Is our universe just an accident? Or does it display exquisite evidence of fine-tuning and intelligent design? This episode of Science Uprising investigates claims by scientific atheists like Lawrence Krauss and Bill Nye that our universe is nothing special and that the fine-tuning scientists observe can be explained away by the existence of multiple universes. Be sure to visit https://scienceuprising.com/ to find more videos and explore related articles and books. Featured experts include Bijan Nemati, Principal Research Scientist, University of Alabama, Huntsville, and former long-time researcher at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab; Frank Tipler, Professor of Mathematical Physics, Tulane University, and co-author of The Anthropic Cosmological Principle; and Stephen Meyer, PhD, Director, Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute and author, The Return of the God Hypothesis. Check out our other videos:
Can life spontaneously generate itself from chemicals? Or are detailed instructions required? This episode of Science Uprising investigates the origin of life and claims by scientific materialists like Stephen Hawking that life spontaneously arose from chemicals without any guidance or intelligent design. Be sure to visit https://scienceuprising.com/ to find more videos and explore related articles and books. Experts featured in this episode include James Tour, T.T. and W.F. Chao Professor of Chemistry, Professor of Computer Science, and Professor of Materials Science and NanoEngineering, Rice University; Douglas Axe, Maxwell Visiting Professor of Molecular Biology, Biola University and author, Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition that Life Is Designed; and Stephen Meyer, PhD, Director, Center for Science and Culture, Discovery Institute and author, Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. Check out our other videos: Information Enigma: Where does information come from? Information drives the development of life. But what is the source of that information? https://youtu.be/aA-FcnLsF1g Science Uprising Episode 1 – Reality: Real vs. Material Has science proven we are all just matter? Or does reality extend beyond what we can see and touch? https://youtu.be/Fv3c7DWuqpM Unbelievable Myths Neil deGrasse Tyson and Co. Love to Tell https://youtu.be/aJ_YXRA7uyw Check out other videos from this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list… Subscribe to our channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/Discover…
Are chance mutations really “the key to our evolution” like they claim in the X-Men films? Or are there strict limits to what mutations can accomplish, limits that point to the need for an overarching designer and the failure of Darwinian evolution to create fundamentally new things? Be sure to visit https://scienceuprising.com/ to find more videos and explore related articles and books. In this episode of Science Uprising, we’ll take a look at the real evidence for the supposed powerhouse of evolution. The featured expert is biochemist Michael Behe of Lehigh University, author of the books Darwin’s Black Box, The Edge of Evolution, and Darwin Devolves. Well-known scientists have been preaching a materialistic worldview rather than presenting the public with all the evidence. We are here to change that. The objective scientific evidence does not prove our universe is blind and purposeless. It does not show we are simply meat machines. It does not prove that evolutionary mechanisms can completely account for the diversity of life on earth. This is what THEY want you to think. Think for yourself and make an informed decision. Are you ready? The uprising has begun. In a lecture, Phillip Johnson cited physicist Richard Feynman on a scientist’s obligation to be honest — not only with himself or in other scientific contexts but, not one bit less, when speaking to the lay public. “You should not fool the laymen when you’re talking as a scientist.” That such a thing would need to be said is itself revealing. What’s more, Feynman insisted, you should “bend over backwards to show how you may be wrong.” The comments are taken from a Commencement address by Feynman in 1974 at Caltech. Johnson, a founding father of modern intelligent design, was so moved by this that he said “I wish it could be set to music.” As far as I know it hasn’t been set to music. But the idea is a major theme in the new Science Uprising series. Scientists fool themselves and they fool non-scientists, not about dry technical details with no special significance, but about matters that bear on huge, life-altering world picture issues. One example is the role of mutations in evolution. That is the topic of Episode 6 of Science Uprising, “Mutations: Failure to Invent.” It’s out now; see it here: The Alternative Perspective The idea that random genetic mutations lead to wondrous, creative innovations is so influential that it forms the premise of a movie franchise, X-Men, that has grossed $6 billion worldwide over the past couple of decades. That’s a lot of “fooling the laymen”! The alternative perspective would be open to the possibility of creative evolution requiring intelligence guidance. The producers of the X-Men movies aren’t scientists. However, the science media have done their best to mislead about the work of real scientists, including National Academy of Sciences member Richard Lenski. We’re all victims of that hype, including Hollywood moviemakers. Dismantling the hype about Lenski occupies biochemist Michael Behe for a significant part of his recent book, Darwin Devolves. Super-Challenges Not Super-Powers As Professor Behe explains in Science Uprising, the Long-Term Evolution Experiment conducted by Lenski has demonstrated not the creative power of unguided evolution but the occasional benefits of devolution, of breaking or disabling genes. That’s the opposite lesson from the one drawn by media such as the New York Times in reporting on Lenski’s efforts. “Think about it,” says the masked narrator of Science Uprising, against the backdrop of poignant images of people suffering from genetic illnesses, “significant mutations don’t create superpowers. They create super-challenges. Sometimes those mutations are even life-threatening.”
QUESTION: Hi Martin, Thank you for your free blog–I’ve learned heaps. I believe the greatest disservice a government can make is to allow foreign investment in real estate in their country. I have lived in Canada, New Zealand, and Australia where real estate is no longer affordable for many first home buyers. Inflated prices have destroyed the dreams of the citizens in these countries where empty (investment) houses are common. Governments have failed to protect the interests of the people. For first home buyers who manage to buy their first home they are burdened with astronomical mortgage repayments. I am wondering if Socrates saw this coming and what it anticipates will happen in the future.
Thank you.
PP
ANSWER: We have to understand the CAUSE of such capital movement. The more aggressive governments become with taxes, the more capital will seek to move. I have suggested that Europeans should open a bank account in a US bank that does NOT have branches in Europe. I have recommended that because the European government is highly Marxist, and it is a natural human instinct to leave. Capital can be moved, but labor cannot.
However, in many regions, real estate has risen also because of domestic shifts. In China and Italy especially, people have tended to look at real estate as a place to park money that is safe and outside the banking system. The rise in real estate has been greatly diverse and it is not entirely based upon capital inflows from foreign investors.
Then there is also the currency factor. I have written many times that I was living in London in 1985 when the pound fell to $1.03. The Americans were buying real estate in London like it was on sale at Harrods. The Brits saw the prices as exceptionally high and thought the Americans were going to lose a fortune. The pound nearly doubled, and in dollars they made a fortune. Remember when the Japanese were buying the trophy real estate in New York City? They also turned around and sold it back when the currency moved against them.
As far as Socrates and its forecasts on real estate, it is objective and looks at the patterns, cycles, and price movements on a daily basis.
Nothing is permanent. Everything flows in a cycle.
QUESTION: Dear Mr. Armstrong,
You have said that everything has its own cycle and that somehow everything is connected to pi. To me this seems to fit nicely within a deterministic framework. Hence I am curious what your thoughts are on the subject of free will. Could you please elaborate?
Regards, E
ANSWER: We all have our individual free will. Society in a collective state produces the business cycle. As we move through life, we mature and change our thinking based upon experience. This is why there are always Democrats and Republicans. There are some who understand the business cycle and move with it, and others who act in a herd instinct. There is a difference between the individual and the collective cycle which we can call the business cycle.
QUESTION: Marty, what do you tell your son when some of the greatest people in business were all dropouts from Sidney Weinberg of Goldman Sachs who was known as Mr. Wall Street, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, Walt Disney, Richard Branson, and the list goes on? Having a degree does not guarantee success. What do you say to this?
HJ
ANSWER: It is absolute nonsense that degrees mean anything anymore. Schools cannot teach creativity. It takes imagination to become successful. That is not something schools can teach. Sidney Weinberg of Goldman Sachs, who indeed was known as Mr. Wall Street, started as an assistant to a janitor. He dropped out of school at 13. Richard Branson is now Sir Richard Branson and he dropped out at 16. Charles Culpeper also dropped out of high school and founded Coca Cola. Then there was Walt Disney who dropped out of high school at 16. The list of the top 20 will surprise many.
How about politicians? Did you know that President Abraham Lincoln who is on the $5 bill had only about a year of formal schooling of any kind! President Andrew Johnson never went to school at all. The list of people who became President of the United States and dropped out of college or never went to school includes:
George Washington
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
Martin Van Buren
William Henry Harrison
Zachary Taylor
Millard Fillmore
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Johnson
Grover Cleveland
William McKinley
Harry S. Truman
To a large extent, you either have the talent for your field or you do not. Elon Musk recently said he does not require employees to hold degrees. “There’s no needeven to have a college degree at all or even high school,” Musk stated. The same is true with Google and Apple as well as 12 other top companies that no longer require college degrees. Neither does our firm. If you have the talent, you are hired. That reflects deeply upon student loans. Is the entire education system based upon fraudulent claims that you need a diploma to get a job?
Despite not being on the ballot in Nevada, tonight will be Michael Bloomberg’s first appearance on a Democrat debate stage.Tonight’s presidential debate is hosted by NBC, MSNBC, Telemundo and The Nevada Independent. Start time 9 p.m. Eastern.
Six candidates qualified: Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont; former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.; former NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts; former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind.; and Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.
The Club is highly restricting the broadcast options for viewing. However, the Debate is being broadcast on NBC and available on-line HERE
If you are watching via NBC broadcast, MSNBC cable or on-line, feel free to share your opinions in the thread comments below.
Tonight President Trump travels to Phoenix, AZ to attend a Keep America Great rally at Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum. President Trump is expected to speak at 9:00pm ET. Livestream links below. VIDEO ADDED:
Lots to unpack here. Maggie Haberman is warning resistance allies in the Senate to prepare all defensive weapons against a possible Trump appointment of Ric Grenell as Director of the Office of National Intelligence (ODNI).
Grenell currently serves as the U.S. Ambassador to Germany. He can serve as “acting” ODNI, but to become permanent ODNI he would need to survive confirmation railroading by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), Chairman Richard Burr and Vice Chair Mark Warner. The SSCI is deep swamp and and participated in the coup effort against the office of the president. The SSCI has a vested interest in controlling the ODNI position; hence their prior blocking of Representative John Ratcliffe.
[Via New York Times] … Mr. Grenell, whose outspokenness throughout his career as a political operative and then as ambassador has prompted criticism, is a vocal Trump loyalist who will lead a group of national security agencies often viewed skeptically by the White House.
He would take over from Joseph Maguire, who has served as the acting director of national intelligence since the resignation last summer of Dan Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana. Mr. Grenell, who has pushed to advance gay rights in his current post, would apparently also be the first openly gay cabinet member.
Mr. Grenell did not respond to a request for comment, nor did a White House spokesman. The people familiar with the move cautioned that the president had a history of changing his mind on personnel decisions after they were revealed in the news media.
[…] Under American law, Mr. Maguire had to give up his temporary role before March 12. He could return to his old job as director of the National Counterterrorism Center, but he might choose to step down from government.
Mr. Trump can choose any Senate-confirmed official to replace Mr. Maguire as the acting head of the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies.
[…] [Grenell’s] confirmation by the Senate is not assured, one reason the president intents to name him acting director, rather than formally nominating him for the job. (read more)
On May 23, 2019, President Trump granted current U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr with essentially the same intelligence review capabilities as the ODNI in an effort to empower the AG to bring sunlight upon intelligence community corruption. Unfortunately, AG Barr did nothing with the power granted by the president.
The appointment of Grenell can be looked at as President Trump trying to cut the Gordian knot that exists due to a myriad of self-interests deep inside the intelligence apparatus.
The SSCI will not allow any ODNI office member to expose their corrupt intelligence operations. Recently Oklahoma Senator James Lankford quietly quit the SSCI. It has been speculated that Lankford left the committee due to rank corruption and their ongoing plans to hide prior abuses. Mitch McConnell selected Senator Ben Sasse to replace Lankford to retain and achieve the continued objectives of the committee.
The *tell* will be to watch how members of the SSCI respond to the Grenell appointment.
If you stay out of the weeds and look at the bigger picture it is clear to see the media are all-in, desperate to retain the Big Lie that Russia was responsible for hacking the DNC servers and releasing the DNC emails. The reason is simple: the ‘Russia hack of the DNC’ is the foundation for the Russia election interference narrative.
Any review, discussion or investigation (Durham) that starts to question the fraudulent foundation is immediately controversialized. Today is no different.
(Via NBC) It is being reported that lawyers for Julian Assange noted in court arguments that U.S. officials had offered a potential pardon in exchange for Assange telling the truth about how he obtained the DNC emails. Immediately the media goes bananas.
President Donald Trump offered a pardon through an intermediary to Julian Assange if the WikiLeaks chief agreed to say that Russia was not involved in hacking emails from Democrats during the 2016 presidential election, a lawyer for Assange reportedly told a court in London on Wednesday.
Assange’s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald made that claim during a hearing related to the U.S. request to extradite Assange from the United Kingdom to face more than a dozen criminal charges in the United States, according to The Daily Beast news site.
[…] The formal extradition hearing for Assange, an Australian national, is due to begin Monday. At Wednesday’s court session, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser reportedly said the evidence about a purported pardon offer is admissible at that hearing.
White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, when asked about the claim of a pardon offer by Trump, said, “The President barely knows Dana Rohrabacher other than he’s an ex-congressman.”
“He’s never spoken to him on this subject or almost any subject. It is a complete fabrication and a total lie,” Grisham said. “This is probably another never ending hoax and total lie from the DNC.” (read more)
The media outrage is somewhat silly. Julian Assange said from the outset he did not receive the DNC emails from Russia; and the emails did not come to him by way of a hack.
It is well known the DNC emails came from a “leak” from inside the DNC.
The Podesta emails, another source of wide disinformation, came from John Podesta falling for an ordinary phishing effort. Neither John Podesta nor the DNC emails came from a “hack”.
However, because the “Russia hacked the 2016 election” was/is needed in order to perpetrate the Trump-Russia collusion and election interference narrative, the media are determined to attack, ridicule and marginalize anyone or anything that starts to expose the original (fraudulent) narrative.
On Tuesday April 15th, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….
♦The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where current FBI chief legal counsel Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time, while also holding jobs in Main Justice.
♦The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.
Why did the DOJ wait?
What was the DOJ waiting for?
Here’s where it gets interesting….
The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”
(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.
Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.
“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”
Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)
Knowing how much effort the CIA and FBI put into the Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative; and knowing how absolutely critical it was to justify all the surveillance that had taken place prior to the 2016 election; it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange; and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury byDecember 2017.
Within three months of the grand jury the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018. The EDVA sat on the indictment while the Mueller probe was ongoing.
As soon as the Mueller probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).
As a person who has researched this three year fiasco including: the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking and interference narrative; the “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; the timing against Julian Assange was far too coincidental.
It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned U.S/U.K motive to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes, and that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.
The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central evidence to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements.
Now Watch This Brief Interview:
.
The predicate for Crossfire Hurricane was Russia interfering in the 2016 election.
The predicate for the FISA warrant against U.S. Carter Page was a Russia investigation, that included the Steele Dossier as evidence, and the use therein was contingent on Russia interfering in the 2016 election.
The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election; and the possibility of Trump-Russia collusion.
All of these predicate claims are demonstrably false or wildly overstated using the most tenuous of stretched interpretations. This is what John Durham is looking at.
The fulcrum for the media to push the Russia interference narrative is the Intelligence Community Assessment; and the primary factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers. A claim that is only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC contractor.
When it comes to reviewing all of the predication aspects, the CIA holds a massive conflict of self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim. Thus we see members of the CIA and intelligence apparatus within media stories outraged over being questioned.
Without the initiation by the CIA, the FBI also is exposed. Thus the FBI holds a massive interest in maintaining the Russia hacking (Crowdstrike) claim.
Additionally, all of those foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with John Brennan and Peter Strzok also have a vested self-interest in maintaining the Russia hacking and interference narrative.
Most worrisome, Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack – but rather from a leak by a source inside the DNC.
This Russian “hacking” claim is ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus; and right there is the most transparently obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon as U.S. and U.K. intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be made public.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America