Archive for June, 2008

It’s competition time

Conspiracy examiners such as myself often come across indications that people are putting out certain subliminal messages in the hope that your mind is steered in a certain direction to feel favourable to what they side with.

Play the game using the images below to see if you share the same affliction as myself. A totally unfounded one of course – one that suggests it’s just me and I’m plain bonkers.



Now Coalition of the killing tanks in Iraq…:


I got 2 ‘coincidences’. What about you?


Good news for slowing down the move to fascism

Overall and long term, this is actually good news for the cause of justice in the UK.

IMO, no accuser should be allowed to give evidence anonymously. Such procedures already exist within English law to allow anonymous witnesses, but it is open to abuse, and when it comes to UK plc – the ever increasing ever impoverished fascist state, such perversions of justice WILL be increasingly abused.

Trust the scummy BBC newz department to present the story in such a way – designed to make you angry that such money was wasted.

Here’s an alternative way to put it, what do you think?

 Legal system failings collapse murder trial to the tune of £6m.

The failure of Judge David Paget and Law Lords to clarify the legal status of anonymous witnesses before the Charles Butler murder case came to court, has caused the trial to collapse at a cost of approximately £6m to the tax payer.

The monumental negligence of the Law Lords and others within the legal profession means that serious questions are being asked as to whether these Law Lords should be removed from their positions.

 But of course the news wasn’t presented like that. Instead you are being steered to feel…
1) angry that suspected murderers are going to get away with a crime.
2) The case would have won if the witnesses were granted anonymity.

Instead we get this sick joker, Justice [sic] Secretary Jack Straw saying there was a real need for some witnesses to have their identities protected.” Straw also vowed to change the law “as quickly as possible”. So he’s really studied the issue thoroughly then. How reassuring.

Realising Straws carelessness in allowing his fascistic arrogance to expose its ugly naked self before our very eyes, one of Straws Ministry of Justice’s ooompa lumpa women tried to minimise his Stalinist psyche saying “We are studying the judgment carefully and urgently considering its implications, including amending statutory law.” There. That’ll allay your fears Straws totalitarian bent won’t impact negatively upon such a crucial part of justice, liberty society and life in general.

Don’t forget Jack Straw is heavily involved with the shipping of innocent men all over the world for torture.The proliferation of Newspeak is chilling Mr Justice Secretary.

And do remember folks, if the Law Lords had allowed the anonymous witnesses to testify, the trial would still have been running up costs of £6, so just in case you got the wrong impression, the £6m was still going to float out of your pockets. The general and serious issue of trials costs is grossly side-stepped.

Thank God I’m going back to Asia soon.


Cheers Alex…


… A choice cut from Prison Planet. (

The BBC’s first stab at debunking the 9/11 truth movement was a jaw-dropping exercise in journalistic prostitution more befitting of state-controlled TV stations in Communist China or Zimbabwe.

The show was a tissue of lies, bias and emotional manipulation from beginning to end, structured around fallacy, lying by omission and an overwhelming dearth of impartiality.

During a follow-up radio debate, producer Guy Smith had no answers for the plethora of inaccuracies that littered the program.

The BBC has also completed a documentary on the 7/7 bombings, set to air in Autumn, which puts forward an individual called Nick Kollerstrom as the main proponent of “conspiracy theories” surrounding the 2005 London Underground attacks.

Despite the fact that we were at the forefront of 7/7 coverage immediately after it happened and have produced scores of articles on the subject that received millions of readers, the BBC did not choose to speak to us and instead interviewed a radical astrologist who also dabbles in crop circles, holocaust denial and making apologies for Hitler.

Full article here…


Child porn policeman stabbed to death.

Here’s one for the coincidence theorists…


BBC cover it here.

If “a man” hadn’t have been arrested, I’d be very suspicious that his killing was to ensure his silence.

Even so, I still remain suspicious. The non-description of “a man” seems almost deliberately vague. It will be interesting to see who this “a man” is and what will happen when the story fades from the publics mind.

It’s one to look out for.

Child pron slurs in the Soham Murders
( Ian Huntley / Maxine Carr / Holly Wells / Jessica Chapman ):

This isn’t the first cop that’s been involved with child porn allegations. I remember another one albeit of a somewhat ‘inverse association’ relating to child pornography levied against Detective Constable Brian Stevens – a detective in the Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman murders.

Word on the anti-coincidence grapevine (or conspiraloon grapevine – take your pic) was that Brian Stevens was working along the lines that USAF personnel at USAF base Lakenheath in Suffolk England were involved. The bodies of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were supposedly found close the the perimeter of the base.

The story goes that false accusations against Stevens were made to discredit him and therefore cut off his ability to pursue the USAF connection. The allegations didn’t stick which in itself should raise suspicions amongst those who take care to examine the battle of the mind society rages against the common man.

The man raising this conspiracy was Joe Vialls, who also discusses aspects of mind manipulation via drugs and programming enforced upon Huntley. The articles make great reading, but I feel it should point out some unsustainable parts of that story in that USAF Lakenheath in Suffolk is only where USAF serviceman Tech. Sgt. Randy Bitter had his court-martial. It wasn’t where he was based. He was based at RAF Menwith Hill in Yorkshire which is why Yorkshire CND posted the press release about him.

31 July 2003

Release 073103-4

RAF Menwith Hill sergeant sentenced for sex offenses

ROYAL AIR FORCE LAKENHEATH, Suffolk – A sergeant assigned to the 451st Intelligence Operations Squadron at RAF Menwith Hill, United Kingdom, was sentenced by a military judge to a dishonourable discharge, confinement for six years, and a reduction in grade to E-1 during a court-martial here, July 23.

Tech. Sgt. Randy Bitter pleaded guilty to one specification of Article 120, Uniform Code of Military Justice, carnal knowledge with a female family member under 12 years old, and two specifications of Article 134, UCMJ, indecent acts with the same victim.

The UCMJ contains the laws that all service members must obey.

Note: The new CND Yorkshire site doesn’t archive this story (but the old one does) and UASF Lakenheath has removed the press release from their web site.

Vialls also says the two bodies of the girl’s couldn’t fit in the boot of a Ford Fiesta which may be false but doesn’t negate the rest of his writings on the subject which make for very interesting reading.


It is of little surprise that when looking behind aspects of all these sordid tales, it isn’t long before you get links via the Dunblane massacre purpetrated by Thomas Hamilton to people like Tony Blair, George Roberstson, Peter Mandelson, Freemasons and essentially established/official power centres etc. The Marc Dutroux case featured similar associations, and you see elements of it in the case of Josef Fritzl (who raped his own child and fathered children by her) and in France where where a married couple Michel Fourniret and Monique Olivier were recently caught.


It’s also of little surprise then, that child porn by its very nature have become a key weapon in mind manipulation (along the lines of the anti Semitic slur or Nazi sympathiser).

People such as myself who have had time to read about the ‘work’ of Bernaise and official programs such as tip of the iceberg ‘MK Ultra‘, can see reasonably easily that such programs have spawned psychological progeny implemented today.

There you have it then… child sex abuse, kiddy porn, murder, rape, mind control. It’s all connected and when you dig just a little bit you find this.

Finally, getting back to Geoffrey Harries one has to ask was Mr Harries murdered by the so called “man” arrested? was this man mentally manipulated? was this man associated with the child porn ring?

I wouldn’t be in the least bit surprised.


Just had to

Thanks for the commentator on StefZ’s blog for linking to a site which penned some loose thoughts I had recently…
(Go to source above for following pdf’s and links)

captured image below…

Not to mention the domestic psyops her death provided for.


The D squared Dilemma

The future is bright. The furute is orange.

D squared referring to David Davis.He appeared on the BBC’s ‘Question Time’ two days ago.

DD is taking a stand against 42 day detention without charge.

The Dilemma is, if one supports DD in his apparent ‘fight’ against 42 detention without charge or 42 day nullification of habeas corpus, then will that support be (ab)used to consolidate the 28 day detention which Davis openly supports?

Unfortunately I have to say Yes, it probably will, because ppoliticians ALWAYS do this. You vote (or don’t vote) for them and they take that as a licence to do what they like over the lifespan of a Parliament, over which time they push and weave a balance of:

a) Personal prejudices
b) Personal enrichment (in terms of both power and money)
c) Party directives (a significant number from outside economic sources and vested interest ‘think tanks’)
d) Drab constituency issues.

It is incredibly rare for them to take a stand on principle. That’s one reason why DD’s supposed stance was so shocking, it even had some political talking heads flabbergasted.

The rule of thumb is they will exercise their power for their own selfish needs only pursuing ‘caring’ (usually constituency issues) minimilistically to secure re-election. Their green leather polishing arses arrogantly believe the orders of their party whips (free votes are not as common) is more valuable than that of public opinion. They twist and spin out often contradictory catch-lines of what democracy means depending on the situation at hand. Yes, in my eyes, most politicians are little better than bacteria.

BUT if we don’t support Davis, what’s the alternative? Only the Lords will vote it down. It may ping pong back and forth for a bit but the cudgel of the Parliament act will get it through eventually.

I believe we are left with only one option: Support Davis on this issue; do what we can to foster a serious debate about the nourishing of the seeding ground of fascism and reverse this insane process – but include in this what exactly we are granting him support on- Say clearly and loudly that Davis’s stance on 28 days is also wrong, especially when he or anyone (as he or anyone are likely to do) says ’28 days has been given a mandate’ – speak out against such a thing fiercely.

Currently, I cannot see any other option available to us for fighting this spate of grossly uninspired and uninspiring politics cheer-lead by the most talentless morons who are only egging on the likelihood that a more fascistic minded government will allow fully blown state sponsored tyranny to manifest.



“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), psssst, don’t mention the bodies found in his flat!


I want to end this post with another point of concern regarding the latest proposal being flouted likely to be abused for political reasons in the near or far future, and that is of anonymous sources in trials.

Here’s a snipped from the BBC story entitled: Law will change on witness rules  (Saturday, 21 June 2008 13:25)

The government has vowed to change the law to allow anonymous witnesses in some court cases after a key Law Lords ruling effectively halted the practice. 

Justice Secretary Jack Straw said there is a real need for some witnesses to have their identities protected.

Jack Straw you may remember was instrumental in global torture transitis otherwise known as extraordinary rendition and lied about it, once it was exposed – research ex-ambassador Craig Murray’s website for details.

This is yet another leap forward to despotism. There should be NO information at ANY trial which is secret. If a witness offers evidence then like it or lump it the state must take measures to ensure that persons safety. Yes, it is expensive (which is why the patheric numbskull law makers in the commons arn’t pursuing it) but it is the best solution.

Anonymos witnesses will simply allow for the detention, torture and precution of political prisoners to occur more easily – which if that’s your goal is the point I suppose.

Actually this already occurs. There are provisions for secret unscruitinized information to be used for watever malicious purposes, but to examnd upon that is once gain dangerous and WILL be abused.

Freedom, 570 – 2001{?}, RIP.

Schools out for Summer

Two continually failing schools.

Another topic I wanted to blog about was that relating to schools.

The tired, old, outdated, uninspiring, talentless, dreary, unrepresentative, clingy and murderous government have decreed schools that don’t achieve at least 30% of its pupils scoring 5 good GCSE’s will face closure. It’s a move any fascist government would be jealous of.

In Manchester that means about 50% of schools face closure.

Revealing that the grubbyment doest give a toss about education, because there are far better things they could do other than threaten to ‘unsettle’ kids, and have hundreds of teachers face unemployment.

The government WANTS these schools to close so that education can turn into a money making venture. Im not against private money coming into schools but I am fiercely opposed to that money influencing the kids in favour of the financier.

Why not pour that same private money into the existing schools? Don’t corporations and enterprises operating in this country have some kind of duty to the citizens who it uses to enlarge its coffers?

Allowing private companires and megacorps into schools is quite dangerous as they will be able to nurture their exploititive faux economics on the young and vulnerable. Its a form of economic pedophillia.

The grubbyment tried to do the same to Universities and it was herelded as a disaster. The persuit of knowledge is often hampered by vested interests.

A radical overhaul of the eduation system is needed but not this crap garbage the miserable squatters in Westminster trundle out occasionally.







David Davis’s resignation – well blow me down.

I’ve never liked the Tory Party – most of those within it and the the “values” which they say they stand for, but I can do nothing but applaud David Davis- the Conservative shadow Home Secretary {originally said Foreign Secretary which is incorrect} who has historically resigned his seat in protest at the erosion of liberty in Britain (specifically the 42-day internment.

The much respected commentator paul memorably said so beautifuly succintly

“They’ll have to hate us for something other than our freedoms”

And its true. The supposed terrorists supposedly hated out supposed freedoms. If like me you believe elements within the British state facilitated those atrocities trhen it looks like they’ve won, and if you happen to believe a man in a cave did it, then he’s won.

As the fascism strengthens, there will be people whose line in the sand gets crossed. These days, unlike the International bridages, lifes comforts have quenched that thirst for opposing fascism and never in a million years could we have thought just 70 years after fighting what we were told was the greatest Fascist scourge in the history of the planet would we turn out to be that same monster. Consequently, the voices have been few and far between.

But the opposition is growing and WILL grow some more as the scam of global finance (the thing which feeds just about everything else) gets increasingly blown open.

Today it’s David Davis’s turn tomorrow it will be others.

Does his previous silence matter – yes it does, but it needs to be put on the back burner, for the movement against neoImperialism is far more important than a few bitchy slaps, not matter if they are deserved.

Welcome on board David Davis.


Update: Minister for Terror and Blarney stone kisser Tony McNulty (pic below)

rabbiting on in BBC Question Time last night played the drab old tricks about Mr Davis. He said of him ‘How come 28 days is fine but 29 is not’ without (of course) realising exactly the same question could be asked of McNulty himself. Throwing in any old slop to have a go. The waffling sod even had the nerve to imply Mr Davis’s stance was illogical in his belief habeas corpus and the Magna Carta were in danger. What a two faced slop – It is fascist McNulty’s actions that are destroying habeas corpus not Mr Davis’s.
He also said 14 days is OK, 28 days were needed as the exception and 48 says exception to the exception.

Phew what a stinker!

I am fairly confident why these times were pushed. It is because psychological research has been concluded that those time frames yield sufficient mental attrition in order to facilitate confessions.

And shame on those idiotic politicians that agreed to the drip-drip strengthening of fascism in this country – a country that believes it has the right to kill and mame at will without consequence. 48 hours, 14 days, 28 days, 42 days….  We already have indefinite detention in Guantanamo bay concentration camp, where for over 7 years international law alongside Qur’ans has been flushed down the toilet. And the Brits say nothing now that the British innocents are released – screw the other innocents right? they must obviously be less human.

A young man suggested on BBC Question Time said the NeoLabour MP who voted against the government follow MR Davis’s example. A nice idea, lets see how principled these rebels actually are.

Following Question tine in the Andrew Neil show with Portaloo and Diane Abott, The issue of freedoms were discussed by violinist Nigel Kennedy and Kelvin McKenzie.

Guess which side they drafted Kennedy to speak up for issues of liberty?

It shows the BBC’s fairness to have a reasoned debate. You might be a good chap Nigel, but you dont really put a good case forward.

McKenzie lowered and rested his head on his fingers as he put then toward the bridge of his nose as Kennedy spoke, such was the ability of our Nige (who has never looked scruffier). McKenzie also said he’d run against Davis if Murdock or some other person paid for his campaign. McKenzie said he dodn’t notice the erosion of liberties, in fact he welcomed the measures taken.

The selfish boar doesn’t get it. In the system of secular nation states, the centralization of power leads automatically to danger. It is the nursery of fascism and the formula for tyranny. In such states, there must be a separation of powers. The unsourced and synthesised “terror intelligence” undermines those checks and balances.

In order to maintain and strengthen its power a government will seek to destroy any challenge to its authority. It isn’t just the increasing acceptance of Islam that (very long term) may pose a challenge to the existing power structure, but the growing number of economically impoverished people inside the country who have already been identified by the MOD as a potential threat for rebellion.

The neo-Liberal neo-Imperial system of global politics this country pursues today will always be challenged as it should, and it’s not going to sit back and let it happen.

THAT is why what’s happening is so dangerous. The fascist laws will be used for political purposes to stop legitimate resistance against the fascist state. As McKenzie supports British fascism practiced by the state, it will not affect him, so he says ‘bring it on’




P.S. I recently congratulated and thanked Gordon Brown for agreeing to ban on cluster bombs, but since then it has come to light he is still supporting the manufacture and possible deployment of cluster munitions by simply spinning the classification of these new munitions. I let emotion go to my head. I fell right into it.


Dangerous Knowledge

I’ve been back in Blighty for a number of days now and don’t feel as shocked as the last time I came home. Immigration wasn’t as bad an experience as it was before, weather barmy as ever, CCTV all over the place as before.

The terrestrial news is visible more pathetic – YouTube “BBC broken news” to see the BBC taking the Mickey out of the pathetic nature of its own news broadcasting. (comedy shown on the BBC is quite praiseworthy)

 (see other clips on the playlist

Anyway Panorama did a reasonable, but highly selective program on the missing billions in Iraq, and last might a very very interesting program indeed called Dangerous Knowledge: BBC4 on BBC2.

Here’s the entry from the Radio Times:
11.30(pm) Dangerous Knowledge: BBC4 on BBC2
David Malone pays homage to mathematician Grorg Cantor, physicist Ludwig Boltzmann, Einstein’s confident Kurt Gödel and code-breaker Alan Turing – all great thinkers whose lives ended in tragedy. The programme also features interviews with those (including IBM research staff member Greg Chaitin) who are attempting to find out whether there are some things the human mind cannot know.

It was great. The just of the program was that these men were driven insane by the findings and that what they knew drove them insane. I got the feeling that this proposal was rather jazzed up to sell the programme or at best ill founded, and I got rather angry at Malone’s inverted ascribing of existence and signs of God to the conventional mathematical and physical system of pure predictable logic.

Far from it.

It was plain to me, that what Cantor came across, and Gödel later proved (i.e. it being impossible to prove certain things which may be true, and that there was no way of predicting which of those things couldn’t be proved then man is doomed to live with finite knowledge) was a sign of the Magnificence of God.

I took it that God conscious Cantor knew of the implications of his work – a mathematical proof that there is an order of intelligence and design that man would never hope to touch or understand and developed some kind of madness from obsession, and depression that he wasn’t delivering that proof.

Gödel did it and used universally accepted mathematics to show mathematics was fundamentally inadequate.

Any scientist knows mathematics is the fundamental basis of all abstract knowledge. Physical is the characterization of matter and its interactions therefore applied mathematics. Chemistry is applied physics. Biology being largely applied chemistry. And so on.

That mathematics is finite is a disaster to the arrogance of man and indeed a humbling outcome.

Yet the work of Gödel receives self-censorship or one-eyed viewing from the majority of the publicly-visible mathematical fraternity precisely because of its implications to the meaning of life and our role in the universe.

What a fantastic programme, what a remarkably self-defeating attempt to spin the programme.

I would advocate philosophy be a significant part of tertiary and higher education today not just because of the infinitely connected structure of knowledge but that it reveals the truth to us about life, the universe and everything.


Why I can’t accept the evolutionists

Preamble: I’ve written about this before previous post HERE (  ( and I am catching a plane back to the UK in a few hours. Hence I’m rushing posting this which I typed last night/this morning.

I’m not sure when I’ll be able to get back on line. At worst it will be a month before I’m back online. I just don’t know. I might be too busy back hime.

It may take you all a month to read this anyway.

TTFN. Lwtc247.

– – – – – – – – –  – – – – 

If your into probability, how about this?

The Universe contains about 250,000,000,000 galaxies each one containing approximately 300,000,000,000 stars. Out of all possible planets surrounding these stars (and science reports more and more planets found every year) we know of life on one of them. That isn’t to say there isn’t life, but despite searching we have found no trace.

Again, by chance, as anti-creationists would have us believe, the output and variability of one of these stars, the sun, isn’t so harsh in terms of solar electromagnetic and particle radiation  and variability, that allows for life as we know it to exist.

The earth which just happens to have a disproportionate amount of oxygen on it bonded to metals and non metals making up the physical earth)in the crust, bonded to hydrogen to make water and in a bimolecular form in the air. The oxygen concentration isn’t too high that should a combustion process like a forest fire develops that it would be impossible to put out, nor is too low that it many organisms in the sea would have difficulty is using oxygen to assist life sustaining energy cycles.

Low oxygen conditions can sustain life (e.g. hydrothermal vents) but there is a large difference in those life forms to the sort that sits at the end of the evolutionary chain, and those environments aren’t totally starved of oxygen.

Our planet us theorised to have an iron core again immensely disproportionate with the rest of the local cosmos. All these ultra small possibilities are permutated with the probability that these conditions just happen to support a temperature and pressure in which water, the substance regarded as being vital to any life as we know it, just happens to be a liquid.


Phew that was lucky. Too much or two little pressure and waters liquid range would be even more precariously narrow – and as for the temp, thank the lucky stars that the temperature range is narrow enough to enable molecular vibration be not too slow – preventing reactivity of large structure and making any reaction painfully slow, however just enough vibration there that the active sites of enzymes can be accessed and proteins can maintain a significant quaternary structure so as not to denature.

And in relation to water, we’ve got the pH factor. pH in living organisms can only change over very narrow limits before it beings detrimental effects to the vitality of life sustaining processes . ranges cause havoc with life processes. It’s mighty lucky the pH of the oceans wasn’t too far from

All by chance of course. – P.S. anyone keeping score of the math p(life by accident)=?

And there’s more… and this is where I’ll hand over largely to information in a DVD I bought the other day called “The collapse of Evolution. Subheading The fact of creation. By the Science research Foundation, Istanbul Turkey based on the book “Evolution Deceit” by the Harun Yahya, one of the most greatest scholars today.

Everything living thing is furnished with complex systems that enable it to play its role in the overall system to the best of its ability. Darwin argued all species descended from a common ancestor by means of little cumulative changes over long periods of time. Darwin could advance no sound evidence of that claim.

He was aware of the great many facts that invalidated his theory. He admitted these in his book The Origin of Species (TOS) in Chapter VI – Difficulties on Theory. He hoped in time science would overcome these difficulties. It hasn’t. In fact it has made them more disputable.

Louis Pasteur said about 5 years after Darwins book, TOS: “Can matter organise itself? No. Today there is no circumstance known under which one could affirm that microscopic beings have come into the world without parents resembling themselves.”

It is proposed that Darwinism supports the development of all life via a simple organism. All life as we know is due to cells. The cell is where life take place. So what of cells?

Russian Evolutionist Alexander Oparin “Unfortunately, the origin of the cell remains a question that is actually the murkiest aspect of the whole theory of evolution.

Stanley Miller 1953. Millers organic chemicals are meaningless. Nobody can say the chemicals he synthesised made life or could conceivably bring about life. There is a question about the gases he used as to how accurate his composition was as to that that of the young pre-life earth. Miller eventually admitted to the invalidity of his experiments.

Leading Evolutionist Geochemistry Jeffrey Bada  Feb 1988 in the periodical “Earth” said: “Today as we leave the 20th Century we still face the biggest unsolved problem we had when we entered the 20th century. How did life originate on earth?”

Even single cell organisms are remarkably complex in their composition. How did the Cell first originate. He didn’t address this fundamental point. A cell is an immensely complex system. It cannot function if one of its organelles doesn’t function. All these functions of the cell, The chance that€

A living cell is made of thousands of tiny parts that work in harmony. As a comparison: There are power stations, high tech factories, a complex databank, huge storage systems, advanced refineries and a membrane that controls what enters and leaves the cell.

In order for the cell to survive all of these organelles have to exist at the same time. What is the possibility of that?

Scientists haven’t been able to synthesise a single living cell from non-living matter. Oh how that probability dwindles, yet people are perfectly prepared to take on this immeasurably small probability that life wasn’t designed and created by The Creator himself.

Sir Fred Hoyle, Mathematician and astronomer, Nature 12 Nov 1981, said: “The chance that higher life forms might have emerged by chance is comparable that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein.”

Francis Crick confessed A structure like DNA could never have emerged by chance.

A million pages needed to write all the information present in DNA. That’s numerous times the amount of pages in {an older version of} encyclopaedia Britannia. In the cell, all that info is in the nucleus 1 micrometer in size.

No evolutionist has formulated a non-DNA way of sustaining life. All models of life are thus based on DNA. Evolutionists therefore want us to believe that in a maximum of 4.7 billion years (the age of the Sun) atoms just happened to assemble into ribose units, phosphates, Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine, Thiamine and Uracil (RNA) and that these molecules happened to come into contact with each other. Remember they have to do so within narrow pressure, temperature and pH windows here – meaning a lot of this 4.7 billion years isn’t available for evolution to occur in as the earth had to cool down and stabilize to such limits to allow the biochemical processes we are familiar with today.

A DNA chain with 9 base pairs would be utterly useless in coding for a viable animal. We have to accept the very small probability that DNA chains grew to such length that the complexity of a living thing became possible. Then we have the problem of molecules like the enzme transcriptase, polymerise and all the amino acids just happened to be present and that everything else present in the cell was present to facilitate the replication of DNA. There must also have been significant DNA repair mechanisms too (as DNA has today) all those millions of years, background radiation would have been higher and so caused damage to DNA and hindered its replication (see more about this point later)
Then we have the problem of what fuelled this process? Sunlight powerplants such as Mg2+ centred chlorophyll just also happened to be assembles and present at the same time as did the lipids to make the cell wall. We have yet again the Stanley Miller problem in that many of the molecules necessary for the creation of a cell are only known to be produced by living organisms and not electrical discharges through gas mixtures.

We have another low probability that reproduction spontaneously came about. As if some cell was tired of splitting by being zapped by lightening or forced about by some unusual chemical/physical stimulus so by chance, was able to interact with another cell (or collection of cells – more complex so more difficult) to produce off spring, yet this feature wasn’t present in the generation immediate prior the ‘J’taime’ generation. And what of food consumption. How did a cell change from one that obviously mustn’t have had a method and orifice for the intake of food, by chance develop such a set of devices to consume food, whereas once again the generation before had no way of consuming food. The thought that an organism would by chance develop a system to facilitate external consumption is deeply preposterous, or that over time one happened to be in the process of forming.

Probability check?

I said to Cambridge based Cosmologist Prof who said dark matter was proposed to make up for the fact only 4% of the matter of the universe appears to be present, that if I did an experiment and only got a 4% outcome, I’d be inclined to change the basis of the theory on which that experiment was conducted. I think most people would agree. Yet the recursive near zero chance of all of these things from happening are acceptable to evolutionists.

The problem is no matter what strong scientific reasons are put in front of some people, they cannot submit to the evidence chiefly because they cannot physically perceive God The Creator, they don’t want to embarrassed being seen to do rituals ridiculed by some. They don’t want to devote some of their life to worship the physically discommoded God. However much of the science today concerns physical processes which cannot be physically perceived like space-time or the pico/femeno world of the atom, however these models of approximations are whole heartedly accepted by many who put faith in such things, but not in God.

Life generated from non-living matter by chance.
No mechanism in nature to carry out the process of evolution. There is no mechanism where a cell can be transformed into a more complex living createure and then go on to tbecome the ancestor of millions of other living species.

Natural Selection:
This really is a joke and maybe from the comfort of your own chair backed up with a few seconds of rational thought to might also see its funny side for it is a self defeating mental construct.

Take the common scenario pimped into your mind on nature programs. That of the poor gene slow running deer picked off by a predator leaving behind a strengthened heard.

Wouldn’t that be likely to see the demise of the predator as the strengthened heard would make it too difficult for the predator to make a catch? And if you say the predator evolves also to catch more slightly strengthened deer, then that is where you destroy your own argument. It would render the natural selection / strengthened survivors postulate dead in the water. It would also put significant pressure on all the other species who the predator might go for as he could catch them more easily. The other prey would have to run quicker or strengthen too in order to face extinction. So played out over hundreds of thousands of years, the deer would be ultra strong, capable of huge speeds, so would the predator and all of the other prey. Such a scenario would/could allow for the possibility of some muscle eating organism to flourish what with all those Herculean muscles present, or the modification of existing birds into Rocs or Griffins to catch these deer which hardly any land animal could.

Obviously Darwin never witnessed natural selection in the Galapagos Islands. He simply postulated something that he thought might be able to account for the unique species there. Much is made of the Islands isolation, but I wonder if this is a deliberate deception because the heralded uniqueness is nothing special. In highly connected land masses such as the geophysical Eurasian continent you get numerous specific animals living in specific areas.

Aaaah, but due to mutation of genes, a number of slow deer will be produced. The predator picks off these ones. Well, lets brush aside the totally unsubstantiated nature of such a claim. Lets not demand they supply genetic proof to support their argument. Lets suppose it’s true, then the number of slow-genes by mutation would necessarily be quite high to allow the survival of the predator in which case why has natural selection not produced a heard that is relatively free of suffering from mutation? The evolutionists only apply their pet theory when to the unquestioning gullible and not when ‘their’ theory proves themselves wrong. Plus of course, very significantly, there is NO scientific data to back up that rash defence claims.

If the predators evolution wasn’t as good as the Deer’s, then it would have to eat the young baby deer, jeopardising the existence of the herd AND resulting in the deaths of ‘good gene’ stock too! The same goes for the old deer that the predator may be forced to eat. Would natural selection not also favour leaving behind deer that would live longer and also be stronger during the course of their lifetime? After all, the old deer did come from a strengthened stock!

You see natural selection is nothing but edited spin of human conceived fantasy. That does not mean natural selection of some kind does not occur, it may well do, but certainly not in any of the ways it is portrayed and upheld by the pro-evolution brigade.

But when you hear some charming man charismatic man like Attenborough on the telly spinning out this 2% construct, it is easy to agree because when you watch TV, not many people sit there and critically analyse the info given to them.

And even if I am wrong, crucially, the strengthen hers does not transform into AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SPECIES. Speciation and natural selection are not the same thing. Darwin used both, stitching them together, but to the minds of most they are one in the same. Natural selection would only help with the survival of a species, by virtue of lack of ANY evidence, it does not have to have any evolutionary consequence.

Darwin was also aware of this problem and confessed in his book “Natural Selection can do nothing can do nothing until favourable chance to coccur” 1st Edn p177

Genetics, microbiology and biochemistry did not exist as brfanches disciplines. Laws of inhereticane were not known. Darwin and the man who influenced him Lemar thought it was

Darwin said in his chapter on difficulties of the theory “If I could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications my theory would absolutely break down.” 1st Ed. P189

The Austrian Botanist, Gregor Mendel (sweet peas) who established the science of genetics (beginning
It was not acquired physical traits, buy only genes that were transmitted to subsequent generations” This made it clear that a scenario suggesting that a trait accumulated from generation to generation and generated different living species was implausible,

There were no inheritable variations for Darwin’s proposed mechanism of natural selection to choose from.

Evolutionist Palaeontologist. Colin Patterson “ No one has ever produced a species by mechanism of natural selection. No one has ever got near it. And most of the current argument in Neo-Darwinism is about this question.” BBC, 4th March 1982
20th Century science shows the irreducibly complexity of life. That is a single component of a living system or organ is lacking, they will not function. Doesn’t this mean they must have been fully formed when their species emerged. How then can minor changes of time lead to these systems and organs?

When man mutates genes, the results are damage to the DNA and only harm the living being. No beneficial mutation have never been observed. It is impossible for a reptile to develop wings or an eyeless creature to develop eyes. Countless experiments on fruit flies show this. Dolly the sheep, the first publicly acknowledged clone sheep developed complications later on. As for Polly the later generation sheep, I haven’t heard any related news.

Here’s a couple of stills of Dawkins pausing and giving no answer to the Question: “Prof D can u give an example of gene mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome”

The video said he hesitated but annoyingly didn’t show him giving ANY answer, meaning that some would go away thinking he had no answer. That was poor form and annoyed me. I don’t believe Dawkins could have given an example, but I wanted to hear what he said none the less.

The complexity and intricacy of a hand made pocket watch points to the existence of an intelligent maker. Why doesn’t the beauty and complexity show the existence of a Creator?

The fossil record.
No fossil remains supporting evolution has ever been found in every corner of the earth. There are NO transient species for ANY species. The intermediary species should be numerous too, not And a lizard mutating into a bird as evolutionists believe, with a half wing is unlikely to

“If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties linking most closely all the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed… Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.” Origin of Species 1st Ed p179

Darwin knew there was no evidence in his time. He wrote a special chapter in his book on this point.  Chapter IX: “Why, if species have descended from other species by fine graduations, do we not see everywhere innumerable transitional forms? But as by this theory unnumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?”

But something that is missed by most people and that is… Today’s species should also show signs of transition, but they don’t. I have never heard an evolutionist make a single argument saying in effect evolution amongst today’s species has stopped. Why then do we not see clear signs amongst the hundreds of thousands of species today any sign of transition. The more species means the more mutations one should find, indeed that is what evolutionists/mutationists say is responsible for the diversity we see today. The sea gannet, frog, and flying fish are debatables, yet Creationists have the upper hand saying the lack of any Neanderthal frog, gannet or flying fish, that these species have no precursor and so are like every other species which have, like modern man, appeared suddenly in isolation and not through evolution. It is true that absence of proof is not proof of absence, but believe in proof when proof is absent is highly tenuous whereas belief in absence in light of absence of proof is the most logical standpoint.

The honeycomb eye structure of trilobite has survived for 530 million years without a single change. Bees and dragon flis has the same eye structure. There is not complex life form known to have existed before the trilobites and other species of the Cambriem period. The Cambrian species came into existence all of a sudden without any ancestors.

Dawkins says “It is as though the species of the Cambrian were just planted there, without any evolutionary history” the Blind Watchmaker, 9186, p229.

“If numerous beloinging to the same genera or families have really started into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the [Darwinian] theory of descent with slow modification through natural selection.” TOS 1st Ed p302

The Cambrian period formes the outset of
Living species always apprar abruptly and fully formed. Fish, birds and mammals. After All the thousands of species withing them after appeared suddenly with distinct structures.

There is NO transitional form.

Palaeontologist Mark Czarnecki: McLeon’s, 18th Jan 1981, p 56: “A major problem in proving theory has been the fossil record. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin’s hypothetical intermediate variants. Instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fuelled the creationists argument that each species was created by God.”

There are difference in structure of a between a 400m year old shark and a modern shark, a 100m year old ant and a modern ant, a 135m year old dragon fly and a modern dragon fly, a 55m bat and a modern bat.

Proposed transitional fossils included Coelacanth and Archaeopteryx.  Coelacanth only (the proposed transitional primitive legs and a primitive lung) was found to be the same as a fish discovered in sub 180m waters in the Indian ocean 1938. It didn’t have primitive legs or a primitive lung. 1992 the creature had a sternum – the chest bone essential for flight meaning it was a perfectly formed bird, not a transitional form. Stephen Jay Gould a stalwart of evolution admitted it oculd be taken as evidence of a transitional form.

Warm blooded/Cold blooded.
This aspect occurred to me getting on about a year ago. How did cold blooded reptiles evolve/switch to warm blooded birds. The difference in physiology between them means it is impossible. A single cold blooded reptile one day couldn’t have become slightly warm blooded, and then mate with a cold blooded reptile to have its progeny slightly more warm blooded which in turn mated with more cold blooded reptiles. To increase the blood ‘warmth’ In reading up on these two types of physiology it seems to me that the evolutionists realised this gaffe and have tried to mussy the waters as to what exactly cold blooded and warm blooded means. Nonetheless their you cannot devise a logical scenarios whereby a warm blooded gene sequence would spring forth only to have it spread in a cold blooded population to remain distinct and then over thousands of years produce species that were totally divergent. Any dominant gene would have destroyed one of the populations, either the emergent warm bloods or the cold bloods. The recessive gene would have been destroyed? Even if you say “Aaa ha” that’s why we have zonal habitats, but there are no warn blooded lizards and birds (the proposed result of lizard evolution) occupy the same habitats as lizards.

Then we get the reptile/mammal egg/giving birth problem and lactation amongst mammals. So where are the half lactating organs? The half eggs? The half live births?

Its nonsense.

6500 ape species have existed so far. Most have become extinct. Doing the morph trick where on TV a carrot can be morphed into a person (commonly projected in terms of man) is a mockery of the intellect.

Australopithecus is an extinct species of ape not man.

Richard Leakey Palaeontologist in The Making of Mankind. 1981 p62” “These differences [in ‘man’ skulls] are probably no more pronounced than [what] we see today between the separate geographical races of modern humans.”

Indeed the BBC showed a very interesting picture of a collection of Cambodian skulls (victims of the Khmer rouge) on a rack. Those skills were from the same race and showed quite a bit of variation.

PIC ———-

So we move to propaganda. Imaginary drawing that appear in textbooks and computerized depictions in nature programs pushing the idea that man came from monkeys. These artists illustrations are a disgrace to science. Quest for Fire was a work of fiction. Much of the bodily characteristics are missing from the bone fragments. The bones of a modern day ape can be wasily clayed up or fleshed up to produce an image that looks exactly like a man.

S. Nisan in the 1964 Sunday Times, Maurice Wilson and Evlul in the 1960 National Geographic used  exactly the same Zinjanthrophus skull yet reconstructed totally different final images


Remember Piltdown man? The put a Orang-utan jaw to a human skull. Now can you imagine the outrage if say a real transitional skull was sabotaged in order to support the theory of Evolution? A similar hoax – Nebraska man’s tooth was that of a wild pig.

However the deceiving drawing of man walking from apes to humans is pushed into kids minds, depicted as being the origin of man.

Species appeared suddenly.

It’s the sign of creation.

I never had all this information when I decided that I accepted there was a God, although I realised some time after trying to prove to a Muslim how man deviated from apes, that my line of argument was flawed and merely a matter of how I chose to draw the deviation and word it. I realised I could equally well have said that any common ancestor could have been called man and that apes could have come from that. After all, if man and ape were subject to evolution than who is anyone to say the converged lineage can rightfully be called ape of man?

Well that’s it.

Evolution for me has been well put to rest. And after 6 hours of typing this, I feel glad to have written it.

I don’t discount that the physical form of man has changed, in fact, isn’t it indisputable that man has been shaped and changed? The tall Kenyan Massai and the small Indonesians, the Australian Aboriginies and the Chiense, The wuropeans and the numerous Native Americans, the long graves and weapons of historically peoples, clearly suggest we can and have changed. But WE ARE THE SAME SPECIES, the same breed – we can propagate amongst these differences.

I credit Darwin, who seemingly in his early days knew of the serious errors of his hypothesis and had the decency to log them, however I think it went to his head as he was held aloft to much praise by people who had no time for religion.

So speciation, spun-mutation and spun-Darwinism is finished.









Viva Palestina – break the siege:

Viva Palestina - break the siege

This blog supports victims of western aggression

This blog supports victims of western aggression

BooK: The Hand of Iblis. Dr Omar Zaid M.D.

Book: The Hand of Iblis
An Anatomy of Evil
The Hidden Hand of the New World Order
Summary Observations and History

Data on Fukushima Plant – (NHK news)

Fukushima Radiation Data

J7 truth campaign:

July 7th Truth Campaign - RELEASE THE EVIDENCE!

Recommended book: 3rd edition of Terror on the Tube – Behind the Veil of 7-7, An Investigation by Nick Kollerstrom:

J7 (truth) Inquest blog

July 7th Truth Campaign - INQUEST BLOG
Top rate analysis of the Inquest/Hoax

Arrest Blair (the filthy killer)

This human filth needs to be put on trial and hung!


JUST - International Movement for a Just World


Information Clearing House - Actual News and global analysis

John Pilger:

John Pilger, Journalist and author

Media Lens

My perception of Media Lens: Watching the corrupt corporate media, documenting and analysing how it bends our minds. Their book, 'Newspeak' is a gem.

Abandon the paper $cam:

Honest and inflation proof currency @ The Gold Dinar
June 2008