It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Manipulation of Information
“By clever and persevering use of propaganda even heaven can be represented as hell to the people, and conversely the most wretched life as paradise.”—ADOLF HITLER, MEIN KAMPF.
AS MEANS of communicating have expanded—from printing to the telephone, radio, television, and the Internet—the flow of persuasive messages has dramatically accelerated. This communications revolution has led to information overload, as people are inundated by countless messages from every quarter. Many respond to this pressure by absorbing messages more quickly and accepting them without questioning or analyzing them.
The cunning propagandist loves such shortcuts—especially those that short-circuit rational thought. Propaganda encourages this by agitating the emotions, by exploiting insecurities [see Dawkins' subtle mention of "a sophisticated physicist" vs "a naive person" in the video], by capitalizing on the ambiguity of language, and by bending rules of logic. As history bears out, such tactics can prove all too effective.
THE 12-year-old student was struggling to grasp the basic principles of algebra. His teacher presented the class with a seemingly straightforward algebraic calculation.
“Let x=y and let them both have the value of 1,” he began.
‘So far so good,’ thought the student.
After four lines of what looked like logical calculation, however, the teacher produced a startling result: “Therefore, 2=1!”
“Disprove that,” he challenged his bemused students.
With his very limited knowledge of algebra, the young student could not see how to disprove it. Every step in the calculation looked perfectly valid. Should he, then, believe this strange conclusion? After all, his teacher was much more versed in mathematics than he was. Of course he should not! ‘I do not have to disprove this,’ he thought to himself. ‘Common sense tells me that this is absurd.’ (Proverbs 14:15, 18) He knew that neither his teacher nor any of his classmates were going to exchange two dollars for one!
In time the algebra student did find the flaw in the computation. Meanwhile, the experience taught him a valuable lesson. Even when someone with vastly superior knowledge presents a carefully crafted and seemingly unassailable argument, a listener need not believe a foolish conclusion simply because he cannot disprove it at the time. The student was actually following a very practical Bible principle found at 1 John 4:1—not to believe too quickly everything you hear, even when it appears to come from an authoritative source.[whereislogic: see also my signature]
This does not mean that you should stubbornly stick to preconceived ideas. It is a mistake to close your mind to information that could adjust mistaken views. But neither should you be “quickly shaken from your reason” in the face of pressure from someone who claims to have great knowledge or authority. (2 Thessalonians 2:2) The teacher, of course, was merely playing a trick on his students. Sometimes, though, things are not so innocent. People can be extremely “cunning in contriving error.”—Ephesians 4:14; 2 Timothy 2:14, 23, 24.
Are Experts Always Right?
“The Falsely Called ‘Knowledge’”
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Noinden
Damn... another scientist?
There seems to be a lot of them that hang around these boards
I bow down to the smartieness of those presenting themselves as scientists on this board.
originally posted by: whereislogic
...the data now gathered from some 100 years of mutation research in general and 70 years of mutation breeding in particular enable scientists to draw conclusions regarding the ability of mutations to produce new species. After examining the evidence, Lönnig concluded: “Mutations cannot transform an original species [of plant or animal] into an entirely new one. This conclusion agrees with all the experiences and results of mutation research of the 20th century taken together as well as with the laws of probability.”
So, can mutations cause one species to evolve into a completely new kind of creature? The evidence answers no! Lönnig’s research has led him to the conclusion that “properly defined species have real boundaries that cannot be abolished or transgressed by accidental mutations.”22
22. Mutation Breeding, Evolution, and the Law of Recurrent Variation, pp. 49, 50, 52, 54, 59, 64, and interview with Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig [who has spent some 30 years studying mutation genetics in plants].
The formation of complex organic molecules (see also organic molecule) from simpler inorganic molecules through chemical reactions in the oceans during the early history of the Earth; the first step in the development of life on this planet. The period of chemical evolution lasted less than a billion years.
Chemical evolution may refer to:
Stellar nucleosynthesis, the creation of chemical elements by stellar thermonuclear fusion or supernovae
Abiogenesis, the transition from nonliving elements to living systems [whereislogic: the meaning I used and spelled out]
Evolution of metal ions in biological systems, incorporation of metallic ions into living organisms and how it has changed over time
Molecular evolution, evolution at the scale of molecules
Gas evolution reaction, the process of a gas bubbling out from a solution
Oxygen evolution, the process of generating molecular oxygen through chemical reaction
Astrochemistry, the study of the abundance and reactions of molecules in the Universe, and their interaction with radiation
Cosmochemistry, the study of the chemical compositions in the universe and the processes that led to them
So you start talking about the science in your words, and I shall engage.
Following on from chemical evolution came the initiation of biological evolution, which led to the first cells.
Several major ideas about evolution came together in the population genetics of the early 20th century to form the modern synthesis, including genetic variation, natural selection, and particulate (Mendelian) inheritance. This ended the eclipse of Darwinism and supplanted a variety of non-Darwinian theories of evolution.
The modern synthesis[a] was the early 20th-century synthesis reconciling Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and Gregor Mendel's ideas on heredity in a joint mathematical framework. Julian Huxley coined the term in his 1942 book, Evolution: The Modern Synthesis.
originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: TzarChasm
Its also not "Chemical evolution" as he is presenting it. As I pointed out to him Chemical evolution is gas being produced in a reaction. These fundamentalists refused to be consistent with their usage of words.
Some people insult those who disagree with them by questioning character or motives instead of focusing on the facts.
“‘Sect’ is another word for ‘heretic,’” wrote German Professor Martin Kriele in 1993, “and a heretic today in Germany, as in former times, is [condemned to extermination]—if not by fire . . . , then by character assassination, isolation and economic destruction.”