Re: The March for ... What?

Just this past week I noticed a distinct uptick in propag ... er news reports making pleas to give some respect to the nations gang of athei er new science experts .... and now comes word of organized protest er ... marchers preparing to heed this call as instructed ..... anyone have insight wtf is up with this particular mainstream wrinkle ..... given that some people have learned that the present era of science, what I distinguish as new science lest somebody confuse it with their once-respected old school actual science ancestry, generally embarks on a program intended to find or manufacture as needed "facts" that promotes its agenda, did somebody pee in new science's cornflakes enough to warrant this sos .....blame it on Russians or Trump or, what , anyone?

Meantime, here is a chunk of investigation that puts present era so - called science in proper, deserved perspective, investigated by an actual scientist who still conducts this investigative art the old way; with legitimate, time-tested inquiry and accumulation of facts that fall however they may.

-

" I have switched sides because I have come to fear the lying scientists more than the lying priests. They are in a position to do more harm, and they are doing more harm. They are stealing far greater sums from the national treasuries worldwide. They are brainwashing the public with false and spun information to a far greater extent than any church"



"..... Anyway, back to Clarence Darrow and the Scopes Trial. One of the most curious sessions occurred when Darrow called the prosecutor Bryan to the stand, as an expert witness on the Bible. It is absurd for the attorneys to be cross-examining one another on the stand, and it is clear proof the whole thing was manufactured for the papers. More indication of that is that we are told the jury wasn't present during the several hours Bryan was on the stand. And the next day, the judge ruled the testimony be stricken from the record. But of course that raises several pertinent questions.

If the jury wasn't seated, how can they say the court was in session? A court without a jury is like a swimming pool without the water or an airplane without the wings. And if the testimony was stricken from the record, then how did the testimony make it into the papers? This indicates the main record of the trial wasn't the court record. The main record of the trial was what was published by the papers. Apparently the script was just fed directly into the media, although we are taught that isn't legal.

In fact, this exchange between Bryan and Darrow is said to have been the deciding factor in turning public opinion against Bryan. This despite the fact the testimony was never heard by the jury and was stricken from the record. That means the exchange was created just for the papers, and that it was intended to turn public opinion against Bryan. Bryan was playing a role here, and knew it.


As you now see, the trial wasn't just promotion of Darwinism, it was a direct attack on Christianity, and as such was a continuation of the Theosophy project. As we saw there and in other papers, the Industrialists had been trying to destroy Christianity for centuries, first because they wanted to steal its tithe, and second because all religions were standing in the way of uninhibited trade (and institutionalized theft).

While Judaism and Islam were also targets, in the US Christianity was of course the main target. This is why I am forced into the strange position of defending Christianity, while not being a Christian. Personally, I have very little use for Christianity. However, I have even less use for the bloated modern State that has taken its place. I also feel compelled to defend Christianity in cases like this, since I can see that it is being attacked with dishonest methods.

For instance, instead of calling a real debate on the subject and reporting it honestly, we see that the Industrialists instead hired actors as debaters, instructing the hired Christian side—Bryan—to throw the debate. Even that was not enough, since the fake debate had to be spun a second time by a thousand hired hacks in the media. In every field of enterprise, these people are outrageous cheaters who can win only by keeping the table constantly sloped heavily in their direction.

So, although for most of my life I came down on the science side of this debate, I no longer do. I haven't switched sides because I have converted to Christianity. And I haven't switched sides because I have joined any other religion. Nor have I switched sides because I believe Darwin was completely wrong. I have switched sides because I have come to fear the lying scientists more than the lying priests. They are in a position to do more harm, and they are doing more harm. They are stealing far greater sums from the national treasuries worldwide. They are brainwashing the public with false and spun information to a far greater extent than any church is doing. To read more about my views on this, you may consult my paper on ( the illogic of Atheism - http://mileswmathis.com/atheism.html)
..... "

http://mileswmathis.com/monkey.pdf



Tweet