PopSci Journals are amazing. They can be totally wrong, later change their story, invoke unseen phenomena, and claim they are providing “understanding” of the natural world's reality. And when their fables are exposed as fraud, the ignorant gullible public just keeps coming back for more. Let me provide an analogy 😉
|image - allposters.com|
|photo - Janwikifoto 2008|
Michel Roux compiled serveral fantastic recipes from his term as head chef at Le Gavroche, as well as recalling some old favourites from the restaurant’s 33 years as one of London’s most celebrated dining rooms. Michel stated that almost all of the recipes detailed in his book should be relatively easy for any confident cook. His book was not a book of ingredients. I mean it might also help to know exactly how long, for example, to steam the lobster in spinach which you can find on page 230. Should it be nine or 11 minutes ??? Will two minutes too long ruin the dish ??? Questions, questions, questions. A mere book of ingredients offers nothing of real value. So does everyone get the point here ??? What I'm leading up to here is a recent CNN clickbait article which claims to answer the question of life's origins on Earth's, but reality never does any of that. This should not surprise anyone since most Pop-Sci journals never do either. They have a following whose worldview needs to be coddled and cuddled for profit.
Ingredients for Life found in meteorites that crashed to Earth
"Our reverence for science has led to a culture of “new findings” and sensationalistic headlines" Science Writer, Simon Oxenham
|Photo Credit: Dr. Queenie Hoi Shan Chan|
"Two Meteorites, called Monahans and Zag, are the first discovered to contain the ingredients for life: liquid water, amino acids, hydrocarbons and other organic matter. A chemical-makeup analysis of blue and purple salt and potassium crystals from the meteorites was published in the journal Science Advances on Wednesday. Although it’s not exactly proof that life exists beyond Earth, the traces of water in the salt crystals could date to the earliest days of our solar system. The researchers compared it to finding a prehistoric fly preserved in amber."
We are at a critical point where life itself is in danger of disappearing if immediate radical changes aren't made soon. Rather than seriously pursue such solutions, PopSci treats us to nonsense. Our planet's natural world was lost a long time ago. Forget everything you've ever heard about rewilding, reversing climate change, forest restoration, alternative energy, etc. To ignore life's basic fundamentals (DNA has real information, Survival of the Mutually Cooperative cancels out Survival of the Fittest dogma, etc) that even your average child gets, exposes just how many of these ecology movements are doomed to failure. It's not about the material substrate folks, it's about the informational content of DNA that defines life. Here's a suggestion to ALL PopSci Journals who attempt to masquerade as Science Sources. Next time you attempt an origins subject discussion, it would behoove you to forget the ingredients living things are made of. Even children get the handful of dirt concept. Instead why not explain through proven experimentation just where all that information inside all living organism's DNA came from which brought lifeless material substrate to life. If Science suddenly decides to change it's worldview on that, then we may be able to find real world viable solutions for saving life now and reversing the damage done on almost all of Earth's ecosystems through the practice of Biomimicry.
|animation - computing.co.uk|
Why we'll never get good Science from the conventional News Journals with Science Sections
Back in March 2016 there was an article by a science writer, Simon Oxenham, who bluntly exposed the reasons PopSci fluff is so popular among most conventional news outlets. Here's what he said:
"If we want to live our lives based on evidence (and who doesn’t?), it makes intuitive sense to live according to what we read in the science section of the newspaper. First things first, don’t do that. Newspapers are actually one of the worst places to get information about scientific matters. Now this isn’t some kind of revelation. Anyone with a good understanding of science knows this is as clear as night and day."
Well, no mistaking his straight forward approach. It's most unfortunate that the today's media is where most of the common lay people get their science education and understanding. Most people in today's modern society find themselves living in a horribly dismantled natural world where life seems to have less and less purpose and so most people are for the most part apathetic. Like the old time religion of the past, most people are lazy and allow the prevailing ruling Scientific Orthodoxy to do their scientific study, research and thinking for them. Simon Oxenham's article went on to further explain why modern day journalism is not more honest and thorough when producing a well balanced and well thought out educational Science article.
"This is because a well-considered and balanced article is not only time consuming and challenging to write, but ultimately sells less copies, brings in less traffic, and consequently less advertising dollars than shock-horror headlines. All journalists who want to tell substantive, well-researched stories face this problem."Historically, the entire natural world has been interconnected by trillions of lines of codes within a mutualistic cooperation system that has probably existed for countless milennia before humans ever arrived on the scene and introduced their own unique version of malware which has had a catastrophic effect ever since as the infection spreads throughout all Earth's ecosystems. According to published scientific research, this degradation of Earth's ecosystems by human beings started about 6000-years-ago. About 150 years ago bad scientific innovation based on gross ignorance of the informational content of DNA has only sped up and accelerated the degrading this process. Gowever, this still begs the question about why the Media won't ever publish an article which focuses attention on the origins of the informational content of DNA rather than focussing on the material substrate for which all Life is made out of which even a child gets ??? I guess we all know the religiously driven ideological worldview obsessed reasons why will never happen!