Archive for outubro 8th, 2014

Frases de Experts Contra a Teoria da Evolução: Veja Como A Matrix/DNA Derruba Todas Elas, Fácil.

quarta-feira, outubro 8th, 2014

É bom ler estas frases ( intermediadas com opiniões vindas da minha interpretação dos modelos da Matrix/DNA), pois elas ajudam a pensar o fenomeno da evolução e servem para testar nossas prórprias teorias. Um trabalho meticuloso, bem feito, de coleção por…

Judy’s Patch – WEBSITE


Quoting scientists themselves:


“The probability for the chance of formation of the smallest, simplest form of living organism known is 1 to 10-340,000,000. This number is 1 to 10 to the 340 millionth power! The size of this figure is truly staggering, since there is only supposed to be approximately 10-80 (10 to the 80th power) electrons in the whole universe!” (Professor Harold Morowitz)

Matrix/DNA: Ok, but, natural informations is not in shape of electrons, and so, in shape of photons. Which we don’t know the number. By the way, I don’t agree with chance formation either… 

“The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less we can believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially, the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer.” (Professor Richard Dawkins, an atheist)

Matrix/DNA : Porque temos que sair de uma teoria extrema e cair em outra teoria extrema? Você não pode enxergar que existem mais teorias sem serem tão extremas?

“Complex molecules that are essential to particular organisms often have such a vast information content as…to make the theory of evolution impossible.” (Bird, Origin of Species Revisited, Vol. 1, pg. 71)

“A close inspection discovers an empirical impossibility to be inherent in the idea of evolution.” (Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, Swedish botanist and geneticist, English Summary of Synthetische Artbildung, pg. 1142-43, 1186.)

Matrix/DNA: No. A close inspection suggests the empirical impossibility of Darwinism, not about natural evolution.

“The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that ‘a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein’.” Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University), as quoted in “Hoyle on Evolution”. Nature, vol. 294, 12 Nov. 1981, p. 105

Matrix/DNA: O problema é que a origem da vida aqui não foi como a construção de um Boeing 747, e sim, como o desmonte de um existente Boeing 747 para com suas peças e material fazer um pequeno avião. O sistema astronomico – esta galaxia – que produziu a primeira simples célula viva aqui era a maquina mais perfeita possível de ser feita pela Natureza. Entidades muito complexas podem darem um enorme salto construindo coisas muito simples, porem o contrario é impossível: coisas muito simples não podem dar o enorme salto de construírem imediatamente algo muito mais complexo.

Darwin’s evolutionary explanation of the origins of man has been transformed into a modern myth, to the detriment of scientific and social progress…..The secular myths of evolution have had a damaging effect on scientific research, leading to distortion, to needless controversy, and to gross misuse of science….I mean the stories, the narratives about change over time. How the dinosaurs became extinct, how the mammals evolved, where man came from. These seem to me to be little more than story-telling.” (Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)

Matrix/DNA: You are right, really this non-complete theory have prejudicing scientific evolution into the right and best way for human life’s conditions. But, still, it is better with Darwin than with the creationist myth alone as it were at the Middle Ages.  

“The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop.” (Dr. Edwin Conklin, evolutionist and professor of biology at Princeton University.)

Matrix/DNA: Yours own body is the result of a big explosion occurred inside an ovule, when exploded the spermatozoon membrane. But… we know that yours body and that event did not occurred by accident.

“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 nought’s after it…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fred Hoyle, highly respected British physicist and astronomer)

Matrix/DNA: Yours mistake is that the formation of life did not occurred from inanimate matter, but, from animated natural systems, which have no  fixed limits with animated “life”.  Yours problem is that you does not know the astronomical system where this event occurred, and which, produced this event. 


“The entire hominid collection known today would barely cover a billiard table, … the collection is so tantalizingly incomplete, and the specimens themselves often so fragmented and inconclusive, that more can be said about what is missing than about what is present. …but ever since Darwin’s work inspired the notion that fossils linking modern man and extinct ancestor would provide the most convincing proof of human evolution, preconceptions have led evidence by the nose in the study of fossil man.” John Reader (photo-journalist and author of “Missing Links”), “Whatever happened to Zinjanthropus?” New Scientist, 26 March 1981, p. 802

“We are about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million species but the situation hasn’t changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information …. ” – D. Raup, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, vol. 50 (1), p. 24, 25


“The facts of paleontology seem to support creation rather than evolution. All the major groups of invertebrates appear suddenly in the first fossiliferous strata. (Cambrian) of the earth with their distinct specializations, indicating that they were all created at almost the same time.” – David Enock Associate Professor of Biology. BS Yeshiva College, MS Hunter College


“In spite of the examples, it remains true (as every paleontologist knows) that most new species, genera and families appear in the record suddenly, and are not led up to by known, gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences.” George Gaylord Simpson, Harvard high priest of evolution 



“Evolutionists believe, for example, that the land plants didn’t appear until over 100 million years after the Cambrian trilobites died out. Yet over sixty genera of woody plants, spores, pollen, and wood itself have been recovered from lowest ‘trilobite rock’ (Cambrian) throughout the world. The evidence is so well known that it’s even in standard college and biology text books.

“There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist..denies that this is so. It is simply a fact, Darwin’s theory and the fossil record are in conflict.” David Berlinsky Senior Fellow of the Discovery Institute.



“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as a trade secret of Paleontology. Evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.” (Dr. Stephan J Gould, Harvard Paleontologist, “Evolution, Erratic Pace”)



We add that it would be all too easy to object that mutations have no evolutionary effect because they are eliminated by natural selection. Lethal mutations (the worst kind) are effectively eliminated, but others persist as alleles. …Mutants are present within every population, from bacteria to man. There can be no doubt about it. But for the evolutionist, the essential lies elsewhere: in the fact that mutations do not coincide with evolution.”Pierre-Paul Grassé (University of Paris and past-President, French Academie des Sciences) in Evolution of Living Organisms, Academic Press, New York, 1977, p. 88

“It’s impossible by micro-mutation to form any new species.” (Dr. Richard Goldschmt, evolutionist. Founder of the “Hopeful Monster” theory.)

“The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that natural selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well.” Stephen Jay Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), “The return of hopeful monsters”. Natural History, vol. LXXXVI(6), June-Jule 1977, p. 28


There are twelve major layers that form what is called the standard geologic column. Each of these layers is identified by the fossils that are found in it. But, strangely enough, most often the fossils are dated by the strata in which they are found. Can you see the faulty logic in that approach? Let us read what some evolutionary geologists say:

“Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory.” Ronald R. West, PhD (paleoecology and geology) (Assistant Professor of Paleobiology at Kansas State University), “Paleoecology and uniformitarianism”. Compass, vol. 45, May 1968, p. 216

“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning … because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales.” Dr. J. E. O’Rourke, “Pragmatism Versus Materialism in Stratigraphy,” American Journal of Science. (1976)

“Scientists determine when fossils were formed by finding out the age of the rocks in which they lie.”S. Welles: World Book Encyclopedia Vol.7 (1978) p. 364

compare with:

Palaeontology (the study of fossils) is important in the study of geology. The age of the rocks may be determined by the fossils found in them.” S. Welles: World Book Encyclopedia Vol.15 (1978) p. 85 
(Samuel Welles was Research Associate, Museum of Palaeontology, University of California, Berkley)

“It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint geologists are here reasoning in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by a study of their remains embedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain.”
R. Rastall (Cambridge geologist): ‘Geology’ Encyclopedia Britannica Vol. 10 1949.


“One of the major unsolved problems of geology and evolution is the occurrence of diversified, multi-celled marine invertebrates in the lower Cambrian rocks on the continents and their absence in rocks of greater age…

…however when we turn to examine the Pre-Cambrian rocks for forerunners of these early Cambrian fossils, they are nowhere to be found. Many thick (over 5,000 feet) sections of sedimentary rock are now known to lie in unbroken succession below strata containing the earliest Cambrian fossils. These sediments apparently were suitable for the preservation of fossils because they are often identical with overlying rocks which are fossiliferous, yet no fossils are found in them.” Axelrod (1958), a paleontologist

This evolutionary paleontologist was willing to ask some hard questions about transitional forms showing how one organism turned into another.

Ager, an evolutionary geologist, seems to think this is a problem all the way through the fossil record. He predicted that no matter where we searched we would find: “not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.”  (This is what the creationist model predicts!)

“It remains true, as every paleontologist knows, that most new species, genera, and families, and that nearly all categories above the level of families, appear in the record SUDDENLY and are not led up to by known, gradual completely continuous transitional sequences.” (Dr. George Gaylord Simpson of Harvard)

‘Phyletic gradualism [gradual evolution]… was never “seen” in the rocks’.” Stephen Gould and Niles Eldredge (both evolutionists).

The single greatest problem which the fossil record poses for Darwinism is the ‘Cambrian explosion’ of around 600 million years ago. The animal phyla appear in the rocks of this period without a trace of the necessary evolutionary ancestors:

“It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history…Despite tempting fragments of evidence, such as cutinized [waxy] spores and bits of xylem [wood] dating back to the Cambrian period…” Richard Dawkins,Weier, Stocking, and Barbour

Most evolutionists still believe that land plants didn’t evolve until much later. But notice, the evolutionist argues ‘in spite of the evidence.'”


“The explanation value of the evolutionary hypothesis of common origin is nil! Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, it seems to convey anti-knowledge. How could I work on evolution ten years and learn nothing from it? Most of you in this room will have to admit that in the last ten years we have seen the basis of evolution go from fact to faith! It does seem that the level of knowledge about evolution is remarkably shallow. We know it ought not be taught in high school, and that’s all we know about it.” (Dr. Colin Patterson, evolutionist and senior Paleontologist at the BritishMuseum of Natural History, which houses 60 million fossils)

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” (Charles Darwin, “The Origin of Species”)

“The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory. Is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation. Both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither up to the present has been capable of proof.”
L. Harrison Matthews FRS – Introduction to Darwin’s Origin of Species – 1971 p.11

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, also known as the Law of Entropy, states that every system left to its own devices will always move from a condition of order to disorder.
“… all we have to do is nothing, and everything deteriorates, collapses, breaks down, wears out all by itself.” – Isaac Asimov – “In the Game of Energy and Thermodynamics, You Can’t Even Break Even,” – Smithsonian (June 1970) p.6

The universe and the Laws of Physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on…” (Stephen Hawking, considered the best known scientist since Albert Einstein, Austin American-Statesmen, October 19, 1997)

“Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” (Prof. Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, NationalCenter of Scientific Research.)

“We have had enough of the Darwinian fallacy. It is time we cry, “The emperor has no clothes.” (Dr. Hsu, geologist at the Geological Institute in Zurich.)

“The great cosmologic myth of the twentieth century.”(Dr. Michael Denton, molecular biochemist, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis.)

“9/10 of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by fact. This Museum is full of proof of the utter falsity of their view.” (Dr. Ethredge, British Museum of Science.)

“We have now the remarkable spectacle that just when many scientific men are agreed that there is no part of the Darwinian system that is of any great influence, and that, as a whole, the theory is not onlyunproved, but impossible, the ignorant, half-educated masses have acquired the idea that it is to be accepted as a fundamental fact.” (Dr. Thomas Dwight, famed professor at Harvard University)

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When this happens, many people will pose the question, “How did this ever happen?” (Dr. Sorren Luthrip, Swedish Embryologist)

“The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based upon faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion….The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but irrational.” (Dr. Louis T. More, professor of paleontology atPrinceton University)

“Evolution is faith, a religion.” (Dr. Louist T. More, professor of paleontology at Princeton University)

“In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to “bend” their observations to fit in with it.” (H.S. Lipson, Physicist Looks at Evolution, Physics Bulletin 31 (1980), p. 138)

“My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed…..It is not even possible to make a caricature of an evolution out of paleobiological facts…The idea of an evolution rests on pure belief.” (Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, noted Swedish botanist and geneticist, of Lund University)

“250,000 species of plants and animals recorded and deposited in museums throughout the world did not support the gradual unfolding hoped for byDarwin.” (Dr. David Raup, curator of geology at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago, “Conflicts Between Darwinism and Paleontology”)

“The pathetic thing about it is that many scientists are trying to prove the doctrine of evolution, which no science can do.” (Dr. Robert A. Milikan, physicist and Nobel Prize winner, speech before the American Chemical Society.)

“Hypothesis [evolution] based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts….These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without a murmur of protest.” (Sir Ernst Chan, Nobel Prize winner for developing penicillin)

“There is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the “general theory of evolution,” and the evidence which supports this is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis.” (Dr. G. A. Kerkut evolutionist)

“For over 20 years I thought I was working on evolution….But there was not one thing I knew about it… So for the last few weeks I’ve tried putting a simple question to various people, the question is, “Can you tell me any one thing that is true?” I tried that question on the Geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, A very prestigious body of Evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, “Yes, I do know one thing, it ought not to be taught in High School”….over the past few years….you have experienced a shift from Evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith…Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge.” (Dr. Collin Patterson evolutionist, address at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, Nov. 1981)

“The theories of evolution, with which our studious youth have been deceived, constitute actually a dogma that all the world continues to teach; but each, in his specialty, the zoologist or the botanist, ascertains that none of the explanations furnished is adequate . . It results from this summary, that thetheory of evolution is impossible.” (Dr. P. Lemoine, “Introduction: De L’ Evolution?” Encyclopedie Francaise, Vol. 5 (1937)

“Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy.” (Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, 1887, Vol. 2, p. 229)

“I have always been slightly suspicious of the theory of evolution because of its ability to account for any property of living beings (the long neck of the giraffe, for example). I have therefore tried to see whether biological discoveries over the last thirty years or so fit in with Darwin’s theory. I do not think that they do. To my mind, the theory does not stand up at all.” (H. Lipson, “A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” Physic Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.)

“In conclusion, evolution is not observable, repeatable, or refutable, and thus does not qualify as either a scientific fact or theory.” (Dr. David N. Menton, PhD in Biology from Brown University)

“The success of Darwinism was accomplished by adecline in scientific integrity.” (Dr. W.R. Thompson, world renowned Entomologist)

“The world is too complicated in all parts and interconnections to be due to chance alone. I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together. Each part of a living thing depends on all its other parts to function. How does each part know? How is each part specified at conception? The more one learns of biochemistry the more unbelievable it becomes unless there is some type of organizing principle—an architect.” (Scientist Allan Sandage)

“I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When this happens, many people will pose the question, “How did this ever happen?” (Dr. Sorren Luthrip, Swedish Embryologist)

“A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the evolutionist camp…..moreover, for the most part these “experts” have abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical persuasions, but on strictly scientific grounds, and in some instances, regretfully.” (Dr. Wolfgang Smith, physicist and mathematician)

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian (Atomic Energy Commission, USA) in “The Fresno Bee”, <?August 20, 1959.


“It will never be possible to prove scientifically whether the earth and universe are old or young. All calculations involving processes which antedate recorded history must be based on assumptions which can never even be tested, let alone proved, scientifically.” Dr. Henry Morris

“When the blood of a seal freshly killed at McMurdo Sound in the Antarctic was tested by Carbon-14, it showed the seal had died 1,300 years ago.”Antarctic Journal, Vol.6 – (1971) p.211

“Richard Leakey’s ‘1470 Man’ was variously dated using the same rocks, the same equipment and the same technicians, at both 220 million years and 2.6 million years BP.

Similarly, rocks associated with Louis Leakey’s ‘Nutcracker Man’ gave a date of 1 .75 million years, although material from the same stratum submitted to Carbon 14 dating gave an age of 10,000 years.

A single sample of rock, one of many brought back from the moon, was dated by the uranium-thorium-lead method to give results ranging from 5.4 billion years (somewhat more than the estimated age of the moon) to 28.1 billion years (half as old again as the greatest estimate of the age of the universe!).

Results have been published that show that recently erupted rocks have been dated at 22 million years old by the Potassium Argon method … The hair on a mammoth was found to be 26,000 years old while the peat in which the mammoth was preserved was measured by the same Carbon 14 technique and found to be only 5,600 years old.” Dr. D. Rosevear Ph.D. Organometallic Chemistry

“If a C14 date supports our theories we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put if in a footnote. And if it is completely ‘out of date’, we just drop it” Professor Brew (1970 – speaking at a symposium on the prehistory of the Nile) – The Revised Quote Book – p.23

“Why do geologists and archeologists still spend their scarce money on costly radiocarbon determinations? They do so because occasional dates appear to be useful. While the method cannot be counted on to give good, unequivocal results, the number do impress people, and save them the trouble of thinking excessively. Expressed in what look like precise calendar years, figures seem somehow better … ‘Absolute’ dates determined by a laboratory carry a lot of weight, and are extremely helpful in bolstering weak arguments.

“No matter how ‘useful’ it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates. This whole bless thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read.” Robert E. Lee, “Radiocarbon: ages in error”. Anthropological Journal of Canada, vol.19(3), 1981, pp.9-29.


“Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation and that is unthinkable.” Sir Arthur Keith, a famous British evolutionist

Incrível! Vídeo de Bill Nye Atacando Religiosos e Sugerindo Revolução na Educação Alcança Meio Milhão de Comentários!

quarta-feira, outubro 8th, 2014

Incrível! Um vídeo publicado em 2012 já conta quase sete milhões de visitantes e o debate que se segue parece ser o mais longo da história do Youtube, pois já conta com quase meio milhão de comentários !!!

Mas o assunto do vídeo realmente é importante e faz parte da responsabilidade de todos os seres humanos conhecerem e tomarem posições participando do tema, pois disso depende o nosso e o futuro das gerações: qual a visão de mundo estamos pondo na cabeça dos estudantes, formando suas mentes.

É um combate ferrenho entre a recem-nascida mentalidade materialista e a velha mentalidade mistica que ainda governa a maioria das decisões sociais mundiais. São duas posições extremas, dois lados de uma mesma moeda, e no meio surge agora mais uma diferente e inédita posição, tentando tambem entrar na briga. Veja o vídeo, veja o comentário abaixo postado por essa nova visão do mundo, e reflita buscando sua posição, pois disso depende se nossos herdeiros irão cantar nosso sucesso ou chorar nosso fracasso.  Pois é a maneira como interpretamos a existência do mundo e nele, nossa própria existência, que determina nossos comportamentos e portanto, nosso destino.


Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children xxxxxx E o ultimo comentário postado pela nova cosmovisão “do meio”: 

Louis Charles Morelli – October 08, 2014

Darwinism is not equal the real observed natural phenomena of evolution. And Creationism is far away off the natural real world. The Universal Natural History can not be reached and understood by any human brain with these limited sensors in time/space. One need to see a system standing outside the system for understanding it, and nobody went outside this Universe… yet. Natural evolution is a observed phenomena when we see a simplest thing ( a morula, a blastula) transforming shapes and increasing complexity in 9 month. And it is easy to accept that Nature can amplify this individual phenomena, projecting it into populations transformations. But… we know that the force causing those individual transformations is something “invisible” inside the blastula, the fetus, etc.: DNA. So, why not the transformations from atoms systems to stellar systems to galactic systems to biological systems could not have a invisible force doing it?! Yes there is one, a natural universal formula for all natural systems, called “Matrix/DNA”, which is showed at “The Universal Matrix for Natural Systems and Life’s Cycles” ( Google it). It is not possible to understand in full, biological evolution ( which is merely another cycle of universal evolution) if not knowing cosmological evolution. And darwinism knows nothing about it. There are more four variables coming from the Cosmological Evolution, acting over biological evolution here – it is not merely the three variables considered now by Modern Synthesis ( VSI – Variation, Selection, Inheritance), which fill the gaps. They are natural laws and mechanisms coming from the electromagnetic dimensions, some of them described by thermodynamic systems theory. Our problem just now is that our official astronomic and atomic theoretical models are not complete, far away off the beam, so, the scientific community can not detect the evolutionary lings between cosmological and biological evolution, while Matrix/DNA Theory is suggesting a model of LUCA that fits the gaps. You can see the Matrix formula working into the shape of yours hands, as any natural systems, sub-systems and accessories, like the hands. You can see as elemental structure of atoms, galaxies and now, this new shape of system called ‘consciousness”. You can see the formula inside a lateral pair of nucleotides, the fundamental unit of information of DNA. That’s due DNA is merely the biological shape of something coming from since the Universe’s origins – the Universal Matrix. The first shape of this Matrix we see at the spectrum of natural light waves, so, the original light already had the code for Life. We see evolution here, but it is not the whole history. The phases of evolution are steps of a bigger universal process: reproduction. Inside this universe as a kind of big cosmic egg, is occurring a genetic process of reproduction. Reproduction of what?! Obvious: the Unknown system that generated this Universe. We can not know it.So, while this discussion among theories ( Darwinism, Creationism, Matrix/DNA, etc.) is necessary and good for stimulating the search for more knowledge towards the final thru, it is not rational the offenses, fundamentalisms. Never forget it: our little brain is not equipped for grasping the thru about the system we are inside it. The most rational method for inquiring this mystery is observing what Nature shows here and now, and then, calculating what must be where and when we can not reach. I myself don’t believe on my elaborated theory – The Matrix/DNA – because I bet that it is not complete, it can not be completed by my little brain. My fellows at this mission, the search for our existential meanings: “Try to understand that beliefs are products of Nature and personal specific experiences hard-wiring the connections among neurons and providing informations, some of them false, others real – and only bringing on to the table real natural approved facts and events, can help the Humanity inits evolution. E outro comentario postado: 

Louis Charles Morelli – October 08, 2014

“…if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fred Hoyle, highly respected British physicist and astronomer)” Have been normal that human’s goes first to the two extremes of any issue, and finally reaching the middle term, where relies the final thru. Like Nature goes from the extreme hot to the extreme could for reaching the middle state good for life. Here, about the universal meanings of existence, humans have going from extreme infant phantasies ( creationism) to extreme materialism ( Modern Synthesis for Natural Evolution). Sir Fred Hoyle is dancing between these two extremes, so, if it is not randomness, must be divine intelligence. The third hidden alternative, the real thru, must be in between and lots more complex. My suggestion is that when we have a big unsolved mystery, and the known theories are extremists, we need ask it directly to Nature. And Nature shows to us that the life of a baby giraffe has not beginings at random, but… it is not product of mother’s giraffe intelligence either. It is merely a long chain of causes and effects known as genetic process.So, tell us the pure rational thinking, that we must search this genetic process as responsible for emergence of life at any planet of the Cosmos. The long chain of causes and effects has coming from the simplest to gradual more complexity (it happens here, facing our eyes: the embryonary morphogenetic event), so, the genetic process must be under evolution too. It must be coming from cosmological evolution, non-living world. Here relies the third hidden alternative, which must be the final thru. No randomness, no intelligent designers. Nature does not plays dice with her creatures.Ask her, She will tell you the thru, showing to you her production here, and revealing that how She does things here, is how She did things at the origins of this Universe and life here. See what you can discover, yourself, doing that, as I did. See the solution that I discovered after seven years asking the last remained life’s origins witnesses that still are alive at the heart of Amazon jungle, and published at my website: The Universal Matrix/DNA Formula for natural Systems and Life’s Cycles”. But, be advised, my findings are not the final real thru also. I have watched only the half-face of Nature, which  is the chaotic face that produced this salvage biosphere.We know that there is another half-facem the ordered state, when we lift our eyes and see this solar system and galaxy working as a watch.And even if we get the real theoretical model of the ordered Cosmos, we know that we don’t get the final thru yet. Chaotic and ordered states are the two extremes again, the final thru must relies on a third hidden more complex alternative. Today we can build theoretical models about the structure and evolutionary history of the Cosmos, as the scientific astronomers community are doing. They must be not complete, even wrong, since we have our brains hard-wired by the chaotic state, never experimenting the ordered state of Nature. So, the astronomers are projecting the laws and mechanisms of chaotic states when building their astronomical models. There is only a unique way for getting a little bit closer to the final thru: making comparisons between the ordered state and the chaotic state, extracting a third theoretical model. I did it, after 30 years of calculations, but… the final results are suggesting that it is not materialism, it is not randomness and it is not intelligent design: it is something never imagined before. Remembering that this model is not complete, it must have lots of errors, so, we must no believe on it. xxxx E como resposta a este post do Fallible Fiend:

Fallible Fiend – 4 weeks ago (edited)

When I taught at university, I warned students against cheating, but some would do it anyway.  They were always shocked that someone who understood the subject could detect their cheating, even though it was obvious.  They changed variable names and other things to mask their copying, but to no avail!  When you lie to somebody who understands, the lying is obvious!  Creatioinsts use quote mines and thereby misrepresent the scientists without caring that they are misrepresenting them!   Being caught in their intellectual incompetence is what’s making them so frothing in fraudulent Arjunasquirtz these days!  


Louis Charles Morelli – Octuber 09, 2014

To Fallible Fiend: “They were always shocked that someone who understood the subject could detect their cheating, even though it was obvious.”

Are you conscious about the virtual cultural matrix 10.000 or more years old built by human inheritance of animals’ instinct? I am talking about this culture that rules ours social systems, shared into big predators (the high class), medium predators (  medium class) and preys ( the slaves workers), mimicking the rules of the salvage jungle? The invention of religions is a good support for this culture due being good strategy for predators keeping slaves.  If yours students were shocked when facing reality it means they believed in it and came from middle class ( conditioned minds) because the high class knows that they are cheating. I will suggest a fantastic discovery from Matrix/DNA Theory for explaining how this virtual matrix works: I watched natives “shamans”  of Amazon jungle when taking their hallucinogenic beverages describing the same picture that very ancient people from Asia used as foundations for their mythos. The big surprise and question for me was: how could it be?! Ok, the first answer is that those people from such different places and time drunk same drugs. But, why this “altered visions” could be the foundations for religions? How they entered a brain dominated by animals instincts and survive together inside the brain?! One possible but surprising answer came when I arrived to Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems… like brains. The formula is suggesting a picture of LUCA ( the Last Universal Common Ancestor), which should be the evolutionary link between cosmological and biological evolution. This “luca” never stood at Earth’s surface, because it is the building block of astronomical systems, like this one that earth belongs to it. Another big surprise is that LUCA was described in full by those mythos. LUCA is a thermodynamic system working as perfect machine described by Physics, ( Newtonian mechanics plus general relativity) using a kind of words, metaphors, symbols, but, The Eden Paradise is the same thing described by another kind of metaphors, words, symbols! Same thing for the world view based on the symbols of I Ching. How could it be?! The explanation is rational, pure natural logistic. Systems as atoms, stellars, galaxies, are species and as such they are our evolutionary ancestors, like the species as bacterias, amoebas, reptiles. All these species are registered into our DNA’s memory. There is DNA for biological systems, but it came from another kind of “DNA” existing as building blocks for non-biological systems, which name I prefer “universal matrix”. ( The inanimate systems are registered at the junk DNA). So, when someone have altered states of brain, like those produced by drugs, this memory comes as flashes, scenes, and each people try to interpret it by its own way. You can see the seven symbols used for building the fable of Adam and Eve at the Eternal Paradise, inside a building block for any natural system, a perfect natural machine, described also by thermodynamic theory. Since that this astronomical building block is reproduced as the fundamental unit of  information called “a lateral pair of nucleotides”, you can now understand why these memories are inside our neurons. Look to LUCA at my website, and you can identify there, the serpent, the apple, the tree, the perfect paradise for Adam and Eve – which were the astronomical evolutionary state of X and Y chromosomes about 4 billion years ago! You will still understand what really was the Fall, and why the entropic force produces biological systems like me and you here. I think that once time this whole theory will be approved, it will destroy those mythos that are the foundations of all religions, forever. But… be aware: the world vision that you are teaching could be another kind of cheating the reality also. And it is, if this new theory will be proved right. So, like you can not see the virtual cultural matrix acting over you, don’t be surprised that yours students are shocked facing reality.

Caneta que levanta riscos para o ar? LinxPen, Util para Desenhos da Matrix/DNA?

quarta-feira, outubro 8th, 2014


Video no facebook:

Site desta escultura abaixo: