The people of the Prince (Beast/Antichrist) that shall come

Here is Agenda 21 from the UN webpage: “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced — a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level. …There are specific actions which are intended to be undertaken by … in short, every person on Earth.”

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

Here is Agenda 21 from the UN webpage: “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced — a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level. …There are specific actions which are intended to be undertaken by … in short, every person on Earth.”

Daniel 9:
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

These godless pagan occultists are the ones who destroy the earth, which is why they will be thrown into the lake of fire that was originally prepared for the Devil and his demons:

Revelation 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Paul Craig Roberts exposed: Hugo Llorens-Barak Obama left-fascist imperialism

Safariman commented on my previous post about Paul Craig Roberts’ egregious errors and his ongoing support for the leftist coup in Honduras in 2009 led by Manuel Zelaya.

He said:

You probably know that Hugo Llorens was a functionary in the US embassy in charge of evaluating Honduran funds requests after Hurricane Mitch. Zelaya was the chief intermediary for the Honduran Government. They developed a close friendship. Personal benefits could have played a part.

Actually, I wasn’t aware of that.

But more revealing are the cables that Mr. Llorens sent to Washington.

Read as follows from McClatchy’s web site, but keep in mind that this shows Hugo Llorens is a liar, because the complaints against Manuel Zelaya were FULLY aired and FULLY public in all the months that led up to the day of his arrest, and the order to arrest him came NOT from any military chief but from the Supreme Court, because he continued to ignore court orders. Zelaya was already acting like a dictator. The article at the link also reports the efforts by the very top US officials to stop efforts to restore Honduran sovereignty and efforts to protect themselves from Obama-Chavez intervention.

Big American Ambassador lie follows, as exposed by wikileaks:

<begin quote>

“Although a case could well have been made against Zelaya for a number of the above alleged constitutional violations, there was never any formal, public weighing of the evidence nor any semblance of due process,” said the cable, dated July 23, 2009.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/28/104400/all-parties-broke-law-in-honduras.html#storylink=cpy

</end quote>

Everybody, and that means EVERYBODY, in Honduras, on all sides, knew that Zelaya would have refused to cooperate with any trial of any kind, because he had already refused to obey a series of court orders from what he called “juecesitos”, which translated means something like “pipsqueak little judges”.

So the Supreme Court ordered his arrest.

Like Sydney Schanberg said in the movie “Killing Fields”, when the New York Times reporter received his an award for his reporting on Cambodia and the Vietnam War, it just shows the inhumanity of people in faraway places that take actions without regard to whether they live or die.

Such is the case in Honduras. Easy for the left-fascist demagogues to condemn Honduran efforts to defend itself. Those left-fascists have lots of money from the billionaire foundations like the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, and money launderers like George Soros who subvert governments everywhere.

But those who denounce rightist coups are quiet about the serial killings of reporters in Honduras who reported the truth, like the attempts on Karol Cabrera. Reporters Without Borders denounce so-called “rightist” detentions, but warn against “politicizing” the murder attempts on Karol Cabrera, who experienced the killing of a reporter colleague and a daughter right in front of her face. These were obviously attempts to suppress the reporting that would contradict the official imperialist condemnations of Honduras.

That leak show that Obama and Llorens fully supported the Chavez-Zelaya plans to install another left-fascist dictator in Latin America.

Honduras fought the international left-fascist cabal, and demagogues have fits

There goes Paul Craig Roberts again, showing he knows nothing about Latin Americans in general and most especially Honduras.

Manuel Zelaya was not the same thing as the Honduran government. He snarled and showed his fangs in Honduras and may have fooled the gullible readers of the corporate-government-media complex propaganda. He was a figurehead in an engineered coup.

What did George Soros say to the presidents at the Central-American-Caribbean presidential summit in his keynote speech in Santo Domingo in November 2008, away from the glare of reporters’ lights? Because Manuel Zelaya went straight back to Honduras and started his auto-golpe, his overthrow of his own government.

Well, his own government and the government of the people in this case, and the people’s representatives elected by the same people that elected him, that Congress kept passing laws making his tactics illegal. He ignored them so finally his own government’s ‘fiscal’, the attorney general, brought charges against him and got an arrest warrant.

The biggest problem the Honduran authorities had during 2009 was that the USA ambassador was supporting Zelaya’s auto-coup lifetime presidency putsch and helping him, even the night before plotting with him in the presidential palace what was supposed to be the piti-Chavez’s coup de grace in July of 2009.

In Honduras the Constitution says the Armed Forces are charged with helping the police when necessary, so they carried out the order of the Supreme Court.

Hugo Chavez WAS a dictator and a very present threat to Honduras in 2009.

And Obama TRIED to support the Zelaya dictatorship but Honduras said no. Obama and Clinton ordered Micheletti to resign and reinstate Zelaya and Micheletti said No. Greta asked what would change his mind and the mind of the Congressmen (elected by the same people that supposedly elected Zelaya), and the stand for freedom of ALL of the civilian society of Honduras.

There was a joke going around in Honduras those days: Zelaya has done what nobody else had every been able to do: He united Catholics and Protestants, rich and poor, campesinos and city dwellers, white collar and blue collar, businesses and workers. They ALL united against him and against the world. :-D

In the USA, Hondurans did not buy this baloney Paul Craig Roberts pushes, as if the CIA did it. I met Honduran-Americans that told me they would never make the mistake of voting for Obama again.

The same Yanqui Ambassador Hugo LLorens that helped the corrupt Zelaya dictatorship coup attempt, was also the Ambassador in Venezuela when Hugo Chavez pulled off his election coup there. And Paul Craig Roberts apparently is quick to forgive and forget a coup attempt if it’s left-fascists doing it. Does he so talk about Fujimori?

I know about Smedley Butler and Central America, and it’s true that the USA has gone from meddling and pushing for coups from the right, apparently to pushing for coups from the left-fascist elements, but with a new twist.

Now, when the USA pushes for leftist coups like with Hugo Chavez and Manuel Zelaya, they do it more quietly with the cooperation of the intimidated, subjugated left-fascist international governments-media corporate propaganda machine. Fabian socialism is having a coming-out party.

In Honduras the opposition to the international monster-machine was so overwhelming that they were able to push back.

The INDIANS NOT SPANIARDS that ran the military at topmost levels did not like the accusations from the WHITE LANDOWNER Manuel Zelaya’s camp that they had committed massacres that they sued and the head of the Armed Forces of those days, retired now, ran for president so he could defend himself. Just one look at him, and you can see he is as Indian as anybody.

Honduras is the only nation-state in Latin America I know of that names its currency for the INDIAN chief Lempira who died in war against the Spaniards. There’s the tell when somebody accuses white Hispanic elites this way applied to Honduras. They are demagogues.

Me, I want Americans out of Honduras. I want all the drug wars to stop. I want all aid from the US to stop. I want all loans to Honduras to stop. I already have my Honduran citizenship, I would not mind if the US got out altogether.

Now. The Hondurans invited the Americans to set up in the southern areas of Honduras during the Sandinista wars in Nicaragua, because the Sandinistas were already trying to take over some areas in southern Honduras, and of course at that time they felt safer. They are deceived by the same propaganda that Paul Craig Roberts is spouting against them, as if the USA diplomacy and secret operations support them.

The CIA could have saved a lot of money if they did. But the US diplomatic corps certainly was helping Zelaya. The ONLY reason the US restored aid was that they saw that the Honduran people were united against Zelaya and that the only way they could put the wannabe dictator back in power would be invasion. They didn’t want to invade, and Honduras was the first people to stand up to the left-fascist invasion of the continent.

They don’t want the poverty of Cuba or the poverty that Chavez caused in Venezuela. They’re poor enough already, NO thanks!

Christians and “Reconstructionism”

My reaction to an atheist who condemned “Abrahamic religions”:

My mention of him was just to demonstrate that your representation of why you are so prejudiced (pre–judged) about all those who adhere to “Abrahamic religions” by which I assume you include unorganized and anarchist believers like myself who totally adhere to the NAP, because you made no distinctions.

And I DO oppose that, and so do ALL of the Christian libertarians I know.

And I notice that while that the article considers Christian libertarians as a laughable concept. That kind of thinking is as dangerous as supporting Israel because you should “always take the side of the civilized man against the savage”. A clear and present danger to freedom, with Pamela Gellar a prime example. With the savage tactics perpetrated by the SECULAR collectivists who were the engine of the Zionists, it makes me wonder what will happen if the haters of “Abrahamic religions” who call themselves libertarians will do to Christians.

So my reaction to your irrational slur and collectivist thinking (grouping almost all of today’s monotheists as if they were so homogenous) has been to point out what you seem to be finally admitting. That there are plenty of us libertarian Christians around. Truly libertarian who oppose any violation of the N. A. P.

And you linked to a Reason article. I’ve noted that their writers have cheered a lot of statist legal dictates that extort money from us to support actions we oppose subsidizing. Gay marriage, non-discrimination laws, and the like. I’m surprised they haven’t come out in favor of sending women into combat.

And they apparently have no qualms about supporting violations of the N. A. P. when the baby is still a helpless infant inside the womb. That is not a religious issue, as demonstrated by the fast-growing Internet presence of “godlessprolifers” and atheists against abortion.

And listen to this. I hold to the N.A.P., I oppose ALL violations of the non-aggression principle, NOT “in spite of”, and NOT “in addition to”, but because “the love of Christ constaineth me”. Every wife-beater deserves a beating. Every rapist deserves punishment in kind. I oppose all statism, more so than Ayn Rand or anybody at Reason Magazine, because I oppose government monopoly grants of ANY kind. I respect the NAP more than they do because I apply it to ALL human beings including the victims of intra-womb dismemberment.

I also agree that organized religion in the US and elsewhere has always been used by the state and it is a horrendous thing in the USA today especially, with all its militarism. Foreign ideas have infiltrated of all kinds including occultism, Darwin Day, Rick Warren’s kissing up to both candidates and following the winds of statist promotion of “gay issues”. By the way, the promotion by the state of “same-sex equality” is a kiss of Judas, the same as past state support of religions has been.

I also oppose very LOUDLY every chance I get very actively in other forums this tendency. I also oppose the use by the state and of the state to support the muzzling of Christians in their free exercise and speech. Atheists are not immune to using the state and lending themselves to the state and statism for their own misguided purposes, and historically have proven more so.

Atheist government more dangerous than religious

It’s the political ideology of atheist regimes and atheist ideologies that have been MUCH more dangerous to atheists in the real world than religious people, even pagans. But to group all “religion” (presumably beliefs in God) as one and blame them all for the sins of individual actors within any one of them is to suffer the very sin of your accusation: using their religious ideology as justification for blaming them for evil. 
 

And you owe the Christian activists of the Reformation era for relaxing the Papist political control over Western societies. 
 

You should include all the followers of Ayn Rand into your pejoratives, by the way, by HER OWN mouth. She herself said her philosophy was a religion of self-worship. At least Christopher Hitchens, often a guest at Reason Magazine (???), talked about the obvious differences in the practices of different “religions”. 
 

It was gangs of self-identified atheists that caused the coining of the new word genocide, after all, on an unprecedented scale. 
 

Memo: My unorganized religious faith is now rooted in Biblical truth, not patriarchy, and I got there using the God-given faculties of reason, based on history, facts, science, archaeology, and fulfilled prophecy. Any “religion” or “faith” that is based on “say-so” or “just because” is built on shifting sands. That’s what atheism is built on, in my opinion. 



At least the religion-bashing is based on shifting sands. Even smart guys who try to reason it out like Christopher Hitchens have to make the most oxymoronic (even moronic!) statements like blaming historical Christianity for Stalinism! I did not make that up!

Christianity: Best thing for women

Libertarianism may attract racists, but it also favors the victims of racism.

If absolute freedom of assembly means letting racists do business only with those they prefer, then it means the same thing for the people they refuse to do business with.

“Ask a former slave about the importance of controlling his own body and property. Ownership is control not merely of property but of life itself.” – See more at: http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/35649/Wendy-McElroy-Libertarianism-and-Racism/#sthash.EUbU4MJI.dpuf

One of the Discovery channels gave an example of exactly that in one specific chimp tribe, where one male chimp kept going after one favorite female with a baby, bringing gifts. Except in that case the female didn’t like him and slipped away.

As to the accusation against “Abrahamic religions”, this is another example of winner-written history’s historical and archaeological ignorance. The violence of ancient pagan cultures fell heaviest on the women without question. If you’re going back to the Origins narrative of Genesis for your twist, consider that the original idea was also “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) WIFE not “wives”. Polygamy came in later generations.

It’s another slanderous myth taught by the militant anti-Christian atheist factions. Even my fanatically gender-feminist sister acknowledges that women were brutalized in almost all the societies that surrounded the “Israelites”.

Unfortunately, the myth gets traction because (1) religious organizations and institutions suffer from the same human maladies that accompany individuals everywhere else, and influence and power can attract the worst of us, and (2) Biblical Christianity exposes many of those very human weaknesses.

Deborah led the army into battle to repel attackers. Her main man, a “general”, Barak, refused to lead the army unless she led it in person. The subtext was that they trusted her more than him for this.

Pagan prostitute Rahab was a hero at Jericho and got mention in the (Ha ha “patriarchal”) line of Christ’s genealogy.

Ruth the Moabitess too.

In Proverbs 31, the breadwinner-wife is lifted up as a paragon of virtue.

Prophetesses figure prominently in many of the Old Testament historical and prophetic books. To fix another myth about the Bible (held by many Christians too): In one passage, to fulfill a female’s prophecy, a group of prophets arranged a “went in unto her” occasion! (God snuck that one in there to befuddle the more sanctimonius).

In the Gospels, it was women who first met the resurrected Christ.

Verses in the book of Acts show that women travelled with Paul’s band.

Two young prophetesses warned Paul himself against returning to Jerusalem and inspired pleas from everyone to him to stop.

Joan of Arc is a double whammy against myths. She said her visions were of God, and led men in battle to drive back the English, and was burned at the stake by patriarchists.

Some will point to Roman Catholicism. They have a point there, but not against a –true– “Abrahamic” religion, at least not a Biblical one, because the establishment of male-only cleric-rule was introduced centuries later. It probably is a vestige of the pernicious and blasphemous Gnostic influence of the time which has now resurged more recently among atheist anti-Christian rants and all those risible “new discoveries” that they say upset the Bible. After all, in Dan Brown’s historically stupid novel, he lifted up one of those rejected books as a “feminist” book. He plays on ignorance of his audience, because they don’t know that that very book says that women cannot enter into Heaven. That’s right it says cannot.

That rule, plus the celibacy command, had more to do with expanding political power for the secular structure. Human factor and power again.

St. Patrick’s disciples in Ireland for several generations formed “monasteries” of men, women and children together, and women often were the leaders in those. (Another item hidden by the winner-historians)

In one counseling question put to me by a couple in dispute over who should be spiritual head of the household, I told them that in their specific case, the wife should clearly be the spiritual head. For Biblical reasons.

Now, with all of that said, there are natural differences between men and women, and there are millions of variations in both sides.

For example, the Marines have been trying –unsuccessfully– for decades to train enough females to pass their minimum requirements for ground infantry. A former supervisor, a left-leaning liberal who was in the National Guard for a time, told me she opposes women in combat. According to her, it’s the matter of the period. This is something that holds throughout time immemorial.

There are natural gender roles. Let us just reason rationally about it, agree that nothing should be coerced, and respecting the NAP, at least we’ll have peace about it. That way, the fear of coercive retribution for violating thought crime decrees will stop interfering with the discussion and what ensues.

Ask a former slave about the importance of controlling his own body and property. Ownership is control not merely of property but of life itself. – See more at: http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/35649/Wendy-McElroy-Libertarianism-and-Racism/#sthash.EUbU4MJI.dpuf
Ask a former slave about the importance of controlling his own body and property. Ownership is control not merely of property but of life itself. – See more at: http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/35649/Wendy-McElroy-Libertarianism-and-Racism/#sthash.EUbU4MJI.dpufv

The “evidence” they use for darwinism is really evidence for Creation

Paul Rothbein mentions the scientific method. I didn’t see the referenced comment but Mr. Rothbein seems to be unaware that there is no scientific method that can corroborate darwinian evolution.

As a matter of fact, most people are unaware of two facts about the history of “darwinian evolution”.

(1) The “evidences” for it in the real world of biology they use are “evidences” of design built into the genome. With each new discovery that points to Creation, they say it’s evidence for their myth. As one well-known darwinian said, they can’t let a divine foot in the door so they believe all kinds of absurdities.

a. Fossils. Darwin said the fossil record of continuity would be uncovered with further digging. But he said it was already a counter evidence. A century later, Stephen Gould offered the even worse today lack of fossil evidence as evidence for his own theory of “punctuation” that happens so fast you can’t find any. “It’s as if it never happened”.

Then they started discovering “humanoid ancestors”. Neanderthals whose bone structure is the same as a Homo sapiens that had lived a long, long, time, say, the hundreds of years recorded in the Bible before the Flood.

b. Spontaneous biogenesis: Louis Pasteur used the scientific method to show that non-living things cannot spontaneously generate living tissue. Before that, it was widely believed to happen all the time because of rot. In fact Hoeckel was not the only darwinian who believed it. But he went ahead and drew his fraudulent pictures of such imaginary spontaneous micro-organism. He also drew his proven fraudulent drawings of embryos. He was castigated by his university for it with a mild rebuke.

And yet they still use his drawings in high school biology textbooks. My kids were subjected to them in the 1990s, and I’m told they are still there to this day in some.

The problem of how a one-celled organism could spontaneously form bedevils the believers in the religious myth of darwinism to this day. (Jeremiah 2:27)

c. Mendel: Mendel showed that traits are inherited and do not change spontaneously, even if skipped by one generation. His research was ignored until darwinism had subverted academia.

d. DNA. That super-molecule was enough to convince one of the co-discoverers that it could not appear spontaneously on Earth. Computer scientists should have sat up and took notice back then, they might have accelerated computerization much quicker. A completely spontaneous computing system, complete with symbolic language derived on a base of a quartenary-letter alphabet that is organized to code for the entire body plan with all biological systems of the functioning of an organism. And the variety within every “kind” of organism.

But no, they started trying to figure out how it could appear.

e. “Junk DNA”. Turns out they almost immediately started finding vital functions performed by such “vestigial DNA”. Just today there was another one on the radio, a neurologist talking about a gene from a strand of such former “junk”, that transplanted to a mouse embryo, increased the brain size in the mouse.

f. Epigenetics. About 10 years ago, during the first decade of the 21st century, I remember a scientific revolution reported happening in biology, because epigenetics studies had upended “everything” according to one biologist and they’d have to back to the beginning and “start all over” again.

g. Giants. 9 feet and more. Not just Saul, but bigger. There is evidence in various places, but since these are mentioned in the Bible, no divine foot is allowed. Foot-long cockroaches, mastodons that make elephants look like midgets, giant sloths, and so on and on. Why not? Before the Flood, when creation scientists say there was probably double or more atmospheric pressure, the kind necessary for a giant cockroach to survive, for example.

There is lots more of course, for the curious. Darwinians should get curious about what they haven’t been told.

Do our governments really protect us or take care of us?

The general population today is not ready for the idea of governing themselves, or the idea that they do not need any government to “protect” them or take care of them.

Most people think we have to have a government (I used to be one) like the lady who always had the butcher cut off a 1/3 of the big ham she always got. He did a little digging and found out it was because her Mom and the granny always did. He did more digging, and found the Mom always did it and the Mom did it because Granny always did, and Granny did it to make it fit into her pot at home and couldn’t afford a bigger pot!

Education will come first. For now Ron Paul surely knew he would never be allowed to get nominated, let alone be elected president of the USA.

Consider this, though. The situation right now is, to paraphrase, “the weak (whether intellectually gifted or not) [have already] become subordinate to the physically strong and morally bankrupt.”

That’s because in any kind of territory where virtually everybody accepts one gang or institution with a monopoly on the use of force, of whatever form, it is the morally bankrupt most of all that rushes to rule. For example…

Nixon: “If the president does it, that means it’s legal”. Clinton’s dalliances and hubris. Bush and the Patriot Act (spy on you) and useless wars that made it worse. Obama with all that and much worse than Bush. Arrests of reporters. Spy on you, on everybody. Drones killing bad guys at wedding parties. Drones on the 16-year old son of a bad guy sipping coffe with friends. Atty General Holder refusing to admit that the federal government cannot legally order a kill on an American citizen on American soil without due process.

Pause. Dwell your mind on that. It took a filibuster of 13 hours to make Eric Holder finally acknowledge they have no legitimate authority to order a drone or a kill on anybody (for example, YOU) on United States soil, sitting at a cafe, sipping coffee.

You think you have “democracy”, or you might think a little deeper from civics class and think “republic”. But your president, from before Nixon to now, thinks he can order a kill on you where you sit just by declaring you a threat to (his own) national security.

That’s just the presidents. Think Congress. The IRS makes up rules and breaks them as it goes its merry way just because it wants to, and because the kind of people that become IRS agents are the kind that like the idea of being the ones that “enforce the law”, gun in hand. They’re not all like Joe Bannister, who turned it all in when he became convinced they were illegitimate.

Congress could STOP the deficit RIGHT NOW by just refusing to spend more money than they take in. CONGRESS created the IRS based on an apparently fraudulent declaration that the 16th amendment was ratified. CONGRESS sets the parameters because it likes that money and that power and they use it to get elected, giving out money to supporters.

CONGRESS could pass a law to shut down the Fed. But they prefer the carrot (benefits) and to avoid the stick (consequences like JFK’s) rather than do what’s right.

JUDGES appointed by the Presidency and ratified by Congress have never acted like they were a genuinely independent branch. They make rulings to take the heat off the power-hungry politicians. Rulings like gay marriage when people don’t want their extorted tax money supporting it.

Rulings like the Chief Justice Roberts’s on Obamacare. Most people think he was going to rule against it but changed his mind. Myself, I think something different, and I think that’s why he chose to wrote the majority opinion, and I think that’s why he wrote it the way he did. First part: “I know this personal mandate is unconstitutional”. 2nd part: “I’m going to switch words in the law”. 3rd part: “I’m ruling unconstitutional is constitutional”.

Couple fighting for $25,000 cash seized while vacationing in Colorado – The Denver Post

http://www.denverpost.com/popular/ci_27529658?source=infinite

Guilty until they can prove themselves innocent, eh? What is this?

What if it’s us?

Vinton G. Cerf
President of ACM

Dear Mr. Cerf

The column in CACM, “From the president”, of March 2015, piqued my interest because in my intellectual forming years (high school) I was an avid reader of science fiction and it’s still my generally preferred genre in fiction if any.

You mentioned Drake’s dog-chase-tail equations and the Fermi Paradox.

That reminded me of MIchael Crichton’s lecture at Caltech, which he titled “Aliens Cause Global Warming”, of which a pdf is found at the following link:
http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/16253.pdf

To me there is no Fermi’s Paradox because it presumes that now famous equation, which never deserved the reception it has gotten. That paradox is not a paradox, it is one of those “anomalies” that exposes the dark underbellies of science’s paradigms and the fact that scientists have a fantasy about themselves that they claim is an attribute of the science itself, as if science were its own independent creature, a pure, independent creature that automatically enforces purity upon its members. This is a fantasy that is no more true of scientists than it is of Politics. Science is only done by scientists, after all, just like politics is only done by politicians.

The rebuttals I’ve seen on the Web include accusations that Crichton “doesn’t understand” how science works. It’s a ridiculous accusation of course, considering who this is, and facile way to preface the aversion the logically organized points made by Crichton that still expose exactly “how science works”, meaning, “how scientists work”.

Most cordially yours,
Alan Cassidy
cassidya