| |
|
|
Adam'Scientific Adam'Dr. Spencer Wells & Genographic Project |
|
|
|
Tagline: Adam, where are thou? by Paul Quek, from Singapore BBA (Hons), MAppSci (CompSci) [Bachelor of Business Administration, Honours]
[Master of Applied Science, Computing Science] Check this out: Cool Software! (New window opens) | Incept Date: | | 17 October 2008 | | Rev'd Date: | | 19 June 2009 |
Notes on Browsers
(New window opens)
 www.pearsall-family.org/
PearsallDNASurnameProject_files/image033.jpg |  freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com
/~nolenancestry/page1.html |  /freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com
/~nolenancestry/page2.html |
1.0 PrologThis web article is about the search for the ancestor of the human race ... or
ADAM, the individual who is supposed to be the first human that God created ... To many, the ORIGIN question is perhaps the most contentious issue. And in the
minds of many people, it is also far from settled. For those who have been
exposed to the Judaistic-Christian traditions, the ORIGIN question involves the
ADAM issue ...
2.0 Notes2.1 Origin of ManProbably, the most contentious mystery is the Origin of Man, aka Origin of
Humans ... If you have a 'faith' or 'belief system', then you already have an opinion
about the matter ... and that opinion may range from the 'mainstream' (aka
'orthodox') religious view, through the not-so-orthodox, and to the other end
of the 'faith' or 'belief' spectrum such as the so-called 'New Age' views ... For the scientific mainstream, it is all a matter involving Evolution ... Human evolution Human evolution, or anthropogenesis, is the part of biological evolution concerning the emergence of Homo sapiens sapiens [note: the double "sapiens" is not an error! — paulquek] as a distinct species from other hominans, great apes and placental mammals. It is the subject of a broad scientific
inquiry that seeks to understand and describe how this change occurred. The
study of human evolution encompasses many scientific disciplines, most notably
physical anthropology, linguistics and genetics. The term "human", in the context of human evolution, refers to the genus Homo,
but studies of human evolution usually include other hominins, such as the australopithecines. The Homo genus diverged from the australopithecines about 2 million years ago
in Africa. Several typological species of Homo, now extinct, evolved. These
include Homo erectus, which inhabited Asia, and Homo neanderthalensis, which inhabited Europe. Archaic Homo sapiens evolved between 400,000 and 250,000 years ago. The dominant view among
scientists is the recent African origin of modern humans (RAO) that H. sapiens evolved in Africa and spread across the globe, replacing populations of H. erectus and H. neanderthalensis. Scientists supporting the alternative hypothesis on the multiregional origin of modern humans (MRO) view modern humans as having evolved as a single, widespread population from
existing Homo species, particularly H. erectus. The fossil evidence is
insufficient to resolve this vigorous debate. Starting with H. habilis, humans began using stone tools of increasing sophistication. About 50,000
years ago, human technology and culture began to change more rapidly. — en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution(NB. / Note Well: The fossil record gives us some form of evidence for Evolution ... but I
predict that eventually fossils will play a minor, subsidiary or supporting
role only. Why? Because with advances in genetics, genetic engineering,
cloning, genome sequencing, biotechnology — as well computer
science research areas, such as nanotechnology, artificial life, artificial
intelligence, robotics, etc., — we should be able to have
'Evolution on Demand', or EOD? You want an Asian baby with blue eyes and
Einstein's brains? You want a koi fish as large as a typical killer shark, with
teeth to match? How about crossing a human with a lion, to produce Lion Man,
eh? Scary, right? Only if you are a cowardly Luddite, a loser throwback from
the retro 20th Century!) Then, there is the religious crowd, which also has marshalled their scientific experts ... and proposed alternatives to evolution ... offering
scientific arguments and supports for Creationism, as well as that very interesting idea of Intelligent Design (by God? Or — Intelligent Design by Aliens?? Who then created or designed those Aliens???)
. Creationism Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the
universe were created in their original form by a deity (often the Abrahamic
God of Judaism, Christianity and Islam) or deities. In relation to the
creation-evolution controversy the term creationism is commonly used to refer
to religiously-motivated rejection of evolution as an explanation of origins. Such beliefs include young Earth creationism, proponents of which believe that
the earth is thousands rather than billions of years old. They typically
believe the days in Genesis Chapter 1 are 24 hours in length, while Old Earth
creationism accepts geological findings and other methods of dating the earth
and believes that these findings do not contradict the Genesis account, but
reject evolution. The term theistic evolution has been coined to refer to
beliefs in creation which are more compatible with the scientific view of
evolution and the age of the Earth. Alternately, there are other religious
people who support creation, but in terms of allegorical interpretations of
Genesis. Creationism in the West is usually based on creation according to Genesis, and
in its broad sense covers a wide range of beliefs and interpretations. Through
the 19th century the term most commonly referred to direct creation of
individual souls, in contrast to traducianism. However, by 1929 in the United
States the term became particularly associated with Christian fundamentalist
opposition to human evolution and belief in a young Earth. Several U.S. states
passed laws against the teaching of evolution in public schools, as upheld in
the Scopes Trial. Evolution was omitted entirely from school textbooks in much
of the United States until the 1960s. Since then, renewed efforts to introduce
teaching creationism in American public schools in the form of flood geology,
creation science, and intelligent design have been consistently held to
contravene the constitutional separation of Church and State by a succession of
legal judgments. The meaning of the term creationism was contested, but by the
1980s it had been co-opted by proponents of creation science and flood geology. When mainstream scientific research produces conclusions which contradict a
creationist interpretation of scripture, the strict creationist approach is
either to reject the conclusions of the research, its underlying scientific
theories, and/or its methodology. For this reason, both creation science and
intelligent design have been labeled as pseudoscience by the mainstream
scientific community. The most notable disputes concern the effects of
evolution on the development of living organisms, the idea of common descent,
the geologic history of the Earth, the formation of the solar system, and the
origin of the universe. — en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CreationismIntelligent design Intelligent design is the assertion that "certain features of the universe and
of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected
process such as natural selection." It is a modern form of the traditional
teleological argument for the existence of God that avoids specifying the
nature or identity of the designer. The idea was developed by a group of
American creationists who reformulated their argument in the creation-evolution
controversy to circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of
creationism as science. Intelligent design's leading proponents, all of whom
are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think
tank, believe the designer to be the God of Christianity. Advocates of
intelligent design argue that it is a scientific theory, and seek to
fundamentally redefine science to accept supernatural explanations. The consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is not
science. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism,
intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin
of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the
methods of science." The US National Science Teachers Association and the
American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it
pseudoscience. Others in the scientific community have concurred, and some have
called it junk science. "Intelligent design" originated in response to the 1987 United States Supreme
Court Edwards v. Aguillard ruling involving separation of church and state. Its
first significant published use was in Of Pandas and People, a 1989 textbook
intended for high-school biology classes. Several additional books on
"intelligent design" were published in the 1990s. By the mid-1990s, intelligent
design proponents had begun clustering around the Discovery Institute and more
publicly advocating the inclusion of intelligent design in public school
curricula. With the Discovery Institute and its Center for Science and Culture
serving a central role in planning and funding, the "intelligent design
movement" grew increasingly visible in the late 1990s and early 2000s,
culminating in the 2005 "Dover trial" which challenged the intended use of
intelligent design in public school science classes. In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, a group of parents of high-school
students challenged a public school district requirement for teachers to
present intelligent design in biology classes as an alternative "explanation of
the origin of life". U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that
intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its
creationist, and thus religious, antecedents", and that the school district's
promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. — en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_designFor the purpose of this particular 'Adam' web article (which is sub-titled
'Scientific Adam'), we won't get ourselves involved in the arguments about Evolution vs.
Creationism, or Evolution vs. Intelligent Design, etc. ... So, let's get on with our exploration into more
practical — and, it is hoped — more fruitful
paths. 2.2 Blog Post/EntryThe following is adapted from a posting in the blog of freelance writer Jennifer SaylorJourney of Man ... Journey of Man [is] a geneticist’s journey to understand the paths of the
first human migrations out of Africa tens of thousands of years ago. It's
narrated by geneticist Spencer Wells, who trekked the world taking blood from people in remote places, searching
for genetic markers that would indicate that early humans had passed through
certain areas as they left Africa to populate the world. ... the first evidence of humans outside of Africa appears in — of all places —
Anne’s homeworld of Australia, 6,000 miles away from Africa across the open
ocean. How did the early humans get there? What route did they take, and would
people along the way still hold genetic clues that some of the first humans
passed through 400 centuries ago, leaving a few of their group behind to stay? Wells goes all over the world to find out, to India and Kyrgyzstan and Africa,
even to the freezing Siberian steppes of the nomadic Chuckchi people, the
“cousins” of all truly native North Americans. According to Wells the Chuckchi
stayed in Siberia while others in the same group kept going, eventually
becoming the Inuit, Incas, Aztecs and American Indians. ... We are all, as Wells says, essentially African. To me it’s a documentary
about race, really, about how “race” is just a snapshot of the long unending
action of evolution, a living creature’s adaptation to the climate where her
people find themselves. We look the way we look so we can maximize our chances
for survival, so our skins can help us make all the Vitamin D we need. We are
tall or short depending on how cold it is where our people stay long; short
people have less surface area through which to lose precious heat to a cold
environment. Start out relatively tall and brown as the Cro-Magnon people did,
and cold, it seems, will eventually make you short and fair. All it takes is a few thousand years. [...] — jennifersaylor.wordpress.com/2007/05/2.3 NatGeo NewsJennifer Saylor was referring, of course, to the NatGeo project undertaken by
Dr. Spencer Wells ... the NatGeo website has the following to say about that
interesting project: Documentary Redraws Humans' Family Tree Hillary Mayell
for National Geographic News
January 21, 2003 By analyzing DNA from people in all regions of the world, geneticist Spencer
Wells has concluded that all humans alive today are descended from a single man
who lived in Africa around 60,000 years ago. Modern humans, he contends, didn't start their spread across the globe until
after that time. Most archaeologists would say the exodus began 100,000 years
ago—a 40,000-year discrepancy. Wells's take on the origins of modern humans and how they came to populate the
rest of the planet is bound to be controversial. His work adds to an already crowded field of opposing hypotheses proposed by
those who seek answers in "stones and bones"—archaeologists and
paleoanthropologists—and those who seek them in our blood—population
geneticists and molecular biologists. Over the last decade, major debate on whether early humans evolved in Africa or
elsewhere, when they began outward migration, where they went, and whether they
interbred with or replaced archaic species has moved out of scientific journals
and into the public consciousness. Wells addresses these issues in a new book, The Journey of Man: A Genetic
Odyssey, and a National Geographic documentary of the same title. In a
straightforward story, he explains how he traced the exodus of modern humans
from Africa by analyzing genetic changes in DNA from the y-chromosome. "As often happens in science," he said, "technology has opened up a field to
new ways of answering old questions—often providing startling answers." Of course, not everyone agrees with him. [...] — news.nationalgeographic.com/news/
2002/12/1212_021213_journeyofman_2.html
3.0 YouTube Videos  |  SUNY Fredonia Website
(www.fredonia.edu/prweb/cr/Vol38_7.htm) |
3.1 NatGeo/IBM-sponsored Genographic Project
Here are video clips from the popular video hosting site, YouTube... These include the documentary from the National Geographic Channel — a.k.a. NatGeo Channel, or NGC — which was
aired or
broadcasted in 2005. The documentary was entitled "DNA Mysteries: The Search for Adam". It was hosted and narrated by Dr. Spencer Wells — "leading geneticist and National Geographic
Explorer-In-Residence", and project head. The documentary programme (and the project) set out to answer such questions as: Could we all be descendants of an "Adam"? And if Adam existed, who was he,
where did he live, and what did he look like? Or, as the SUNY Fredonia web site puts it: Are we all descendents of the same person? Spencer Wells, a new breed of explorer, uses DNA collected across the earth to answer questions like that and more. —
www.fredonia.edu/prweb/cr/Vol38_7.htm (adapted) Dr. Wells' quest — the NatGeo/IBM-sponsored "Genographic Project" — is "to trace every man's family tree back to an ultimate ancestor", referred to in the NatGeo Channel (NGC) as the "scientific Adam" who was the earliest or ultimate "superancestor". There were several other "superancestors" — one could have
been Genghis Khan, another Thomas Jefferson! — who descended from "the scientific Adam", and from there the family tree of humanity (or, specifically, man) spread
out across the globe.
Why only 'man', and why not 'woman'? This is not due to any sexism! It is
literally about the men-only Y-chromosome that is transferred virtually unchanged — sometimes, with a mutation in this chromosome — from man to man; the mutations in the
Y-chromosome allowed Dr. Wells to trace the genealogy of large groups of man. Dr. Wells' quest ended up in Africa "where he pinpointed the birthplace of human kind. Using the latest technology in DNA research and forensic anthropology, Wells
and others reconstruct the life and face of [the scientific] Adam".  Source: www.alphachimp.com/poptech/images/ |
The programme invites us to explore "a world where science and religion
converge", so that it may be that if we can find the "scientific Adam", we can
find the more problematic Biblical Adam of faith. The Biblical Adam is part of the faith systems of more than half of the world's
population — that is, from adherents, believers and supporters
of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. Anyway, here are the potentially relevant tags (useful for further searches on
the Net) for this particular NGC programme:
Abiogenesis Biology Christianity Charles Darwin Evolution Faith
Fundamentalist Galapagos Islands Life Richard Dawkins Understanding
Science Learning Channel Knowledge Mechanics Processes Organisms Theory
Psychologist Natural Selection Sexual Religion Religious Origin Genetics
Scientist Evolutionary Biologist Homo Sapiens Humans National
Geographic Society Spencer Wells
3.2 The Genographic Project, Part 1 & Part 2This clip was "added", or uploaded, to YouTube on April 04, 2007, by someone who
used the handle "YaLibnanTV" — here is what the video summary
says ... "This is from December 10th, 2006. "You can sign up here to contribute your DNA: www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/journey.html "You can look here to see the journey of man, but do you know which one is you
ancestor's path? www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html "If you are from Lebanon & Malta especially, and/or Syria, Palestine, Cyprus,
Tunisia, Carthage, Southern Spain, Sicily, Sardinia, France (Marseille), then I
would highly recommend you contribute your DNA. It is only saliva. If you have
taken the test and you are from these places then please get in contact with me
and let me know your results. If you have not taken the test, then what are you
waiting for? The project ends in 2010. Once you get your results then please
get in contact with me. Thank you and I hope all of you have enjoyed these
videos. Tags: Genographic Project DNA Phoenician humans genetics science
Canaanite Carthage Malta Libnan Lebanese Tyre Canaan
3.3 IBM Genographic ProjectCheck out www-03.ibm.com/industries/healthcare/genographic/as well as www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/. The video summary of this video clip entitled "IBM Genographic Project" quotes
from Wikipedia (my favorite free, user-editable, online encyclopedia) as follows:  Field researchers will collect DNA samples from indigenous populations as well
as allow for public participation. For US$100 anyone in the world can order a self-testing kit from which a mouth
scraping (saliva swab) is obtained, analyzed and the DNA information placed on
an Internet accessible database. The process will be completely anonymous and will not test for medically
relevant traits. Instead genetic markers on mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomes will be used to
trace distant ancestry, and each participant is provided with their genetic
history. As of June 2007, more than 210,000 people have participated. The US$40m project is a privately-funded collaboration between the National
Geographic Society, IBM and the Waitt Family Foundation. The proceeds from the sale of self-testing kits support the Genographic
Project's ongoing DNA collection. Parts of the proceeds are said to be ploughed
into a Legacy Fund to be spent on cultural preservation projects nominated by
indigenous communities. Tags: genographic project evolution common ancestry out of africa
mitochindrial eve DNA sequences human lineage |
3.4 The Genographic ProjectThe info-summary of this YouTube video clip asks "Could our ancestors be more
alike than we think?" This clip shows four people mapping their " genographical history". Tags: genographic dna history ancestors family africa
3.5 TED ConferenceAnother interesting video clip from YouTube is the TED Conference (TED:
Technology, Entertainment, Design) in which Dr. Spencer Wells spoke about the family tree that his "Genographic Project" is constructing for
the whole of humanity ... The video clip is entitled "Spencer Wells: Building a
family tree for all humanity". As usual, the basis of Dr. Wells' presentation
is that all
of us "share some common bits of DNA, passed down to us from our African
ancestors", and that "this shared DNA" makes us, despite all our diversity,
"truly connected". We are apparently all descendants of the ultimate
"superancestor" that scientists like Dr. Wells and his team of investigators
call the " scientific Adam". Tags: Spencer Wells TED TEDtalks talks Africa Anthropology Culture DNA
Genetics Race Science
3.6 MSNBC TVIn the MSNBC TV video clip entitled "Genealogist Dr. Spencer Wells talks about Humans Genetics", Dr. Spencer Wells discusses with the MSNBC TV
crew about their family trees and their genes to trace their history deeper. Tags: genetics spencer wells geneologist human race environment dna
ancestors genes ancestry africa
3.7 Charlie Rose TV Talk ShowIn the video clip entitled "Charlie Rose - Henry Louis Gates, Jr. / Spencer
Wells /..." about the Charlie Rose TV Talk Show, there are 3 segments ... Segment 1: Henry Louis Gates, Jr. of Harvard University spoke about his latest
project for PBS, African American Lives. The search for an individual's genealogy is related to, but is not really
part of, the Genographic Project; the latter is more about "deep ancestry", especially for the entire human race. Segment 2: [Dr.] Spencer Wells, Director of the Genographic Project, talked about the
quest to chart ancient human migrations from Africa across the globe, where Africa was the birthplace of the "scientific Adam", that is, the ultimate "superancestor" of the entire human race. Segment 3: Part Two of a conversation with Major General Douglas Lute, Director
of Operations, Centcom (about the US's engagement in Iraq; not part of the
Genographic Project!) Tags: charlie_rose tvshow sv_charlierose sv hp
Adam ('Scientific Adam')  Javascript must be enabled!
Required at least Flash 8 ... | PAUSE RESUMETo play video, click on title in menu below. |
4.0 EpilogThe ORIGIN question may never be settled ... Science has one viewpoint, while
many religions and 'belief-faith' systems offer many viewpoints. It is doubtful
that any particular viewpoint offers the complete answer, even if they are
valid to the supporters and adherents of that viewpoint. Cheers!
Webmeister
Woodlands, Singapore| Incept Date: | | 17 October 2008 | | Rev'd Date: | | 19 June 2009 |
 |  |  |  | This website is predicated on the basis of the following categorization of the
Sciences ... Four Categories of Science By Stanton T. Friedman (Former Nuclear Physicist)Some people have insisted that if I can't provide a piece of a [flying] saucer
or an alien body, there is nothing to support my claims. I was quite surprised
during my last visit with Carl Sagan in December 1992, when he claimed that the
essence of the scientific method was reproducibility. In actuality, as I wrote
Sagan later on, there are at least four different kinds of science: - [Category-1 Science] Yes, there is a lot of excellent science done by people who set up
an experiment in which they can control all the variables and equipment. They
make measurements and then publish their results, after peer review, and
describe their equipment, instruments, and activity in detail so that others
can duplicate the work and, presumably, come to the same conclusions. Such
science can be very satisfying, and certainly can contribute to the advancement
of knowledge. However, it is not the only kind of science.
- [Category-2 Science] A second kind of science involves situations in which one cannot
control all the variables, but can predict some. For example, I cannot prove
that on occasion the moon comes directly between the sun and the Earth and
casts a shadow of darkness on the Earth, because I cannot control the positions
of the Earth, moon, or sun. What can be done is predicting the times when such
eclipses will happen and being ready to make observations when they occur.
Hopefully the weather where I have my instruments will allow me to make lots of
measurements.
- [Category-3 Science] A third kind of science involves events that can neither be
predicted nor controlled, but one can be ready to make measurements if
something does happen. For example, an array of seismographs can be established
to allow measurements to be made at several locations in the event of an
earthquake. When I was at the University of Chicago, a block of nuclear
emulsion was attached to a large balloon that would be released when a
radiation detector indicated that a solar storm had occurred (something we
could neither produce nor predict). Somebody would rush to Stagg Field and
release the balloon. When the balloon was
retrieved, the emulsion would be carefully examined to measure the number,
direction, velocity, and mass characteristics of particles unleashed by the sun.
- [Category-4 Science] Finally, there is a fourth kind of science, still using the rules
to attack difficult problems. These are the events that involve intelligence,
such as airplane crashes, murders, rapes, and automobile accidents. We do not
know when or where they will occur, but we do know they will. In a typical year
more than 40,000 Americans will be killed in automobile accidents. We don't
know where or when, so rarely are TV cameras whirling when these events take
place. But we can, after the fact, collect and evaluate evidence. We can
determine if the driver had high levels of alcohol in his or her blood, whether
the brakes failed, whether the visibility was poor, where a skid started, and
so on. Observations of strange phenomena in the sky come under this last
category.
In all the category-4 events, we must obtain as much testimony from witnesses
as possible. Some testimony is worth more than other testimony, perhaps because
of the duration of observation, the nearness of the witnesses to the event, the
specialized training of the observer, the availability of corroborative
evidence such as videos and still photos, or the consistency of evidence when
there is testimony from more than one witness. Our entire legal system is based
on testimony — rarely is there conclusive proof such as DNA
matching. Judges and juries must decide, with appropriate cross-examination,
who is telling the truth. In some states, testimony from one witness can lead
to the death penalty
for the accused. We should take note of the fact that even instrument data is dependent on
testimony from the observer of the instruments, and on appropriate calibration
and validation under standardized circumstances. Also, our courts place limits
on requirements for testimony, such as that against one spouse by the other.
Furthermore, there are rules about hearsay testimony, and rules regarding legal
evidence are complex and detailed. When it comes to flying saucers, we must remember that the reason most
sightings can be determined to be relatively conventional phenomena, often seen
under unusual circumstances, is that most people are relatively good observers.
The problem comes with the interpretation of what was observed. People watching
the sky late at night may get excited about a very bright light that moved very
slowly. Checking on the position of the planets at that time may reveal that
that light was Venus, because we have good information as to the angle of
observation, the direction of the light from the observer, the relatively slow
rate of motion, the location of Venus at that time, and so on. On three
occasions, when living in Southern California, I was called by people who
described an unusual object moving rapidly. I tried to make sure that I
analyzed their observations, such as, what time was it? In what direction were
you looking? In what direction did it seem to be moving? Was there any sound?
What was its apparent size, say, as compared to the moon (just covered by an
aspirin held at arm's length)? Two of the people wanted to tell me that the object was just over the next
hill. I stressed that this was an interpretation, because even huge objects far
away can seem to be small objects nearby. In all three cases, I felt that what
was being described sounded similar to a rocket launched down the California
Coast when the sun had gone down, but while the object was high enough to still
be in sunlight. I had seen such a spectacular case once myself. I checked, in
all three cases, with Vandenberg Air Force Base, which launches many rockets
down the U.S. West Coast. Indeed, there had been a launch at the right time in
each case. One case was especially intriguing, because several witnesses were
looking out across the ocean from a beach area and described the thing they saw
as similar to a string of popcorn. It turned out to be the launch of a special
weather satellite with extra solid boosters being dropped off multiple times. The people were good observers. To say the least, it would be irrational to say
that people are good observers when their input allows us to identify the
object being observed, and yet poor observers if we can't identify the UFO as
something conventional. — Stanton T. Friedman (Nuclear Physicist)
Flying Saucers and Science
Subtitle — A Scientist Investigates the Mysteries of UFOs: Interstellar Travel, Crashes,
and Government Cover-Ups
(Chapter 1 - "The Case for the ET Origin of Flying Saucers")
(Franklin Lakes, NJ: New Page Books, 2008)   |  |  |  |  |
| | | | Nine Points to Note - Recently, we added a simple blog so that you would be apprised of the latest
changes to the Mysteries of the World Website. To get the updates automatically, CLICK HERE to subscribe to our RSS (you will get a new window or 'tab'). Thanks and cheers!
Warning to the unthinking (and to the control freaks and power junkies) ... You probably won't like the following 'thinking' observation ... But it's
an important part of any exploration, investigation, study, etc. of the Mysteries of the World ... SEVEN DOORS TO SEVEN ROOMS OF THOUGHT- Accept the statement of Eminent Authority without basis, without question.
- Disagree with the statement without basis, out of general contrariness.
- Perhaps the statement is true, but what if it isn't? How then to account for
the phenomenon?
- How much of the statement rationalizes to suit man's purpose that he and his
shall be ascendant at the centre of things?
- What if the minor should become major, the recessive dominant, the obscure
prevalent?
- What if the statement were reversible, that which is considered effect is
really cause?
- What if the natural law perceived in one field also operates unperceived in all
other phases of science? What if there be only one natural law manifesting
itself, as yet, to us in many facets because we cannot apperceive the whole, of
which we have gained only the most elementary glimpses, with which we can cope
only at the crudest level?
And are those still other doors, yet undefined, on down the corridor? |
- Please do not assume or conclude that, just because I present many views (in
the form of textual notes, pictures/stills, and audio and video
clips) — as well as many advertisements, some by me and some
automatically by Google Adsense and Amazon — on this website,
it does not
mean that I am in agreement with or that I believe in the views and/or ads
offered-proferred ... That would be displaying such a parochial and provincial
attitude, towards this website and towards me as well!
As an ex-military officer, I assure you that I am in the habit of reading,
viewing and digesting lots of stuff that I don't necessarily believe in ... We
call all the stuff we read, view and digest, 'military intelligence' ... The
same applies with 'business intelligence' in the business world, of course. Our aim, as usual, is to find out what others (including our friends, enemies,
competitors, suppliers, strategic partners, business partners, etc.) believe
in. In order to do that effectively, we have to 'get out of the way', so to
speak — we have to remove our humongous
ego! — else we will never ever really have gotten started in
our journey of exploration and discovery of the Mysteries of the World. Furthermore, similarly and additionally, as a "Charismatic Christian", there
are lots of stuff presented in this website that I do not believe in ... which
had even led some to label me as "Fundamentalist"! ... Whatever! Matthew 7 1Judge not, that ye be not judged.2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye
mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest
not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye;
and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt
thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. — Jesus the Christ
(Yahoshua ha Mashiach;
Yeshua/Yesua; Ieosus; Joshua),
"Sermon on the Mount"
If you want to hear the NIV — specifically, from The Visual Bible: Matthew (1993) — please click the audio player below:
In short, in this website, I present many things that, I am hopeful, would be
of interest to a student, explorer and investigator of the Mysteries of the World ... but this doesn't mean that I believe in any of the stuff presented. ... Got it? ... Right! - Here is a purpose that I am wholeheartedly in agreement with ...
[Mysteries, Monsters, Mutants, Myths, Miracles & Much More ...]Our purpose ... is to describe the rich variety of anomalous, unexplained,
sometimes totally bizarre phenomena that people have experienced in all times
and places and that are still occurring today. ... the nature of the world and
of our existence are quite different from that which we were taught at school.
The reality is far more interesting, humorous and expansive than any religious
or rational, scientific world-view can possibly accommodate. It is not our intention here to dispute anyone's beliefs or
theories — but we should like to point out their limitations.
There are things that happen in this world - and have occurred throughout the
whole of human experience - for which there has never been a lasting
explanation. Explanations are temporary products, coming and going in response
to fashions. Meanwhile, the happenings they are supposed to explain carry on as
mysteriously as ever. — John Michell and Bob Rickard
The Rough Guide to Unexplained Phenomena (Rough Guide Reference)
(New York, NY: Rough Guides Ltd, 2007) - Here is a sentiment that I am wholeheartedly in agreement with ...
As I sit down to redo this book for an American audience, what rises before me
is last night's dream: I'm in a broad and beautiful land among many trees. It's
night. I look up at a huge old tree that's dark against the starry sky in its
detail of twig and branch. There is room enough here for all of us, I realize,
here in this big, intricately textured park. But I see that some want to cut
down the trees and level it out, so huge throngs of people can gather to gaze
up at the sun's glare. I watch dark twigs fingering the remote, untouchable
stars. A voice speaks: "Don't turn this into a Copernican Garden." Waking up, I remember that I went to sleep wondering how to put this book
together. And I take "Copernican Garden" to mean a parking lot vista where
masses gather to honor the bright sun of traditional science with its old rules
as the center of the universe. So I will not cut down the trees and level this book out. It is between you and
me [or you and I], a conversation as we stroll along in a moonlit fractal
garden past webby connections of thought that merge to patterned insight. Here
hidden delights nestle in scaling patterns of self-similar but never quite
repeating beauty. Here the tree of life hold stars in its branches. No matter
how huge, this garden stays human-sized because we have a place in it, you and
I. No need to cut down the connective forest and level things out for that
bright Sol [sun] of left-brain logic whose daytime dazzle — so
close and glaring — can blind us to the myriad constellations
beyond. [...] — Katya Walter, Tao of Chaos
Sub-title: Merging East and West
(1994, 1996) - Here is an observation (adapted) made in the Acknowledgement page of a book ...
It takes many minds to produce a book [including an e-book, of course].
Although most authors [especially of non-fiction books and articles] would
prefer not to admit this fact, fundamentally they are merely 'synthesisers' of
accumulated knowledge. The process of synthesising may unveil a new reality map, or paradigm, which,
in due course, will be used by future pioneers to unveil further paradigms. This principle was summed up by Sir Isaac Newton when he remarked: "If I have
seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants". [...] — Christian von Nidda, Our Secret Planet
(2005) - Here is an observation about UFO-Aliens cover-up or conspiracy that may be of
general interest, although some readers would not agree with the observation
(e.g., they may say that some whistleblowers, such as Bob Lazar on the
Roswell-type flying saucers in secret Area-51 labs, have already come forward)
...
If any long-term coherent cover up of UFO information does exist, however, then
it must operate at all levels of government and the media. It must encompass
all the relevant written materials, from the briefest handwritten note in
government files to entries in squadron log books to letters in the personal
papers of members of the Establishment. Hundreds of politicians, service
personnel, police officers, clerks and officials, over half a century, would be
required to excise any reference to the reality of UFOs from official documents
and the media. The number of people who would have taken part in this cover up
would be vast, yet not one person has broken ranks to 'blow the whistle' on the
greatest story ever told. Meantime, millions of dollars are being spent every
day on space probes and radio telescopes that are searching for evidence of
alien life. Would there be any reason for a conspiracy of silence if that
evidence already existed? — Dr David Clarke and Andy Roberts, Out of the Shadows
(2002) - Even though I am a "Charismatic Christian", the views presented herewith, in
this Mysteries of the World Website, will NOT be colored by this fact of being a Charismatic Christian. Rather, where and
when I find it necessary (and usually, I would NOT find it necessary, since I find it tiresome to repeat myself, again and again
and again ..., ad infinitum ..., but if I should find it necessary to repeat myself), I will then state
what my Charismatic Christian beliefs lead me to believe
in — even though I am aware that my own Charismatic Christian
beliefs may or may not be the same as, or in accord with, those beliefs of
others who also may want to regard themselves as Charismatic Christians
(nb/note well: there appears to be so many varieties of Charismatic Christian
beliefs, including from those who are simultaneously of the
traditional-historical denominations — such as the Roman
Catholics, with their purgatories, mortal and venial sins, and their Mother
this and Mother that. Shudder! Shudder! Shudder!).
Thus, for example, I do not necessarily "believe" in "ghosts", even as I (will
later) examine the entire gamut of so-called "paranormal events or phenomena",
especially of those with a psychic bent (truly, these are bent!, as in
less-than-straight, aka "crooked", thinking variety). Many so-called "ghosts"
are probably some form of "fallen angels" or "demons" of the Biblical kind,
masquerading as either gods, demons, spirits, ghosts, or even "angels of light"
(when they are obviously "fallen" and are "angels of darkness", or "sons of
darkness" as used in one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, i.e. The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness). Anyway, the author of 1 John, gave us a simple test against any "spirit" to see
whether that spirit is of light (God; Christ/Son of God; Holy Spirit of
God/Comforter/Advocate/Paraclete/The One; Jehovah/Yahveh/Yahweh/God the Father)
or of darkness (Satan, Lucifer, the Devil; the Anti-Christ; the False Prophet;
the Beast): 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges
that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the
spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is
already in the world. — First Epistle of John
(1 John 4:2-3; New
International Version/NIV)
(Note: many Catholics like NIV
and dislike KJV! Tough!) Whatever the case may be about "ghosts" and other "apparitions", in this
website, I have stated that we will be truth-based and science-based. Despite
this, definitely, I will not be ashamed of being a Charismatic Christian or of
God's Word:If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him
when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy
angels. (Spoken by Jesus and recorded in Luke 9:26; NIV)If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful
generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's
glory with the holy angels. (Spoken by Jesus and recorded in Mark 8:38; NIV) I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the
salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. (Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans; Romans 1:16; NIV)
| | | | |
Check our Mysteries Blog to see the latest changes to our webpages and 'web articles' (click on the Mysteries Blog button on the LEFT NavBar)
As stated in our Mysteries Blog, the ' Mysteries of the World' Website does NOT aim to sensationalize any particular 'Mystery', although we
will examine and explore all possible viewpoints pertaining to each
'Mystery' — including the fringe AND the mainstream. We will, of course, come to a conclusion ( eventually!) about each 'Mystery' ... even if that conclusion may eventually turn out to
be 'as yet unresolved' or 'unexplained to our satisfaction'.
|
Go to TOP of this page ['Adam - Scientific Adam' - Tier 3] Return back ['Articles' - Tier 2] Return to Homepage ['Mysteries of the World' - Tier 1]
|
|
or 
) ...
