Man's State of Decay in the Social Imagination...

 

Human genome decay

In his landmark book, Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome, geneticist Dr John Sanford clearly demonstrates that human genomes are decaying at an unstoppable rate, a principle he calls ‘genetic entropy’. The reason for the decay is that natural selection can only remove the severely deleterious mutations from the gene pool. 

The vast majority of mutations are only mildly deleterious, or they have no detectable effect at all, so they are passed on from one generation to the next and accumulate continuously. Sanford includes a model calculation that predicts our species will become extinct in about 300 generations (6,000 years, with a generation time of 20 years). 

A far more important development occurred with the release of Sanford and colleagues’ powerful computer simulation program Mendel’s Accountant. This allows greater refinement in predicting the fate of mutations in populations and the results agree with Sanford’s earlier work. There appear to NO (realistic) evolutionary models in the scientific literature that contradict these results. This overwhelmingly negative evidence clearly contradicts Darwinian expectations; but, clearly and dramatically fits the biblical record of the Fall ~ https://creation.com/human-genome-decay-and-origin-of-life.

Ever since the fall of man... actually, all creation fell, the state of entropy continues. It affects all things organic and inorganic.... all matter. Here is a reading from Romans 8: 19-21... 

"The creation waits in eager expectation for the revelation of the sons of God.  For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but because of the One who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.…"

There will be a new heaven and new earth...  "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more" ~ Rev. 21:1.

News Media 'MishMash & Mincemeat' in the Social Imagination...

 

Lets start by explaining what is operation mincemeat? Well, according to Wikipedia, Operation Mincemeat was a successful British deception operation of the Second World War to disguise the 1943 Allied invasion of Sicily. 

Two members of British intelligence obtained the body of Glyndwr Michael, a tramp who died from eating rat poison, dressed him as an officer of the Royal Marines and placed personal items on him identifying him as the fictitious Captain (Acting Major) William Martin. They (largely the British Military) created a fake person. In fact, they thought to be able to pull it off, the 'persona' must have a convincing background, history and supporting details and they created him ~ William Martin. 

The 'News' today hardly needs explanation... fake news or controlled information by those in positions of power. Each broadcast company has its puppets. Now, you may not wish to believe that but that's your problem. 

Why would I put the news and operation mincemeat together in the social imagination? Good question! The news is run by puppeteers or control specialists and operation mincemeat was created by specialists to create a fake event in order that an advantage be gained. So, there you have it... the news with its 'fake' puppet people does the same. 

In fact, the two are blending quite nicely these days. Just look at what's happening with Twitter... and who is responsible for that? Oh, I am sure plenty would like to blame DJT but lets go farther back to see what we can find. 

The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda...The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as "sock puppets" – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organizations to do the same. ~ https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks

Yes, that discovery came out in 2011... ooh, its 11 years old. Who was the big shot in the White House then? BO. Seems operation mincemeat in the News Media has been going on for some time. What is the real intention? Its to deceive, its to manipulate and make mincemeat out of your brain. And, it all happens in the social imagination. 

Which sock puppets are you watching these days? Who are you letting make mincemeat out of your brain?

What is a Woman in the Social Imagination...

The following is an excerpt from https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/im-not-a-biologist/ with a commentary inserted by this blogger.

Marsha Blackburn, the senior United States senator from Tennessee, asked Judge Jackson a simple question: “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?” Jackson, a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard College and sometime supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review answered: “Can I provide a definition? No. I can’t. Not in this context. I’m not a biologist.” The judge, brow furrowed, seemed equal parts annoyed and genuinely confused.

Webster’s: “An adult female person; a grown-up female person, as distinguished from a man or a child; sometimes, any female person.”)

How does a court or a country function if its jurists feel they should defer to experts in life science for the definitions of basic English words? Law cannot be interpreted in a vacuum. One of the most basic inputs for sound jurisprudence is a working knowledge of what words mean. If a nominee to the high court really does not know what a woman is, we’re in trouble.

Yet the word is admittedly more fraught than most. If Ketanji Brown Jackson doesn’t know the answer to Senator Blackburn’s question, then neither do half the people in this country. The strategy of the left on every social issue has been to invent, and then expand, a moral gray area so that even (or especially) those with advanced degrees from elite universities find themselves unable to distinguish a woman from a child or a man. When you entertain the “I’m not a biologist” copout, you don’t just feed into the scientism and expertocracy of the ruling class; you cede the mapping of reality to people who have no interest in the territory.

Scientists, gender law scholars and philosophers of biology said Jackson’s response was commendable, though perhaps misleading. It’s useful, they say, that Jackson suggested science could help answer Blackburn’s question, but they note that a competent biologist would not be able to offer a definitive answer either. Scientists agree there is no sufficient way to clearly define what makes someone a woman, and with billions of women on the planet, there is much variation.

    But if that is true, then why have any study called biology? How could one even become a biologist if one starts from the position that one cannot know the basic differences between a man 'male' and a woman 'female'. What would then be a means to start the study of biology, right? In fact, when a baby is born, how could anyone determine the sex of the baby... well, if they are not a biologist they could not make such a determination even though every baby comes with biological determining facts ~ The Social Imagination

“What is a woman?” A judge who can’t provide an answer that question—or who thinks the matter of who is a human person and who is not as a “private” matter—has no place in the government of a just society.

Either Judge Jackson genuinely does not interpret the law in light of any moral framework—in which case she would be no better than the braindead legal nihilists whose reign has delivered every judicial abomination from Griswold to Bostock and beyond in each direction (this is the “stupid” option)—or the substantive vision that informs her jurisprudence would be so objectionable to the half of Americans who do know what a woman is and do not want babies murdered that she thought better of speaking it aloud before the Senate (this is the “lying” option).

 

~  A wife of noble character is her husband’s crown, but she who causes shame is like decay in his bones. The plans of the righteous are just, but the counsel of the wicked leads to deceit.…Proverbs 12: 4-5. Sure you can make the liberal (LGBT) argument that those are just pronouns and a wife is a social concept which either a male or female could role play. But, make no mistake, only a woman 'female' can give birth and that is based on the science of biology. A woman giving birth to a child has pain because her time has come; but when her baby is born she forgets the anguish because of her joy that a child is born into the world... John 16:21.