Intelligent life before humans?

Interesting link to an article on intelligent life on earth before humans.  Could evidence even be detected from eons ago?

 

via A New Study Suggests There Could Have Been Intelligent Life on Earth Before Humans – Motherboard

Advertisements

Space needs to pay for itself.

flight-sky-earth-space.jpg

The United States needs less space exploration at the expense of the taxpayer and more space exploitation for profit. Sending humans to Mars is wrong at this time because we should use that same money to establish near earth space infrastructure that can support for profit opportunity in the near future.  Look at the human moon landings as the example of a not for profit enterprise controlled by the government and paid for with taxpayer dollars.  We landed a few humans on the moon in a heroic fashion at great cost and risk.  In return for this great effort we received a short temporary boost in our national pride and a few moon rocks.   We should have established a permanent nuclear powered base on the moon at that time for industry, mining, research and military purposes instead of just collecting a few rocks that are really not that critical.  We should not repeat this same mistake with an expensive human Mars landing as proposed by the current U.S. administration.

Robots can explore Mars and the outer solar system more efficiently and safer than any human can.  Mining our moon and any asteroids we can relocate to near earth orbit has a greater potential for real profit in the near term.  A nuclear powered electromagnetic mass driver built on the moon could send large amounts of processed or raw lunar material  into orbit around the earth.  Space based solar power collection systems could be built with these materials and the resulting power sent to earth based collection systems via microwave transmission.  These solar power systems could eventually eliminate the need for any dangerous nuclear plants or dirty fossil fuels on earth.  Global climate change due to human CO2 emissions from fossil fuels would be unnecessary.  In addition large space based systems could be built that could modify the climate on earth if it is disrupted by nature.

Pride and glory are the primary reasons humans want to put their first footprint on Mars.  The vast bulk of people on earth would not be helped by putting humans on Mars.  Why not let cheap AI controlled robots go explore Mars instead?  No one cares if a robot dies in a slow motion horrible accident.  Why not put more taxpayer dollars into near earth space industry infrastructure that will help the people living on this planet?    Space industry of this type would create many new jobs on earth and improve the immediate quality of life for everyone.  Capitalism in space needs this type of infrastructure to make a profit.

 

 

 

The Joy of Cloning!

Manchurian Apricot Fruit Tree in Wisconsin Garden
Manchurian Apricot Fruit Tree in My Wisconsin Garden.

Recently Chinese scientists cloned a monkey which has similar physical characteristics to humans.  The obvious question is when will someone clone a human being.  I believe that it is inherently wrong to create higher animal life by these types of techniques if the animal life will suffer in any way due to botched experimentation.  It is not possible to perfect cloning of higher animals using our current technology without causing severe suffering to many failed experimental animals and even the suffering of an animal has importance to me.

Cloning experimentation on humans will be done by some unethical group in the near future because it is clearly possible and there is always some organization that wants to be the first to make scientific progress.  I am totally opposed to allowing human cloning because I consider it evil based on my cursory reading of the Bible and common sense.  Just because science makes it possible doesn’t mean it should be done.

Human cloning is pretty grim stuff but cloning plants in my garden is great fun.  I am not the first person to discover the joy of cloning.  Some of the native fruit plants in my garden can be cloned and grown into new plants easily because they are not grafted onto any special root stock.  I plan to eventually do some backyard cloning of native fruits and exceptional houseplants for my own enjoyment.  I may even sell clones of any of my plants that it is legal to propagate for resale.  It is possible to make many clones very quickly using cloning powder and an appropriate container.  Commercial nurseries must be making a hefty profit using this technique because it seems incredibly simple on the small scale that I will be doing for relaxation.

I would just buy more plants but the darn things cost too much and my cash is in real short supply at this time in my life.  I particularly would like to clone my Jostaberry bush because they taste so good and yet they have a unique black color which kind of looks unappealing to an uninformed berry thief.  I’d like to make a hedge out of the Jostaberries rapidly using cloning techniques so they would perform the dual purposes of giving me privacy to eat my berries in peace along with providing the berry crop itself.  I doubt that these berries would sell that well due to their appearance but the taste is great.

My Juliet cherry bush is another likely candidate to clone for a hedge combined with a cherry crop.  The cherries have an excellent sweet quality just like sweet cherries from commercial orchards.  I am sure these cherries could be sold if any survive my ravenous plundering of the final crop.  I suppose I will need some netting to stop the birds from beating me to the plundering.  We should actually get a small crop of cherries this year.  I had to severely prune my cherry bush to fit it in my car when we moved to Hartford so I missed a full year of production and reduced future production for a few years.

In my opinion cloning of plants is great but cloning humans not so much.

 

 

 

Wikipedia is a great reference!

Academic Reference police after Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a great reference!  Many college professors believe that they are the only people that can provide accurate reference information which coincidentally gives them job security and a monopoly on how good academic information is transmitted. They despise Wikipedia and brainwash their students to have the same condescending attitude. 

I think that Wikipedia makes a great initial reference to go to provided you cross check it against other sources. Some types of information are simply changing too fast for academics to keep up.and Wikipedia fills a void for these types of situations.  It is not that easy for false information to stay on Wikipedia for any length of time because it tends to be self correcting particularly if it has some type of content that people have strong emotions about. Also, any reasonable person knows enough to check on any information from any source and form their own opinion.

Not everything you read is true. What a shocking concept! Instead of accepting everything from a self protecting academic elite as true you should think for yourself and compare different sources. College professors do make mistakes and they have their own types of prejudiced thinking so make sure you never trust them completely.

Is evolution scientifically accurate and can it be reproduced in the laboratory?

puffballruler
Mushroom growing in my yard.

It should be possible to experiment on non-living matter and produce living matter if the hypothesis of evolution is true.  How did non-living molecules originally turn into life and why can’t science reproduce this event?  Suppose a scientist could start with a tank of non-living  molecules and experiment on them to produce a living creature that would come crawling out of that tank.  Wouldn’t that be a great item to put on the news and enhance that scientists career?  Why hasn’t this been done already?  If it happened by a combination of time and chance we should be able to do it again quickly using the modern resources at our disposal.

mars

One of the biggest reasons we want to spend money on space trips to mars is that mars is similar to earth and should have spontaneously produced life.  We have not found life on mars but we have spent a lot of tax money sending robots there.  Let me say that I have nothing against going to mars or the exploratory space program at NASA.   There are a lot of planets similar to earth in our galaxy according to our observations and it may be possible that there is life on those planets but we still should be able to replicate the origin of life here on earth even if none of these planets can be shown to have living creatures.

Many atheists think that finding other life in our universe would prove evolution is true and that is a major driving force behind our space program.  Even if we created life from scratch in a test tube or found other forms of life in the universe it would not prove what happened in the distant past when life originated.  The greatest weakness of the evolution hypothesis is that its origin can’t be reproduced or observed in nature at this time.

Evolution according to Darwin general concepts probably proceeds at a very slow rate over a long period of time.  Darwin observed finches with variations in their beaks and I would agree that this is probably a form of evolution and could be reproduced by humans in the same manner as different types of cattle are produced by selective breeding.  Many atheists say that evolution requires long periods of time so we can’t observe it happening today because we don’t live long enough but why couldn’t we speed things up in an experiment.  Couldn’t we start with dogs and experiment on them until a rudimentary donkey is produced perhaps?  I would feel sorry for the experimental dogs but it might be educational for everyone to see if such an experiment could achieve a donkey.  I have observed animal reproduction on the farm and I would predict that a donkey could never be produced no matter what you did to the poor dogs to make their genes mutate.

Evolution clearly has limitations in my opinion.  I have seen no reproducible evidence that life has been spontaneously generated from non-living matter and I have seen no reproducible evidence that an animal can produce a completely different kind of animal by selective breeding even using gene mutations induced by humans.  Both of these things should be true if today’s life forms were made by random chance acting on molecules over long periods of time.  It appears to me that the fossil record shows a limited type of evolution in intervals that happened over a long period of time similar to Darwin’s finches and that radical evolutionary transitional forms are not present in sufficient quantities to explain the different types of life forms on earth.  The age of the earth and universe appears to be great in my opinion simply from observation but that does not explain the origin of life or the great differences in kinds of plants and animals.

I personally am a Christian so that means I am naturally biased in favor of Biblical writings however the Bible could be interpreted in different ways when considering events so long ago with limited physical evidence that were not the main purpose of the author.  The Bible is written to save people from their sins and show them the right way to live.  I believe that God knows more than what he chooses to tell us at this time and since he has done me no wrong so far, I will continue to put my trust in him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lomira High School had a great Physics/Chemistry/Math teacher when I went there long ago….

glenngradcar

The best teacher I ever had was Mr. S. at Lomira High School in Lomira, Wisconsin.  He taught physics, chemistry and various types of math.  Most of the teachers at Lomira were pretty good but Mr. S was stellar.  I never realized how lucky we were to have a great group of teachers like that at lomira until I got to college and encountered some of the unique personality’s of the professors there.

Mr. S. dealt with a wide variety students from the most basic math classes to the most difficult science classes and I am fairly certain that most of his students thought he was top notch.  He had an excellent way of imparting knowledge and maintaining a good attitude while doing it.  He always included “Enrichment” knowledge in his lectures which he would tell you was not on the test but I always thought it was interesting.  I borrowed the word “Enrichment” from him to add to my blog title because I always liked it.  He let us play chess in class provided we finished all our work ahead of time and he was nice enough to be the faculty person for the chess club during my senior year.

I didn’t have a lot of extracurricular activities so being the chairman of the chess club was a great thing to put on my college applications.  I applied to a lot of colleges and I was accepted at several but I was surprised that M.I.T accepted me because my grades were not that outstanding. The M.I.T. representatives told me that the chess club activity combined with my unusually high ACT score test results were critical in getting me accepted.  Unfortunately, once I saw how much it would cost me to go to M.I.T. I realized it was far beyond my financial reach.  My guidance counselor told me that I had plenty of financial aid if I just picked a college in wisconsin so I chose MSOE instead. MSOE’s primary entrance test is to make sure that you can pay the tuition although once you are in there they don’t pull any punches on the difficulty of the work.

I have no idea if Mr. S. is even still alive or where he would be living but he could still teach some of the professors I encountered about how to teach.  His level of organization was so much higher that I was spoiled in high school and had to totally readjust in college to the attitudes of some professors.

One of my college chemistry professors showed up on the first day and wrote a bunch of assignments on the board.  He said that there was no reason to talk to us until we had done the assignments and then walked out the door.  It was supposed to be a two hour lecture and I was paying good money for this lazy son of gun to talk a little so he could of at least said something.  Maybe a word of advice or some enrichment.  At that moment I realized what a good teacher Mr. S. had been and I was glad I was not going major in chemistry at MSOE.