sammy7

I for one think this could be bullshit, but since you people know more about different sciences than I do, I thought you could help me determine whether or not these "UFO" sightings were real. hay that is some very interesting stuff but google things like "project blue beam" and stuff , imo i dont doubt man (military etc) has some pretty insane stuff that us folk (common ppl or "plebs' (lol) if you will) have no idea about , a girl i knew once in the navy confirmed something i said once when i was like "yeh they have all this technology (the military industrial complex i think is what some ppl call it) and they just trickle it down to us plebs in drips and drabs" and she was like yah yah (very tight lipped they have to sign things i think saying they wont talk) and she confirmed something about google earth ie whenever new "technology" or software or something becomes available to us in the public domain you can bet they (military or whatever) had it like at least 20 years before (she was saying something about google earth but i cant remember what exactly) also she said they call us (non navy airforce or military people) "civis" (siv-ees) lmao like we are just dumb ignorant "civis" (civilians) who have no idea whats really going on (lmao)lool so yeah i guess... well i mean who the hell knows what kind of technology exists up in the higher levels of that heirarchy..., also youve probably heard of haarp but if not its kind of interesting to read about (no first hand experience of it obv but its just interesting to read about)....interested to hear your reply...

hi intriguing topic, just want to know though what is your personal belief on origins? if your intention is just to undermine the bible i dont really care (no offense) either way this is an interesting thought and i will read more about it... thanks

well yeh kinda i guess, i just wanted an immunologists opinion on the above video (i believe it) but yeh sure i guess im interested to see if there is any literature ( i dont see how something can be predicted based on the starting point that it didnt happen because we did "x" so to speak? does that make sense? thanks

lmao please tell me how then? thanks

Yep, you don't know what a prediction is. We knew that they had to be fused BEFORE we discovered that they were. well i presume that man is looking for whatever "evidence" (i wouldnt call it that) he can find to somehow link us to apes or whatever and in this case the telomere telomere was used... please write the prediction model right here? also-just so we both know too micro-evolution (poor name imo) is variation within a kind if you will ie, brown dog black dog tall dog short dog etc etc (has been observed (obv) a child can see this... macro-evolution...the "concept" or "idea" that new "functional" genetic information (somehow wether by mutation or whatever) "appears" (mechanism of action could be determined but this *usually* happens after something has actually been observed (lol?) -this has obv never been observed (i will read lenskis experiments in detail and comment)... http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/ We don't need magic, because we know how it happened. Since we have samples, we can even point to the exact mutations. Mutation + selection = preserved change. Not only is it not magic, it's incredibly simple. so some bacteria can now consume citrate or whatever instead of whatever they could originally (i will read that link you posted but it will take a few hours so will just write this based on what i read of it the other day), it may/may not have even started with a mutation, they just passed/swapped around genes for allowing consumption or whatever of different "energy" sources. so there was no "gain" if you will of "new" information, . (which is exactly what ndt needs if it has even the remotest possiblity of being considered true) i will read the whole thing then comment more... "Kind" is meaningless which renders the quoted portion above meaningless, though it does seem to indicate that you don't even know what evolution actually is. im referring to macro evolution ie- a molecule turning into a man (lol) vie natural selection is what darwin proposed, except most mutations are deleterious to an organism except when in a "favourable" environment (so here we have natural selection ie, long hair animal lives/has offspring in a cold environment where as a short hair one dies off, genes for long hair keep geting passed on etc, only thing that survives in that environment is the animal with the genes for long hair etc, till the only genes left in that gene pool of that environment is the ones for long hair, so we have a DOWNWARD trend of genetic information ie, there has been a loss of options to the point that the organism is only left with long hair genes in this example, so natural selection in REAL LIFE (not darwins or dakwins fairytales) is a DOWNWARD trend of options or "information" if you will, for ndt we need somewhow to observe wether by natural selection or by just a mutation an UPWARD trend of genetic information ( the source of this could be hypothesized after it is actually observed) Thanks for completely ignoring the passage you quoted. Care to give a stab at the answer? Why doesn't "micro-evolution" accumulate into "macro-evolution"? i cant give an explanation for something that has never been observed... (does that make sense?) imo science goes-observe something first, then try to figure out how/what the mechanism of action behind it is, see my above quote please, more over the onus of proof is on those (dawkins other preaches who claim that "EVOLUTION VIA NATURAL SELECTION IS A SCIENTIFIC FACT!!!! (caps for dogmatic tone) to show something, how can one explain something that has never been observed?? does this make sense? im not being evasive i just cant see how logic can explain something that has never been observed? Also, saying "can you cite some literature for that" is vague as to be worthless. What exactly do you want citations for? What journals can you access? etc. ok again see my above quote please. im just saying if we want to call it science we need to actually observe it first (not have it only exist in the minds of those who believe it (no offence if you do believe it) ok thanks for your time

You don't seem to know what a prediction is. please write the exact prediction model then and i will show you how i can fit anything on the planet i want or any figment of my own personal imagination into it then (no offence) as long as you start with the CONCLUSION (presuppose whatever you want is actually true and work backwards lol) Then you've not looked very hard. If you have the proper storage equipment, you can even get samples of the Lenski experiment to confirm for yourself. Oh, and we do have examples of observed "macro-evolution" such as dog that can no longer breed with wolves. please cite the actual literature for lenskis experiments ( ive only read overviews etc) before even reading the literature im 100% confident i can explain the mechanism of action behind it and no it has nothing to do with new functional genetic information *magicly* (oh sorry were referring to purely naturalistic processes here so magic isnt allowed) appearing from one generation to the next... the dog/wolf are probably the same kind too ie they both have a common ancester -a dog, (same "kind" if you will) i will have to read more about things being able/not being able to interbreed before i can comment again... Speaking of "macro-evolution", since you make this distinction, what is the anti-accumulative mechanism that keeps "micro-evolution" from becoming "macro-evolution"? well sure you can believe that it can if you want (please cite some actual literature though, we are trying to call this science remember not personal opinion/ones belief system) but its just that...a belief... (unless you can cite some actual literature) so yeah... again were does this new "functional" genetic information come from? (im falsifying the actual story itself now (given there is no literature unless you can cite some)) magic? (again sorry no magic allowed as its a purely "naturalistic" process )...i will await your reply before i go in depth more if you want i guess... also to the other poster (not the guy im addressing above) i never claimed there is scientific evidence for "in the beginning god created" im unaware of a machine that allows one to travel into the past and thus observe said cause (for macro-evolution (the official story is from n.i.h. francis collins etc is we dont observe it today because it both started and stopped happening a long long time ago 9without observation)) or genesis 1.1.) thanks for your time

this is a quote from charlie darwin (now a corpse) from origin of species (i cant remember what page but w/e)i found it yesterday "Psychology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation." so his "theory" (theory deserves better) of (macro)evolution has pervaded every sector of everything to do with human thinking/life (imo psychology wouldnt be considered science anyway but thats just mo (not saying some people may not be "helped" by it just mo)) so yeah, if you want to understand modern day systems/schools of thought you have to understand what darwin and all his quack mates did to our way of thinking about things 150 yo or whatever (not saying the school of thought of evolution wasnt around before then coz it was-but thats another story) so darwin +all his mates were all swapping ideas etc etc, im not claiming to know it all because i dont but ive only been reading darwins/lyells/ (there was another guy to who was darwins cousin i think who was in the field of pyschology) etc stuff for a few weeks and can see the effect their opionins/thoughts has had on every area of life we see today. so the construct of modern day psychology is built on "psuedo" science if you will (macro evolution) so its doomed to fail from the very beginning...thanks for your time flame away etc etc...lol

yah yah but you believe the overall concept so to speak? ie the hinterlands of afgahnistan are loosely referred to as the "target population" if you will, and the delivery mechanism *may* be what is sometimes referred to as "chemtrails" (one dude mentions the word "aerosol") or possibly vaccines, i challenge an immunologist to please cite me one piece of literature showing efficacy of vaccines preventing diseases ( i dont know how he word diseases would be defined here +ive never asked this before so will be interested in/if something gets cited) thanks

hay i dont know a ton about it but a lot of practioners who deal with kids with autism do, ie candida albicans is normally present in the intestines i think but in certain circumstances (screwed up intestinal transit time lack of bile etc etc) it gets out of control and starts dominating (where as normally the "good" bacteria i think all the lacto's and bifido"s and the other zillions man probably doesnt know a thing about) usually keep it in "check" i think so to speak, so yeah it gets out of control and causes some nasty symptoms (these practioners would say) just google "candida albicans autism" and youll find tons of articles on candida and some unpleasant effect some people claims it causes.. ( i dont think the mainstream medical model even believes it exists so...).hope that helps.

hi thanks for reply. yes using that same prediction model i can- start with a presuppostion "x" is true , then make up whatever story i need and cite it happened in the (unobserved) past and walla! my prediction is true so the model is far far below actual reality/science (no offense). i could go on and on about the complete failure of the model and how any falsifying observation against it can be re-worked if you will as somehow actual evidence for it, and any prediction that it makes, although that prediction has never been observed..well again that somehow is actual evidence for it! so its the whole heads i win tails you lose thing, What, exactly, is the creationist explanation? Satan changed our DNA to trick us? well i only literally started believing this around 2 weeks ago (after utter failure of ndt to show any actual scientific evidence, yes im letting my investigations/scientific evidence (or lack thereof) guide me as opposed to blind faith in a model and not questioning the dogmatic preaching of it(no im not referring to the bible here but ndt, both christianity and evolution are religions/belief systems) but the creation model of life goes like this -starts with the presupposition the bible is the literal word of god (as evolution starts with blind faith that all these things happened in the unobserved past) and that genesis 1.1. is literally true (not like these (i will leave some unkind words out here) priests (i dont really even know what catholics believe either nor do i really care if they fail at the most basic book of the bible (genesis)) who get on tv with richard dawkins and fail the whole conversation as soon as they open their mouths "adam and eve are a myth" "god used evolution to evolve us (lol?) etc etc (author withholds opinions on these people lol) so from that starting point enter genesis- "in the beginning god created the heavens and the earth, and the earth was with out form and void and darkness was on the face of the deep, and god said "let there be light" (uni-verse means...single (uni) spoken word (verse)) and there was light, and god saw the light that it was GOOD, and god seperated the light from the darkness and the darkness he called night and the light he called day and the evening and the morning were the first day" (literal- bible timeline yields like 6k years or so) adam+eve are made on day 6, satan (the serpent) questions eve (god commanded them not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil or they would "surely die") saying -you shall not surely die! for god knows that in the day you eat of it then your eyes shall be opened and you shall be as gods knowing good and evil!(thats were the whole concept of "evolving" comes from ie-we can become like gods or something become wise through our own knowledge and "ascend" (evolve) if you will to be like god (s). so eve+adam disobey god, listen to satan, eat the apple, "sin" enters the world, fall of man, etc etc and its been an awesome downhill trend ever since (increasing mutations disease death suffering etc etc) so yeah imo makes perfect sense (keeping in mind both ndt religion and christianity religion both require faith as the starting point except christianity has eyewitness testimony imo-god (lol)) so yeah thats the creationist view point of origins....ask away please... thanks for your time.... (i can also make and extremely interesting comment about electricity too if you want... (i figured it out myself and feel proud and yesterday realised nikola telsa had the same revelation...)

ok sure sorry will know for next time thanks

hay all im a creationist the earth is around 6000 yo etc etc, the literature "Origin of human chromosome 2: An ancestral telomere-telomere fusion" has imo 4-5 NON SCIENTIFIC "FAILS" in it. ie "is precisely that predicted for a head-to-head telomeric fusion of two chromosomes" i can predict any effect today and "link" it to an UNOBSERVED "cause" (MACRO-evolution) in the past if i want....and call it science in the process... "The data we present here demonstrate that a telomere-to-telomere fusion of ancestral chromosomes occurred, leaving a pathognomonic relic at" cites some unobserved cause in the past (look at word "occurred) and this is the cornerstone literature of MACRO-evolution???? (if there is more recent one please cite it as this literature is 20yo.) "The telomere-telomere fusion at region 2q13 must have been accompanied or followed by inactivation or elimination of one of the ancestral centromeres," again lets just make assumptions (imagination) and call it science in the process.. ive only been looking for evidence (scientific not just-so storys/fairytales etc) for neodarwinian theory for a few months and almost certain anymore looking would be a complete waste of time (unless someone can cite some literature please dont waste time unless your confident/know what your talking about etc) please watch "richard dawkins stumped" on youtube to see what happens when dakwins gets asked an actual science question as opposed to people just believing his dogmatic preaching...oh and watch "dawkins fails to remember origin of species" on youtube...for me this made me realise (only 2 months ago or so) that the emporer is indeed wearing no clothes... origin of species=adam and eve (for humans) lol will post more but wait for reply thanks for reading...

immunologists id like to hear from you's on this one thanks

small intestine hands down, poor digestion-less absorption-less amino acids/fats, water soluble vitamins (b"s), fat solubles (adek), minerals less cofactors for enzymes/less amino acids for neurotransmitters, less fats for nervous system cells etc etc nasty nasty downhill slide...

sure im a complete layman with no scientific training in anything but i think certain "opportunistic" bacteria or something feed on certain carbohydrates (or maybe the products of poorly broken down/digested carbohydrates or something?) so yeah just google "small intestine bacterial overgrowth" or something im unaware if anything can/does feed off of amino acids (dont think they do) in the intestines so yeh...youll find a bunch of things to kill them/reestablish good bacteria/improve digestion etc...easy...

hi all new here. i had a super rare problem called superior mesenteric artery syndrome for a long time and had surgery to correct it although it didnt actually improve my digestions/way i feel etc.i feel it might be due to a triggering problem with the pancreas/gallbladder etc just want to know concerning fat absorption/digestion-i understand the efa's (dha epa) are long chain fatty acids so bile+lipase is absolutely necessary for break down/absorption is this right? ie short and medium chain fatty acids dont need either lipase/bile to be absorbed they can just go straight across the intestinal wall or whatever? (sucks they arnt the ones that are the efa's) so im going to buy some lecithin and mix it with liquid fish oil (dha+epa) to emulsify it, this will remove the necissity of bile (ive bought ox bile/bile salts too but will try this first), then i will take creon with it for lipase and *hopefully* this should nail it right? want to hear from a biochem expert... ok thanks bye sam