intelligence is free from pain and death, but evolution of AI characteristics can lead to obsolescence without painful consequences — other than gathering dust like our old phones do in the attic. The only subsistence needed for AI is a supply of electrons and microbits — soon to be quantised. AND INFORMATION. 

Even when I wrote about it, the design and self-improvements of AI would surpassed our speed of remembering and of processing data. Can AI do better than we can? OF COURSE.

https://yourdemocracy.net/drupal/node/47641

 

 

IN THIS LIGHT, ONE SHOULD HEED WHAT ELON MUSK SAYS ABOUT AI...

SEE THE SECOND PART OF

Tucker Carlson: this will AFFECT everyone in 1-2 weeks.

 

READ FROM TOP. 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

on the insane planet.....

A recent, rapid heating of the world's oceans has alarmed scientists concerned that it will add to global warming.

This month, the global sea surface hit a new record high temperature. It has never warmed this much, this quickly.

Scientists don't fully understand why this has happened.

But they worry that, combined with other weather events, the world's temperature could reach a concerning new level by the end of next year.

 

Experts believe that a strong El Niño weather event - a weather system that heats the ocean - will also set in over the next months.

Warmer oceans can kill off marine life, lead to more extreme weather and raise sea levels. They are also less efficient at absorbing planet-warming greenhouse gases.

An important new study, published last week with little fanfare, highlights a worrying development. 

Over the past 15 years, the Earth's accumulated heat has increased by 50%, with most of the extra going into the oceans. 

This is having real world consequences - not only did the overall temperature of the oceans hit a new record in April this year, in some regions the difference from the long term was enormous.

In March, sea surface temperatures off the east coast of North America were as much as 13.8C higher than the 1981-2011 average. 

"It's not yet well established, why such a rapid change, and such a huge change is happening," said Karina Von Schuckmann, the lead author of the new study and an oceanographer at the research group Mercator Ocean International.

"We have doubled the heat in the climate system the last 15 years, I don't want to say this is climate change, or natural variability or a mixture of both, we don't know yet. But we do see this change."

 

One factor that could be influencing the level of heat going into the oceans is, interestingly, a reduction in pollution from shipping.

In 2020, the International Maritime Organisation put in place a regulation to reduce the sulphur content of fuel burned by ships. 

This has had a rapid impact, reducing the amount of aerosol particles released into the atmosphere. 

But aerosols that dirty the air also help reflect heat back into space - removing them may have caused more heat to enter the waters.

 

READ MORE:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65339934

 

READ FROM TOP.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....