Stealing an Empire - Bert Carr - Copyright 2010

8/7/2019 Stealing an Empire - Bert Carr - Copyright 2010

1/25


2/25

CONTENTS

THE GROWING BODY OF EVIDENCE

RADIOMETERIC DATING, GEOLOGICAL TIME AND GLOBAL CLIMATE

CATASTROPHISM

PALEOCURRENTS AND PARACONFORMITIES

HONESTY IS A KEY ISSUE IN ANY DEBATE

PALEONTOLOGY & DINOSAUR DNA

MITOCHONDRIAL EVEBACK TO HONESTY

CRITQUE OF FRANK COLLINS BOOK: THE LANGUAGE OF GOD

CRITIQUING ORIGINS

FAITH IS ATTESTED TO IN THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICIAN

WHO WAS DARWIN & HOW THIS AFFECTS FREEDOM?

THE MONKEY TRIALS THAT HAVE MADE A MONKEY OUT OF THE UNITED STATES

SMITHSONIAN WHAT DARWIN DIDNT KNOW

SIGNATURE IN THE CELL: A SEMINAL WORK SUPPORTING DESIGN

CRAIG VENTER & INTELLIGENT DESIGN

THE DOVER, PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL

MORE REVEALED ABOUT DARWIN AND DARWINIAN HISTORY

IS THE WALL OF SEPERATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

INDEX

PP. 7

PP. 30

PP. 103

PP. 115

PP. 120

PP.139

PP. 154

PP. 166

PP. 173

PP.249

PP.268

PP.275

PP.300

PP.306

PP.323

PP.332

PP.344

PP.411

PP.426


3/25

Copyright 2010 Gilbert Carper

All rights reserved. This book is protected under the

copyright laws of the United States of America. Thisbook may not be copied or reprinted for commercial gain

or profit. The use of short quotations or occasional page

copying for personal or group study is permitted and

encouraged.. Permission will be granted upon request.


4/25

INTRODUCTION

STEALING AN EMPIRE: the Great Cosmographic Myth of Time and Originsfollows the shifting paradigms threatening our constitutional liberties inAmerica. How could totalitarianism be the wave of the future asour nation wasfounded on the Protestant beliefs of its founding fathers and onthe Christianityof its early settlers? Principles of justice and liberty instilled into our nationsunique beginnings are being hunted down and attacked as destructive andsubversive to the very inheritance they founded. This ruthless attack on the

Christian foundations of our nation is nothing less than treason. The enemy isevolution draped in the intransigent cloak of atheism.

What are evolutions philosophical and political ambitions as revealed by its nowsubstantial history? Its ambitions are emboldened in the takingdown ofnations who were once free and advanced in their cultures. Sucha place wasGermany preceding Hitlers arrival with his revolutionary and savage dictum ofevolutionary terrorism, the survival of the fittest which claim to destinydestroyed nearly the whole of Europe.

On arguments of law, history proves how processes and events evolve and cometo fruition as a domineering totalitarianism. Evolutions killer instinctsrevealed in its primeval slogan the survival of the fittest is among the mostvicious and deadly ideologies ever expounded in the course of human historyas demonstrated by its holocaust museums, its archives of frauds, fakes anddeceptions, well documented and available to everyones scrutiny.

Like many projects which grow beyond an authors original expectations, this


5/25

manuscript grew into a full length book, critiquing and satirizing theevolutionary stance taken in major, well-known books and magazine

articles, including sources on the internet, purported discoveries,claims and law suits against and competing interests with IntelligentDesign and Creationism, events which now require a different analysisof the 1st Amendment. Major players in the saga of evolutionaryapologetics and defenders, are not spared.

Considerable quoted material is referenced from both sides of theargument to determine their validity, and the conclusions, analysisand convictions arrived at.

In the chapter dedicated to the testimony delivered in the Dover,Pennsylvania Monkey Trial as argued by evolutionist Mr. Miller and hiscohorts and legal team of the ACLU, I show their testimony was faulty,fraudulent and misrepresentative, illogical, or did not support ascientific method of reasoning and proper definitions of science andgave a false testimony of history.

Proceeding the Index and the list of secondary resources, is a photocopy

of the New England Journal of Medicine article I suggest should beread before proceeding with the particular chapter dealing with thatarticle. That article was the direct provocation which lead to thewriting of this manuscript.

Intelligent Design as referenced in this work refers only to the evidence ofdesign in nature which infers a designer. There are philosophicalvariations and extensions on this theme, but they are not being

referred to specifically in this book.

INTRODUCTIONSTEALING AN EMPIRE Bert Carr


6/25

PALEONTOLOGY & DINOSAUR DNA

A recent conundrum for the intelligentsia as the evolutionists would like to deceivethe world into thinking of their gymnastics of intellectual flights of back-firingimaginations and unprovoked circular theories of programmed falsehoods anddreamt up pretenses along with backhanded excuses slashed acrosswhirlwindsof nonsense: (theirs could be described as a spectacularly indoctrinairededucation with fabulous proportions of fiction). The recent discovery ofextremely fragile and delicate biological tissues inside the fossilized bones of

dinosaurs, and other comparable discoveries has shaken up thepaleoanthraphology world with the drastic insult they could have been wrongabout many of their unprovable timeline assertions. In fact, being wrong wasnot thought to be a rational alternative. But an unexpected discovery can easilymanhandle even an adept scientist. These new discoveries were secreted away,mysteriously, for millenniums and ages beyond suspect, inside ofancient,fossilized bones that contain fleeting biological substances such as; bloodvessels, red blood cells, possibly DNA, RNA which is even more fragile than DNAand protein, as well as collagen. It is well established that DNA chemicalsubstances have a very short shelf life. For instance: at 100 degrees C, adeninefound in DNA, RNA, and ADP and guanine found in DNA have chemical half-livesof only about one year; uracil contained in the RNA has a half-life of twelveyears; and cytosine found in the DNA has a half-life of just nineteen days. Thepresence of rarely preserved proteins can indicate certain otherpredecessorchemical processes, but it is impossible to establish anything near a completegenome from such sparsely inadequate data. In most remains a few decadesold, a score of other highly perishable and fleeting biological materials with

proven short survival rates last for only a few139


7/25

decades, weeks, days, even less has left the paleoanthraphology world wheelingfrom the shock of dismay in the face of their own ignorance. Such an

astounding chemical feat was never supposed to have happened, and it isoccasions like this that brings out the best and most educated liars. It hasalways been assumed everything in a fossilized bone had decayed anddisappeared millions of years ago! That has been until now that assumptionhas been proven startlingly difficult to imagine as anywhere reliable by recentdiscoveries. In the most ideal conditions, Collagen, the longest lastingbiological material other than bone, is known to last no longer than about 2000thousand years at normal burial temperatures, other words, well within therecorded history of man. But could even far more fragile biological materials in

fossilized and supposedly ancient Dinosaur bones have lasted formillions ofyears unfossilized as fragile genetic proofs preserved in a mummified statewithout having totally decomposed and disappeared? Scientists for scientificreasons are growingly skeptical such evidences could have lastedunlessdinosaurs lived much more recently then once believed. Some things arecertainly obvious but deniable, of course, and that is the purpose of sciencethese days it would seem to deny what is the most intuitively astounding andobvious therefore that which makes the most sense. That is the way it is inscience where the obvious is most often mistrusted and misconstrued as aninadmissible argument. One Montana 68,000,0000 million year oldTyrannosaurus was still in possession of some of his Red Blood cells and BloodVessels. An unbelievable feat for one very tuff old monster. Dr. MarySchweitzer, a molecular Paleontologist at North Carolina State made one of thefirst discoveries. Not only is the tissue intact, it is still transparent andpliable. The removal process left behind stretchy bone matrix material that,when examined microscopically, seemed to show blood vessels, osteocytes, orbone building cells, and other recognizable

140

PALEONTOLOGY & DINOSAUR DNASTEALING AN EMPIRE Bert Carr


8/25

organic features. There was an attempt to compare branching blood vesselsand many small microstructures to structures in modern day Ostriches. In

support of the current evolutionary theory that birds are closely related todinosaurs. Do Ostriches have a dino gene? That question should cause alreadybewildered and alarmed paleontologists to scurry off to collect their evolutionarywar gear and switch the On switch to their electron microscopes for anotherbewildered look. There were two photos offered for comparison, but it seemedto me as only a humble artistic genius that it would take a lot of stretching of theimagination in all directions to get the two to look even remotely alike a lotmore elasticity than claimed, you might say to get the answer right. But than,that is why I am not an expert but only a genius. I dont see faces on the moon

to prove life is there, or patchy resemblances of ape like humans in clouds, andmetaphors of patch worked time in stones and genes. The theory that birds arerelated to dinosaurs was recently contradicted by another find: An alleged 65million year old duckbilled dinosaur still wearing his fossilized skin as hard asiron mail, with fossilized scales and is reputed to possibly have other bodyorgans as well. (Discovered in southwestern North Dakota.) North Dakota is aplace where something can be north of everything that is south, east or west ofanything else. Skin decays rapidly, therefore fossilization had to occurextremely rapidly if not suddenly to preserve it. Otherwise, decompositionwould see to it that there wouldnt be anything left to discover and argue over?The sudden rapidity of disaster is ascertained by a Corythosaurs buried alivewhile giving birth. [My hearing on this one may have been a little faulty, but Ibelieve this was the beast described]. Chemistry says all perishable biologicalmaterial should be gone in a few thousand years at most. Time does not alterthe laws of chemistry. But time and inclination can easily alter the rationality ofsome minds.

141



9/25

Mary Schweitzer admitted, The new finding will be viewed skeptically. Its very,

very, very controversial because most people have gone on recordsayingthere is an absolute time limit to anything thats protein or DNA.

Blood cells in dinosaur bone should have disappeared eons ago. I got goosebumps, recalls Mary Schweitzer. It was exactly like looking at a slice ofmodern bone. But, of course, I couldnt believe it. I said to the lab technician:The bones, after all, are 65 million years old. How could bloodcells last thatlong?

Why was Schweitzer, an eye witness who microscopically observed the insides of

a T. rexbone, afraid to believe her own eyes? Isnt empirical science aboutstudied observation? Connective tissue ruins and degrades over time, suchthat DNA could not survive at all, even if the creature lived only 10,000 yearsago. The existence of 65 million year old DNA is biologically unthinkable[because it is]. Other words, the old-earth evolutionary tale is clearly at oddswith the fresh dinosaur bone evidence. How embarrassing to the academicestablishment! This may be why ongoing dinosaur soft tissue discoveries aregenerally not broadcast through popular media channels. Acts & Facts,Institute For Creation Research.

I mean can you imagine pulling a bone out of the ground after 68,000,000 yearsand then getting intact protein sequences? said John Asara of Beth IsraelDeaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, lead authorof one ofthe studies. ( Mary Schweitzer stated, she couldnt believe it ). Thats mindboggling how much preservation there is in these bones. Impossible ofcourse, unless such discoveries indicate a sort of phony evolutionary magichas occurred the bones are not as nearly as old as they have beeninaccurately dated only a few thousand years old as indicated by a recent

flood story in


142


10/25

contrast to millions and tens of millions of years as attested to by the evolutionarydumb theory: an indication that radiometric techniques and theories are not only

grossly but fantastically inaccurate and misleading?Scientists discovered bacteria in 200,000,000 year old salt crystals. When the

scientists took the bacteria out and plated them, the bacteria were still alive andgrew. There isthe question of how bacterial biopolymers can remain intactover millions of years in dormant bacteria, or, conversely, if bacteria aremetabolically active enough to repair biopolymers, this raises the question ofwhat energy source could last over such a long period. I think the evolutionistsare beating their bloodied heads against the rocks of a naturalistic fate anddamnations. One should wonder whether the salt crystals are actually 200million years old or only a few thousand? Supposing there were an incredible200 million year energy source, ridiculous, of course, how coulda bacteria livefor 200 million years? Thats the really critical question posed by the evidence?Man lives only 60-80 years on the average a dominantly superior species, webelieve, suffers from a dangerously inferior mortality rate, whereas bacteria, aninferior, and often dangerous or questionably useful entity can achieve anunchallengeable, and unimaginable biological immortality? What a cruel priceto pay for intellectual superiority and a little bit of ego. But it fits with the

survival of the fittest as these bacteria have survived longer than any other lifeform, it is claimed. Therefore, these bacteria, rather than man, are the ultimatetriumph of the evolutionary scenario. Life must spiral downwards to achieve theultimate evolutionary victory! But I, like many others, have too much of an egoand too much good sense to believe this, or any other evolutionary poop-ontology.

Tomas Lindahl in 1993 wondered Deprived of the repair mechanisms provided in


143


11/25

living cells, fully hydrated DNA is spontaneously degraded to short fragments overa time period of several thousand years at moderate temperatures. The apparent

observation that fully hydrated plant DNA might be retained in high-molecularmass form for 20,000,000 years is incompatible with the known properties ofchemical structure of DNA.

Notice the age estimates over which DNA is supposedly capable of surviving isdown drastically from 200 million to 20 million years and the bottom of theevolutionary Stock Market is dropping out like lightening in referral to theknown properties.

Lindahl is probably correct in saying that DNA cannot last much longer than

10,000 years. All points of view are consistent when one concludes these oldages are wrong. Edward Golenberg. In fact, there are no historical dates whichcollaborate that DNA could last for 4-5000 years and any known historicallysupported time periods are far less. 10,000 years is in itself, an extremeexaggeration of any known facts!

Definitely, Lindahl and Golenberg are on the right track, but there is onescandalous, unacceptable conclusion to naturalist science that the detectedDNA in such instances is not millions of years old, but only a few thousand yearsold at most, but to suggest such a scandalous possibility would be like a

sacrilege degrading the country club atmosphere of the evolutionary imaginaryhalls of triumph and the cause of all this debauchery would be an ancient, world-wide flood.

A fossilized jelly fish was discovered in South Australia, mummified baleen indeposits of whale bone near the Chilean coast; a fossilized fishmemorializes inits stone sudden Catastrophe as the larger predator in still-life swallows its preywith the victims tail protruding out of the aggressors mouth. Instantaneouspreservation by sudden Catastrophe are the only explanations. If not, you

explain it if you are arrogant enough to think you are


144


12/25

more astute than the cleverest source of incomprehensible academoniac: [egoinsanity induced by too much imaginary learning]. Most of mankinds beliefs

require overconfident self-deceiving arrogance in direct denial of rationalthought. These startling and contradictory discoveries topetparadigms ofevolutionary schemes have sent paleontologists wheeling and virtually standingon their heads and wondering what they can do next, if one can do much rationalthinking while spinning on ones head. I doubt Shakespeare ever attempted itwith pen and ink in hand while writing Hamlet the punctuation would haveflown uncontrollably in all directions along with letters and words and splattersof ink you could never write the word evolution or Hamlet that way. As pointedout, what does this all mean for the bird relationship of Bambiraptor dressed up

in the full regalia of faked and imaginary feathers with a purported line ofdescent to birds, or a 65 million year old Triceratops whose supposed DNA wasdiscovered to have been deliberately substituted with turkey DNA. ICONS OFEVOLUTION: Archaeopteryx: Chapter on The Missing Link. Did you get that!Had it been pork, it could have been a real non-missing-link in the evidencehidden behind someones teeth! These erroneous claims were a dishonest,sadistic tampering with the evidence without any regard for the consequences offalse information preying upon the publics gullibility to fraudulent science.Pass the dinosaur turkey loaf, please, mixed with Spin-ach and Nuts as in culprit.I would like to know how many millions of years ago this crime occurred and didauthorities ever apprehended the 21st century culprit? I am guessing in whichmillennium and century the crime occurred. Was this miraculousstaging ofdisbelief an attempt to discredit legitimate finds, made by other shocked anddismayed evolutionists, as I have mentioned, over specimens, which have intact,ancient DNA inside their bones where no one had ever thought to look! Likelythe turkey fraud had more to do


145


13/25

with upholding the Bambiraptor fraud, than to discredit tyrannosaurus by asuspect PHD who had grown dizzy and bored from watching too many

evolutionary science fiction horror flicks on TV and couldnt resist the plunge.The end of the world is at hand cried forth by disturbed evolutionists rightalong and right beside on channel with the evangelical doom-sayers and one ofthem very likely maybe right! More than any time in history, mankind faces across-roads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, tototal extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly. WoodyAllen.

Check out the Body-Farm on the internet. There are established, historical rates ofbody tissue decay at which point nothing but dust and fossils and lifeless matteris left. Every evolutionist and atheist you see today, will one day be turned todust and blown about by ill winds, or swept out of peoples CLOSETS, and theirinfamy recounted only in the dusty ossuary of books.

In Fact, bio-chemical decay rates showing that soft tissues would be dust after allthis time (millions of years) are also thus far unfalsified. [ Cannot be disproven].Therefore, the millions-of-years of age assignments must go.

However, if the deep time goes, then so does the grand theory ofevolution thatdepends on it. For many, that is too sacredan assumption to dare alter. Biblical

data, however, not only provide a timeframe for the death of these dinosaurs inFlood deposits a few thousand years ago, but also a mode of deposition inagreement with observable data that their demise occurred when they fell into awatery grave. Acts & Facts. September 2009.

The National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging insensationalistic, unsubstantiated, tabloid journalism. Says Storrs L. Olson ofSmithsonian Institution. National Geographics Archaeoraptor, or Piltdownbird fraud brought harsh


146


14/25

criticism from the scientific community. What was all the conflict about? In anOpen Letter to Dr. Peter Raven of the NGS, Olson addresses the problem: At a

press conference held at National Geographic Headquarters October 15, (1999), a team of Geographic-supported experts (an expert is nomenclature for ahighfalutin professional sociopath liar) unveiled the fossil, which they namedArchaeoraptor Liaoningensis. At the time, the team members announced thatthe 125-million-year-old creature, as well as two other fossils (all smuggled)from China which were also featured, demonstrated that feathers werewidespread among theropods, the carnivorous dinosaurs that includeTyrannosaurus and Velociraptor. Unique to the Archaeoraptor fossil, they said,was the presence of both bird-like bone structure and a strong, dinosaur-like

tail. These turned out to be composites from two very different creatures. Thedinosaur tail, it was later learned, did not belong to the rest of the animal, whomight have otherwise felt very naked without a tail while still alive and in theconfusion of an a-typical metamorphous. The so-called Archaeoraptor appearedin a full spread photograph in the December National Geographic Magazine, thediscovery hailed as the best evidence to date for Darwins so-called missinglink. If this was the best evidence to date, than what was the restof theevidence? It is now widely known, this elusive, illustrated link was a fraud, andwhat was hopelessly missing was the truth. To summarize, no legitimateevidence for a missing link has ever been found! Obviously, theNGM is stillmuch in want of that missing link to integrity and the truth.

Prior to the publication of the articleDinosaurs Take Wingin the July 1998National Geographic I (Olson) tried to interject the fact that strongly supportedalternative viewpoints existed to what National Geographic intended to present,but it became eventually clear to me that National Geographic was not interestedin anything other than the prevailing


147


15/25

dogma that birds evolved from dinosaurs. It figures as little more than editorialpropagandizing. This melodramatic assertion had already been disproven by

recent studies of embryology and comparative morphology, which, of course,are never mentioned.

More importantly, however, none of the structures illustrated in Sloans articlethat are claimed to be feathers have actually been proven to be feathers. Sayingthat they are is little more than wishful thinking that has beenpresented as fact.The statement on page 103 that hollow, hair-like structures characterized asprotofeathers is nonsense considering that protofeathers exist only as atheoretical construct, so that the internal structure of one is even morehypothetical.

The hype about feathered dinosaurs in the exhibit currently on display at theNational Geographic Society is even worse, and makes the spurious claim thatthere is strong evidence that a wide variety of carnivorous dinosaurs hadfeathers. A model of the undisputed dinosaur Deinonychus and illustrations ofbaby trannosaurs are shown clad in feathers, all of which is simply imaginaryand has no place outside of science fiction.

The idea of feathered dinosaurs and the theropod origin of birds is being activelypromulgated by a cadre of zealous scientists acting in concert with certain

editors at Nature and National Geographic who themselves havebecomeoutspokenandhighlybiasedproselytizersofthe FAITH. TRUTHandcarefulscientificweighingofevidence have beenamongthe firstcasualtiesin theirprogram, which isnowfastbecomingone ofthe granderscientific hoaxesofourage. Olson

This is just one more example of the scientific community peddling fraud asscientific fact. Charles Colson. January 28, 2000.

A breathtaking forgery. Tim Friend USA Today


148


16/25

A lie is a dinosaur with a tale pinned on, although the liar thinks it is a bird ofparadise.

Mary Schweitzers turkey shoot of a Piltdown-Tyrannosaurus monster so huge itsmeat would feed entire villages has been called off due to the lack of prey. Noone has asked what if any alternatives she has planned for her Thanksgivingdinner. But this imaginary bird certainly turned into a turkey of sorts. Dinosaurcollagen has since been sequenced leaving no doubt at all that the proteinfindings are genuine, and the sequence of dinosaur DNA wasnt turkey like butunique! Another slap in the face for National Geographics pretense to science.

National Geographic printed a retraction. Retract quickly what you dont want to

repent of to save at least your reputation if not your dying sense of honor. Ifrepenting is an unsatisfactory option, apologize. Most people wont notice thefarce and will forgive. Those who rarely feel remorse often fear scandal.Remorse is the result of having a conscience, fear of scandal isthe adaptive fearof those who do not. For those who rarely feel remorse, fear of scandal shouldbe sufficient to keep their deviant behavior in check until theyare convinced theycan get away with it the next time around. The overall enjoyment of a significantscandal is directly proportional to the amount of amusement and money to begained in the ruin of reputations, where a simple, insincere apology will save the

day if not ones honor.This was not the end of numerous other debacles, however. In 1994Thewinners of the race to sequence dinosaur DNA were Scot Woodward and hiscolleagues, who published their results in science. They extracted DNA from awell-preserved dinosaur bone. However, they were not rewarded for theirvictory. The sequence they discovered was not like birds or reptiles, but seemedunique.


149


17/25

These researchers decided not to follow the procedure in the 1993 flowchart,which would have told them that what they found was an unacceptableanomaly. The flowchart describes the process of extracting dinosaur DNA.Step 7 asks: Is the sequence similar to human, bacterial, or fungal DNA? If theanswer is no, then step 8 asks, Is the sequence similar to birdsor crocodiles? Ifthe answer is no, go back to step 1 and begin the procedure all over again. If theanswer is yes, you might have dino DNA. Since this DNA did not fit theinterpreted evolutionary filter, the authors were raked over theacademic coals.Moreover, the objections were not based on conflicting research results, butappeared in [offended] editorials and reviews. As a result of the uproar from thescientific community, their dinosaur DNA sequence never became a permanententry in any public database. In fact, since this very public academic flogging,no scientist has attempted to publish any dinosaur DNA research (resulting inchilled academic speech). Acts and Facts, October 2009. If the evidencedeviates from evolutions foregone conclusion, the facts are declared by thetheory


150


18/25

These researchers decided not to follow the procedure in the 1993 flowchart,which would have told them that what they found was an unacceptableanomaly.


150


19/25

to be in error not the reverse that the facts declare the theory in error! SinceScott Woodward and his colleagues were the first to sequence dinosaur DNA,

how could the flowchart have predetermined a year in advance of their discoverythat dinosaur DNA could only resemble bird or crocodile DNA? A coincidencehad it been right would have required divination or something entirely of themiraculous. Evolutionary damage control is observed in the form of chilling(i.e., coerced) censorship of research, with severe consequencesto those whobuck the System. Acts & Facts. Truth is strangled by an Inquisition. Imaginewhat these modern evolutionary despots would do, were they to gain control ofAmerican Democracy as well as science? Democracy would come toascreaming, screeching halt! Overnight, our land of freedom would be

transformed into a totalitarian state. The freedom of speech, and of the press,and of religion would be wiped out. Evolution is a thoroughly cooked up theoryboiling down to a conspiracy and its supporting antagonists as an anathema tofreedom.

Current naturalistic evolutionary theories hold that organic molecules should notpreserve over 100,000 years, but where is there any evidence for this claim? Isay its so, so its so declared by a secular naturalist-anointed, prophesying PHDatheist? Over 65 million years is majestically unbelievable and over a few

thousand years is incredibly unbelievable! There is a 65 million year gap in thisriddle if you stop to think about it 65 million years which could have neveroccurred, either by fact, fantasy or theory stretched beyond the limits of anuncontrolled and wild imagination! 65,000,000 yrs - 100,000 yrs = 64,900,000 yrs,leaving for known chemical and empirical evidence less than a maximum of5,000 yrs = 64,995,000 years which could have never occurred. The 65,000,000years never existed. It just evaporated!! I was allowing 5,000 years forextremely generous empirical evidence of


151


20/25


21/25

chemical and time reactions when there is not any empirical or historical evidence

that biological materials will last anywhere near as long as 5 thousand years oreven possibly 4 thousand years! See the problem? Other words, research datawhich demonstrates such vast time-frames of preservation are entirelytheoretical and fictitious and off the map and unintuitive to any known andprovable date more than several thousand years of known history. Theory, andnot demonstrable data within already known and limited parameters of a coupleof thousand years for biological materials, time doesnt alter chemistry isneeded to exponentially and fictionally stretch out the time-frame like stretchybone matrix material as an utterance of faith and irreducible uncertainty. In less

then 5,000 years less than 4,000 years nothing is left but mummies, dust andtombs. The evolutionists and the atheists will all be gone forever into theunsettling and dusty nightmare of their disintegrating future.

So why is it so difficult to get answers out of very old mummies like deadPharaohs, and so easy, once youre learned the trick, to find answers just waitingto be discovered in millions of year old dinosaur bones, is an astonishingmystery if you havent already guessed there is something drastically anddisturbingly wrong with modern dating techniques. Here we have the very

blueprints of life shouting out their recent age in conflict with the tick-tocks inthe rocks!

Evolution, however, will not be allowed to die a natural death. It must be proppedup by crutches, sustained by respirators and emergency tactics, and by ahopeless enthusiasm for a dying and malignant and mean patient who is of nouse to anyone other than frauds and liars if left living.


153


22/25

Who was Mitochondrial Eve? Her introduction first seized the popularimagination with the original scientific article published in the January 1, 1987issue ofNature, by Cann, Stoneking, and Wilson; publicized as the Cann et al.study which announced, they had proven that all modern human beings cantrace their ancestry back to a single woman who lived thousands of years ago inAfrica. This woman was nicknamed Eve. This caused an immediateinternational sensation and her name stuck. Only scientists canexceedpublishers in raising the temperature of sensationalism. Together, they can cook

up almost anything beyond the boiling point of wild speculation whichcrescendoed to a January 26, 1987 article in Time,and in the following year to amajor Newsweek production in January 1988 under the sensational heading:The Search for Adam and Eve: Scientists Explore a Controversial Theory AboutMans Origins. I still remember theNews Week Magazine cover of Adam andEve, with Eve holding the apple more matter-of-factly than temptingly and thegreen serpent full of guile and twisted around the tree in the background. Theillusion to Genesis was obvious. But theNewsweekCover illustration was not arunaway masterpiece recommending it to be hung in the gallery ofa great

museum. Adam was looking at Eve, not at the apple. Where was the fascinationof the temptation, and therefore mans fascination with the story ever since and in center space was the cause of all of mans woes, the woman, Eve. Did theportrait really look like her, did it do her justice? Justice, of course, wasaccomplished by other means and begins a very long and convoluted story. Ifelt like booing. She wouldnt even turn heads today. Since that first clinical trialplayed out between a man and a woman as husband and wife in paradise longago, the prospects of marriagemakes any expectation of

MITOCHONDIA EVESTEALING AN EMPIRE Bert Carr

154

MITOCHONDIA EVE


23/25

immortal life extremely scary. Fortunately for Adam, he was a coward and took the

quickest way out when the opportunity came. But due to some unrevealedincompetence, that took nearly a thousand years! And heres the snag, whetherone falls in love, or falls out of love, either way involves a fall.

That aside. The claims made by the scientists in the original articles have breweda lot of controversy ever since. There are all sorts of extravagant claims fastforwarded, and new data hitting the field, leading one internet author or authorsto announce The Demise ofMitochondrial Eve,apparentlyproposingtheirarticleas herobituary. Have scientists successfully concealed the body of evidence in

a crypt of scientific embarrassments, or resurrected a subject they would ratherforget? What is needed here is a diagnosis to decide if the patient could havedied of the symptoms described. And why did scientists name her,Mitochondrial Eve, is fundamentally important to the intriguing story? First,understanding what the mitochondria is and what functions it performs insidethe body and within the cell and how it is inherited is important to understandingEves significance in the controversy. The mitochondria are the rod like, orbean like structures in the cytoplasm of eukaryote cells that serve as the centerof inter-cellular enzyme activity which produces the ATP needed to power the

cell. ATP is the molecule or the energy source which runs the cell. Themitochondria has its own digital-like coded DNA separate from that of thenucleus of the cell which oversees the production of other proteins andhormones and innumerable chemicals necessary to support life anditsfunctions. The mitochondria DNA (mtDNA) strand is shorter and relativelysimple compared to the DNA strand found within the nucleus. And unlike thenuclear DNA which is inherited from both parents, mitochondria (mtDNA) isinherited by both the male and the female only from the maternal side of thefamily, or from the mothers


155


24/25

line. And thus this line of descent can be traced back to a single woman who was

the mother of us all. So the scientific icon representing this hypothesis wasnicknamed Eve for the first woman. The choice of the name sensationalized thewhole concept and that they could come close to even proving it was totallystartling and unexpected. This set up the stage for what was to come next.

This is only a Sample of STEALING AN EMPIRE by Bert Carr

Copyright 2010 Gilbert Carper

All rights reserved. This book is protected under the copyright laws of the United Statesof America. This book may not be copied or reprinted for commercial gain or profit. Theuse of short quotations or occasional page copying for personal or group studyis permitted and encouraged.. Permission will be granted upon request.

[email protected]


156


25/25

Date post:	08-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	gilbertcarper
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

Stealing an Empire - Bert Carr - Copyright 2010

Documents