Scientists are just educated apes
Some non-religious people insult the religious people for believing in
concepts that don't have supporting evidence, or which are vague and
contradictory, but everybody has some beliefs that are vague or
contradictory.
For example, the scientists who promote the Big Bang are promoting a
theory that conflicts with some of their other theories. I've mentioned
some of the contradictions in other documents, such as the Big Bang
theory claims that the universe is expanding from a single point, but
at the same time they claim that galaxies are colliding with each
other, and that there is no center of the universe, which implies
that the galaxies are drifting around in a variety of different
directions.
However, the scientists don't care about that contradiction any more
than the religious people care about the contradictions in the Bible.
The Bible doesn't provide any details about the life of Jesus, and as
I've mentioned in several documents, such as here,
some
scientists are creating theories that are also lacking in details and
supporting evidence.
Scientists are not a different species of human with a superior brain
than the rest of us. They are the same species of ape that the rest of
us are, but they ended up in a different job. There is only a subtle
difference between the
brains of a religious fanatic and a scientist.
I complained in other documents that we don't have any standards for
people in leadership positions, or any standards for the information
that they provide to us. We need to change that. We need to pass
judgment on the information that scientists are giving us, and we need
to pass judgment on who qualifies to be a scientist.
For example, their theory that the universe is full of dark matter
should be described as a "wild
speculation," not as a theory or a fact.
Likewise, they have no evidence that a meteor killed the dinosaurs, so
that should be referred to as "one
of many wild speculations", rather
than a theory or a fact.
Scientists should set a good example of how to think and do
research. The scientists who behave like religious fanatics should be
disqualified from having the title of "scientist".
All of us also have a desire to answer all questions, perhaps
because animals must make
decisions. An animal is not going to survive
if it becomes confused and doesn't know what to do. Animals must make decisions based on what
they know.
We inherited that characteristic to answer every question we have.
This results in us answering questions that we know nothing about, such
as what happened to the dinosaurs? How was a universe created? What
happens when we die?
However, in this modern era, we have to control our desire to answer
questions and admit that there is a lot we don't know. Doctors have to
admit that there's a lot they don't know about our medical problems,
and scientists must admit that they don't know how the universe was
created. Actually, scientists should admit that none of our theories
about the creation of the universe make sense.
The universe contains such a phenomenal amount of matter, and the stars
are producing and wasting such
a phenomenal amount of energy that it
is difficult for us to comprehend. Humans are producing
about 20 TW of power each year, which seems like a lot, but it is a microscopic amount
compared to what the universe is producing. The stars are producing so
much energy that we don't have a number large enough to describe the
amount.
How did so many trillions of stars appear from nothing? Where is all their light
and heat going? Does light exist forever, or does it eventually
degrade or become recycled into something?
Scientists need to control their arrogance, push themselves into
saying "I
don't know", and find the courage to explore all sorts of
theories. They should set a good example for the public,
rather than behave like the religious fanatics.
Historians produce
contradictory information, also
The historians who have an inaccurate view of humans are giving us a
warped view of history because they have a warped view of human
behavior. For example, their description of how the USA developed is
that a group of Europeans were violent, dishonest, and cruel to the
Native Americans and Hawaiians, and that they selfishly imported
Africans
as slaves. Their explanation contradicts the behavior of humans all
around the world, and all throughout history.
In reality, humans are a species of ape, and our behavior is very
similar to that of the other apes, and the other social animals. The
people who can
understand and acknowledge that humans are apes will have a different
view of the creation of the USA. They will realize that the immigrants
from Europe behaved just like every other group of people, including
the
Native Americans and Hawaiians.
Specifically, they took the land that
they wanted and fought with their neighbors, just like everybody else
has been doing all throughout history, and just like all of the animals
do,
and just like all of the vegetation, bacteria, lichen, and fungus are
doing. However, the Native Americans and Hawaiians lost the battle
because their culture and technology was significantly more primitive
than that of the Europeans.
The Native Americans were no more honest or trustworthy than the
Europeans. Before the Europeans arrived, they were fighting over land,
also. And they were killing, torturing,
and raping one another.
Historians are also giving us a warped view of slavery. They claim that
cruel and selfish Europeans were kidnapping Africans and selling them
as slaves, but there is more evidence that the Africans were selling
the people that they didn't like, and the Americans were foolishly
purchasing them. There are also people claiming that it was primarily
Jews who were involved with the slave trade, not Europeans.
Historians are not yet showing any interest in discovering the truth
about slavery, just as the religious people show no desire to resolve
the conflicts and vague remarks in the Bible.
The historians also make it appear as if the African slaves were
suffering and hated being a slave, but if we could travel back in time,
we would
undoubtedly discover that most of the slaves did not rebel against their owners
because they were glad to get away from the crude living conditions in
Africa, and the abuse that they were suffering from. However, many of
the
children of the slaves resented being slaves.
The Bible creates a world that conflicts with the world that the Romans
described, and conflicts with every other society. Likewise, the
historians are giving us a view of the development of the USA that
conflicts with the development of every other society, and the
development of every tribe of wolves, chimpanzees, and other animals,
and with how a species of tree, bacteria, and bush expands its
territory and "conquers" more land.
A historian cannot provide us with useful analyses of human events
unless he understands that:
•
|
All humans behave in a
similar manner because all of us are closely related to one another. |
•
|
All humans are a species
of ape, so all of us behave in a similar manner to apes and other social animals. |
When a historian, journalist, religious leader, or anybody else,
claims that one group of people has behaved
differently than all other humans and animals, that is evidence that he
is mistaken or lying.
For example, the Bible wants us to believe that almost every Jew wanted
to kill Jesus, but without any
sensible reason. That is not the
behavior of any animal. There has never
been
a time when virtually every person in a city has decided to hate and
kill somebody for no reason.
A lot of Ashkenazi Jews have demonstrated incredible levels of hatred
and violence, including their movies, such as Hostel, but if the
original Jews of Palestine were violent, they would have killed Jesus
themselves. They would not have told the Romans to do it.
Is there any historical evidence that the original Jews of Palestine
were unusually violent people? Did they fight with the Romans? Did they
fight with any of their neighbors?
There is no evidence that any group of people has ever wanted to kill a
man of no importance and for no reason. Instead, we find that the only
people who create intense levels of hatred among lots of people are the
pedophiles. Until recently, homosexuals were also feared, hated, and
tormented.
By comparison, the Ashkenazi Jews don't seem to have a problem with
homosexuals or pedophiles. There are a lot of people claiming that Tel
Aviv is the "gay capital
of the Middle East", and New York City is the "gay capital
of the world". People such as Vicki Polin
claim that Jews are also secretly involved with pedophilia and murder
rituals of babies.
We ought to consider the possibility that the intense hatred of Jesus
was because he was homosexual pedophile, and possibly a criminal, also.
Furthermore, his inability to defend himself at his trial implies that
he had some significant mental
disorders.
His 12 disciples might have also been mentally ill
pedophiles or homosexuals, which would have increased everybody's
hatred of
Jesus, and explain why his disciples did not defend him at his trial.
During the following three centuries, as the stories about Jesus passed
around, somebody came up with the idea that he "died for our sins", and
that his sad, lonely life and cruel crucifixion was part of God's plan
to help us.
|
Other vague
remarks imply that he had become 
