“All I ask is equal freedom. When it is denied, as it always is, I take it anyhow.”
— H. L. Mencken (1880-1956) American Journalist, Editor, Essayist, Linguist, Lexicographer, and Critic
I mainly cover politics on this website because I am concerned about the direction of this country is taking. Those concerns are for my children and your children and every child in this country, because they are inheriting an insurmountable amount of debt and we are subjecting them to a life of property in the future.
I thought I would write about a different subject today because even a political junkie like me needs a day off from writing about the misdeeds in that swamp hole along side of the Potomac River.
The subject of paleontology (the evolution of man) has been an interest of mine for a long time and how it interacts with the known Christian Bible and science. I read several different estimates as to how old the Bible is, anywhere between 4000 to 6000 years since the Creation in the garden of Eden. (Adam and Eve)
The most logical answer seems to be 6,000 years and that answer is derived from population growth called the “rule of seventy”; which takes into account death rates, diseases, infanticide and geronticide and when all the factors are weighed in you get 6 billion people on Earth which comes very close to 6000 years needed to get to the present population.
So how old is the Earth? the 6,000 years is a drop in the bucket of time. Through carbon testing in layers of rock, most Sciencist agree the the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and by testing moon rocks and meteorites this confirms the 4.5 billion years as to the age of the Earth.
So did Homo Sapiens (US) evolve from some-Ape like creature? So what is the difference between an Ape-like creature and a man? The defining moment is when man learned to walk on two feet and it allowed him to use his hands for gathering.
The evolutionary website Handprint gives excellent descriptions of the contenders in the alleged ape-to-human transition:
• Homo habilis
• Homo rudolfensis
• Homo ergaster
• Homo erectus
• Homo heidelbergensis
• Homo neanderthalensis
(Homo is Latin for humans)
Which for decades was the accepted theory of the Origin of man. The answer is NONE! From the thousand of fossils discovered there is no direct link to Homo Sapiens from the above.
The Dinosaurs Age
They first appeared during the Triassic period, 231.4 million years ago, and were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates for 135 million years. At that time there where no Homo’s that interacted with Dino’s; it a guess but it is believed that humans first appeared on Earth 2.8 million years ago. Homo Sapiens first appeared on Earth 200,000 years ago.
Did Homo Sapiens interbred with Neanderthals? The answer to that is very likely, since we see evidence of that every weekend in Football games.
The common theory accepted today is Homo Sapiens are a subspecies that evolved from mutations in their DNA. But as we look around today there are sure enough humanoids that act like monkeys.
So how does the Origin on Man interact with the Bible? It is difficult to try to tie the two events together. In one area we are dealing with billion and millions of years before the Creation.
Perhaps we take the words in the Creation too literally… “When Genesis says on the first day and we immediately think of a 24 hour period. It’s possible that the first day was an extended period of time.
When Genesis says Adam lived to the age of 180, it really doesn’t seem likely and it must mean something else.
When you parse the words in Genesis there are many passage that could mean something else.
It all comes down to a matter of faith and that is for each of us to determine in our own way.
I hope you enjoyed my little diversion into the unknown, and on the 14th day of Creation, God created politicians and if we are lucky they will turn into a pillar of salt.
In a State of the Union address that mostly skimmed over energy issues – remarkable, given the generational opportunities stemming from America’s ongoing energy revolution – President Obama still underscored the yawning disconnect between his all-of-the-above energy rhetoric and his administration’s failure to put that rhetoric into action.
Talking about the need for infrastructure investment, the president said:
“Democrats and Republicans used to agree on this. So let’s set our sights higher than a single oil pipeline. Let’s pass a bipartisan … infrastructure plan that could create more than 30 times as many jobs per year and make this country stronger for decades to come. Let’s do it. Let’s get it done.”
We agree. America’s infrastructure needs are greater than a single oil pipeline – the political football known as the Keystone XL – which the president has been punting around for more than six years.
But there’s no good reason, no good excuse, for not making the Keystone XL pipeline Job No. 1 in a procession of infrastructure projects. President Obama hasn’t offered any beyond calling “temporary” the 42,100 jobs the U.S. State Department has said Keystone XL would support. Yet, those jobs are no more temporary than the ones that would be supported by building bridges, roads and other projects the president routinely cites.
That’s the disconnect between what President Obama peddles in speeches to Congress and around the country – and what his administration is doing. You can’t beat the drum for infrastructure investment while blocking it. For more than six years the Obama administration has blocked a shovel-ready project worth about $5.4 billion in private investment, which the State Department says would add approximately $3.4 billion to U.S. GDP.
The president’s performance – or the lack of it – on Keystone XL has impacts.
API President and CEO Jack Gerard addressed some of these in a speech at the U.S. Energy Association’s 11th Annual State of the Energy Industry Forum: “…
if we can’t make a decision on a single pipeline, how can we expect to ever convince the market we can accomplish comprehensive infrastructure improvement? Indecision has consequences. The fact is that if all other infrastructure projects are held to the same standard as Keystone XL, we are years away from approving or improving anything.”
Gerard said the Obama administration’s handling of Keystone XL is a strike against American workers and a deterrent to the investment the president says he wants:
“The needlessly protracted fight over the Keystone XL pipeline only serves to deprive tens of thousands of hardworking Americans of well-paying jobs and our nation of a safe and efficient means of transporting much needed North American energy resources. Furthermore it has a chilling effect on infrastructure investment, generally, reminding all that government’s indecision must be a part of a risk calculus when deciding whether to invest in infrastructure. Deciding to improve our nation’s electrical grid, roads, pipelines and rail freight lines, particularly those built by the private sector, should not be reduced to a partisan talking point.”
Gerard noted an IHS study that found essential infrastructure improvements in just the oil and natural gas sector could spur as much as $1.15 trillion in new private capital investment over the next 10 years, while supporting 1.15 million new jobs and adding $120 billion on average per year to GDP.
“This level of infrastructure investment eclipses the pending highway bill, and taken together they could mean thousands of well-paying jobs and improve our nation’s economic competiveness. So, we agree with the president on the talking points.
However, we strongly disagree with the administration’s actions.” Beyond Keystone XL, we’re talking about declining energy development on federal lands – at a time when energy activity is booming on private and state lands. It includes an ideologically driven environmental agenda that could undercut the energy revolution.
Gerard: These “aren’t just prime examples of getting our nation’s energy policy exactly wrong; they stand in stark contradiction to the president’s professed all-of-the above national energy strategy.”
As the new Congress gets into full gear, there’s a dynamic energy agenda to be pursued – and it can begin by holding President Obama to his own “all-of-the-above” rhetoric and his continued call for infrastructure investment.
Gerard: “… the president has an historic opportunity to foster this unique American moment and to help set our nation on a course for enduring energy abundance and global energy leadership. Together, we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to show the world how energy abundance can be used as a positive force rather than as a tool to harm or to control other nations as some still use their energy abundance. What we want and what the American people deserve are elected leaders at all levels of government who act with a sense of urgency and spirit of collaboration to convert this unique American energy moment into an enduring legacy of American energy abundance so that future generations will only know the United States as a global energy leader.”
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has been involved in a scandalous, unethical, and illegal human exposure experimental research program for two decades.
The Agency has sponsored, encouraged and funded research that exposes children and adults to air pollution, which it has told the congress and announced to the public is toxic, lethal, even cancer causing.
During the 2000s, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-funded researchers at Southern California Medical Schools sprayed high doses of diesel exhaust particles up the noses of 10-15 year old children in a ‘scientific’ experiment to see what would happen. Federal and California State laws prohibit such immoral and unethical experiments with children or even adults. Does the EPA disregard and disrespect law and ethics in a mindless crusade to regulate air?
Although specifically required to do so by federal regulations and the Nuremberg Code-based California state law — if not basic morality — the University of Southern California (USC) and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) researchers failed to disclose to the children and parents of those children that the EPA, at the time had concluded that diesel exhaust emissions contained particles that are toxic, dangerous, deadly and cause cancer.
Since 1997, the EPA has regulated the small airborne particles (dust, called PM2.5) that are 95% of diesel engine emissions. The theory was that the exhaust could cause death, even in a short-term exposure.
1998, the California Air Resources Board determined that any exposure to diesel exhaust could cause cancer.
In 2004, the US EPA determined that any exposure to PM2.5 could cause death within hours of inhalation. EPA’s official characterization of PM2.5 essentially renders it one of the most toxic, lethal and cancer causing air pollution substances known to man.
After evidence of these illegal human exposures to small particle air pollution experiments in Southern California Medical Research facilities was discovered in 2012 by Steve Milloy of Junk Science.com, the EPA tried to delete the evidence from its publicly available Internet archives. Then it appears that they terminated the research program on children as too sensitive.
SideBear: When considering the potential for scandal considering the history of Nazi and other human experiments, you might ask why a United States Federal Agency like the US EPA is sponsoring and even conducting these experiments in the first place.