Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Worshiping the God of the genome

Worshiping the God of the genome
Reviewed by BILL WILLIAMS

Fierce battles between science and faith are nothing new. After all, when Galileo said that Earth revolved around the sun, he was brought before the Roman Inquisition in 1633 and forced to deny his findings because they contradicted church teachings.

Nearly four centuries later, many Christians are wrapping themselves in the cloak of creationism and thereby dismissing scientific findings supporting the theory of evolution.

Francis S. Collins argues in his compelling new book that this deep divide could be repaired if only science and religion would stick to their respective areas of expertise. Science can tell us much about the physical world, but it cannot explain where the universe came from or what happens to people after death. Likewise, religion, which requires a leap of faith, cannot unravel the mysteries of the physical world.

Dr. Collins has superb credentials for tackling this sticky subject, which continues to stir passions on both sides. He is both a respected scientist, having led the groundbreaking Human Genome Project, and also a Christian with strong religious convictions.

During his student years, he became an agnostic and later an atheist. While he was in medical school, an elderly patient asked him about his religious views. Dr. Collins was stumped. He suddenly realized that he had failed to think seriously about the possible existence of a Supreme Being. He consulted a Methodist minister, who handed him a copy of Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. Dr. Collins devoured the book, which he quotes frequently in The Language of God.

The Big Bang, evolution and DNA can be challenging subjects, but Dr. Collins adeptly translates arcane science into easily understood terms. He describes the arduous effort to decode the gene sequencing in each human cell. If printed in book form, the sequence, consisting of 3 billion characters, would reach to the top of the Washington Monument.

Scientists say the universe dates to the Big Bang 14 billion years ago, but Dr. Collins argues that the Big Bang “cries out for a divine explanation. ... I cannot see how nature could have created itself. Only a supernatural force that is outside of space and time could have done that.”

Dr. Collins guides readers through difficult scientific concepts in cosmology, genetics and evolution, maintaining that there is no inherent conflict “between the idea of a creator God and what science has revealed.”

Science has not explained how life began on Earth, he says, although there is no doubt that once life began, evolution led to increasingly complex organisms, including humans. He finds it “almost incomprehensible” that in an intellectually and technologically advanced nation such as the United States, about 45 percent of adults, according to polls, believe the Bible should be read literally, that God created the universe in six 24-hour days and that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. Scientists say it is about 4.5 billion years old.

As an alternative to creationism and intelligent design, Dr. Collins endorses the theory of theistic evolution, which accepts Darwin’s findings while positing that humans are “unique in ways that defy evolutionary explanation and point to our spiritual nature.” As evidence, he cites the existence of a universal moral law and an intuitive search for God throughout history.

A decade ago, Pope John Paul II endorsed such a balance of evolution and spirituality, saying that evolution can explain the origin of the human body, although “the spiritual soul is created directly by God.”

Evolution, Dr. Collins says, cannot explain the altruistic impulse, “the voice of conscience calling us to help others even if nothing is received in return.”

He quotes C.S. Lewis, who said that God uses conscience “as an influence or a command trying to get us to behave in a certain way.” That made sense to Dr. Collins, who concluded that the existence of a universal moral law “demanded a serious consideration of its origin. Was this God looking back at me?”

Near the end of this wise and timely book, Dr. Collins proposes a truce in the escalating war between science and spirit: “Science is not threatened by God; it is enhanced. God is most certainly not threatened by science; he made it all possible.”

Finally, Dr. Collins urges scientists not to reject God as “an outmoded superstition,” while he implores believers not to spurn science as “dangerous and untrustworthy.”

“The God of the Bible,” he concludes, “is also the God of the genome. He can be worshiped in the cathedral or in the laboratory. His creation is majestic, awesome, intricate and beautiful -- and it cannot be at war with itself. Only we imperfect humans can start such battles. And only we can end them.”

Bill Williams is a retired editorial writer and religion book reviewer for the Hartford Courant in Hartford, Conn.

National Catholic Reporter, October 6, 2006

Experts: Technology Could Save or Destroy Civilization This Century

Experts: Technology Could Save or Destroy Civilization This Century

By Tariq Malik
LiveScience Staff Writer
posted: 30 September 2006
09:17 am ET


NEW YORK—The continual advancement of technology will be critical in determining whether humanity will evolve into a true global civilization or destroy itself in the next century, a panel of experts said this week.

In the next 100 years, humanity could leap forward into a true global civilization—complete with a unified language, culture and planet-wide technological prowess—but the way is fraught with dark turns like war, terrorism and irresponsible science, string theorist Michio Kaku said at Wired Magazine's NextFest forum here.

"We are watching the birth pangs of a Type 1 civilization and it's not clear that we'll make it," Kaku said, describing a Type 1 civilization as a global community capable of sustaining and controlling its planet. "It's not guaranteed that we'll make this transformation."

Kaku spoke during a panel discussion on the influence of technology on the world at large, and how it can be wielded to address issues such as global warming, alternative energies and fuels, and other issues.

"I think we're at the early stage of the next great scientific revolution," said futurist Peter Schwartz, adding that encouraging today's youth to embrace the study of science will be key for tomorrow's advances in computing, engineering and other fields.

Managing the planet's resources effectively should also be a priority for today's generation in order to build up more sustainable technologies for future populations, panel members said.

"We have to figure out how to do more with less," said Kate Brass, who manages GE Energy's Ecomagination program. "We have to make a quantum leap now in 'I wonder if.'"

Alaskan storm 'cracked iceberg in Antarctica'

Alaskan storm 'cracked iceberg in Antarctica'
October 03 2006 at 02:01AM

Washington - A bad storm in Alaska last October generated an ocean swell that broke apart a giant iceberg near Antarctica six days later, United States researchers reported on Monday.

The waves travelled 13 500km to destroy the iceberg, said Douglas MacAyeal of the University of Chicago and Emile Okal at Northwestern University.

Writing in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, they said their study shows how weather in one region can affect events far away.

"One of the things we're debating in the world right now is whether global warming might increase the storminess in the oceans," MacAyeal said in a statement.

"The question we then pose is: Could global storminess have an influence on the Antarctic ice sheet that had never been thought of?"

The researchers were watching icebergs using satellite images, and saw that on a clear, calm day last October, a big iceberg known as B15A broke into half a dozen pieces.

MacAyeal and colleagues had put seismometers and other instruments on the 96km iceberg and on Antarctica's Ross Ice Shelf.

"We are trying to figure out how the icebergs are sort of making music when various phenomena that we think are linked to the cracking of iceberg masses takes place," Okal said.

So when they saw B15A break up, they persuaded other researchers in Antarctica to fly over to the beg and get their instruments.

The seismometer record showed that although it was mild and clear, the iceberg had been moving up and down and from side to side.

"I was surprised at the level of amplitude that we were recording," Okal said. The researchers figured a storm somewhere may have generated waves, which are known to travel long distances.

They did some calculations and saw the swell must have come from more than 13 500km away.

"Our jaws dropped," MacAyeal said. "We looked in the Pacific Ocean and there, 13 500km away, six days earlier, was the winter season's first really big, nasty storm that developed and lasted for about a day and a half in the Gulf of Alaska."

They looked at records from wave buoys in between.

"We saw that the waves in Alaska were about 10 metres tall and then two days later they were down to about four metres as they passed Hawaii on their way south," MacAyeal said.

And three days later, a sensitive seismometer on Pitcairn Island in the south Pacific recorded the waves' passage.

"We think that B15A was in the right position where these waves would be fatal to it," MacAyeal said. "The iceberg shattered like a gracile wine glass being sung to by a heavy soprano."

General: U.S. Army in danger

General: U.S. Army in danger
Equipment, manpower shortages put the nation in 'strategic peril,' he says

By Dick Foster, Rocky Mountain News
October 4, 2006
COLORADO SPRINGS - The Iraq war has left the U.S. military in critical condition, stretched beyond its limits in manpower and equipment and in danger of "breaking," retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey said Tuesday.
"The United States Army is stumbling toward the edge of a cliff. It's starting to unravel," McCaffrey told the Rocky Mountain News, prior to addressing the Homeland Defense Symposium at the Broadmoor Hotel.

"It has $61 billion in equipment shortages. It has a $50 billion shortfall in the vital equipment and parts you need to run a war," said the former commander-in-chief of the U.S. Southern Command. "I hope there's new thinking and new debate because the course we're on now won't sustain us for the next 24 months."

The 14 Army brigades now deployed in Iraq have their full complement of troops and "extremely competent" leadership, said McCaffrey, but "the other two-thirds of the Army's combat brigades are not ready to fight."

That's because many brigades leave their equipment in Iraq for their replacements when they return home and are rapidly depleted of manpower as returning soldiers complete their service and leave, McCaffrey said.

Any new emergency, he said, such as heightened tensions in Korea or Taiwan, a domestic terrorism attack or natural disaster, could push the Army beyond its limits.

"If the other shoe drops, we are breaking the U.S. Army," he said.

McCaffrey said the Army has been fighting "on a World War II footing" since 9/11, exhausting its capacity.

"I think it's irresponsible. I think we put the nation in the position of strategic peril," he said.

Col. Lee Packnett, a Pentagon spokesman, declined to discuss the specifics of McCaffrey's statements Tuesday, but said "that is the opinion of a retired general officer, and he is not speaking for the Army."

But the Army's own chief of staff, Gen. Peter Schoomaker, refused to submit a required 2008 budget plan in August to protest what he considered inadequate funding proposed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the Los Angeles Times reported last month.

Money for equipment and operations is not the only dangerous deficit for the Army, McCaffrey said. Manpower standards are falling in order to meet enlistment quotas, he said, citing the Army's own announcements.

As a result, he said, the enlistment age has been raised to 42, more recruits are being accepted from the lowest category of aptitude scores, and more morals waivers are being granted for recruits with arrest records.

McCaffrey assailed both the Bush administration and Congress for failing to mobilize the country to support its military.

But McCaffrey also cautioned that leaving Iraq or Afghanistan in the midst of turmoil would unleash civil war and instability.

He urged major new efforts to rebuild both countries' economies and initiate diplomatic efforts with neighboring countries to achieve stability.

Dr. Bowman on False Flag News

Dr. Bowman on False Flag News - 10/3/2006
falseflagnews.com

Yesterday, Dr. Bowman was interviewed on Dan Abrahamson's "False Flag News" radio program. They talked about 9/11, military exercises and Iran;

"...according to the Nuremberg Principles, which we wrote... which are enshrined in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, every person in the military must obey the Nuremberg Principles... according to those Principles, we in the military not only have the right, but the duty, to refuse an illegal order... and what I'm saying is, those guys up there in the nuclear chain of command, if they get an order to nuke Iran, they must not only refuse to carry out that order, they must arrest who gave them the order as a war criminal." - Dr. Bob Bowman, Oct. 3, 2006

Archived here: Tue., October 3, 2006 (interview starts around 25 minute mark)
http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Dan06.html

If you can, send Mr. Bowman some money for his congressional campaign!
http://bowman2006.com/

http://falseflagnews.com/

The Pentagon's Cyber Secret Agents

The Pentagon's Cyber Secret Agents

Written by Fabio Ghioni
Tuesday, 03 October 2006


U.S. Air Force researchers are developing a new project based on the idea that in the future it will be possible to set up computer programs which will be used in military operations and long-term intelligence activities, such as "being to monitor a military barracks, accumulate financial information on a potentially hostile nation, or provide status on the political climate of a South American country”, an Air Force paper announces.

In a short-term perspective, a similar cyber aid will be decisive to detect hidden people or dangerous items, such as explosive, without endangering human lives.

According to the project that stands behind this revolutionary technology, “Cyber crafts” will work on a variety of mediums with no distinctions, so that they could hop from computer networks, to electrical grids, to wireless nets and so on. Moreover, the programs would be able to keep up with the networks changes, performing constant self-morphing in order to be effective but impossible to detect by the adversaries.

The other revolutionary element conveyed by this technology is Cyber crafts’ ability to make decisions on whether to morph or self –destruct in case the enemy would discover them.

The Air Force paper then, makes an example of Cyber Craft application considering a squad of marines entering a residential area…

“They need updated information, and they find an electrical outlet and plugs-in. Such an outlet allows access to the town’s power grid and to the adversary’s computer network.
So, a cyber Crafty is injected into the system in order to localize insurgents or hidden military facilities The Cyber Craft detect[s] some activity at a military installation within 1000-ft of the Marines location.
The Cyber Craft performs a 'recce mission' to gather intelligence on the insurgents (exact location, number, arms, etc.) and sends back data/information to the marines.

However, in the meantime the marines have moved and have located a different means of connecting to the network. The Cyber Craft has 'sensed' this shift so readdresses the feedback information to the marine¹s new location and port. The 'Cyber Craft' acquires a positive ID, and sends an alert message back to the marines that the insurgents are about to leave and may be heading their way... The Cyber Craft executes its orders (turns power off, locks the doors), sends back an acknowledgement and self destructs.”

No doubt that, if these tools will be implemented and will work properly, they will convey a revolutionary change in the way to carry out any kind of intelligence or military action.

Anyway, the technology that would be able to support such a program doesn’t exist now, but Air Force Research Unit has already started a fund raising operation involving three companies that have agreed to finance the initial phases of the research.

Assured Information Security of Rome, NY gave its contribution to "research and develop a Cyber Craft software tool that will be able to covertly enter a network and move about the network to detect intrusions or other abnormalities."
Indialantic, FL outfit 3 Sigma Research is working to build "Cyber Craft organized in to 'cells' to allow survivability and increase resiliency to attack."
Solidcore Systems, out of Palo Alto, will try to put together a “system including a harbor (a host), and a dock (a control environment for Cyber Craft execution) and
cyber craft themselves (ordinary programs that can get launched to hosts and run there)."

According to provisions, it seems that they will implement a perfect program, but we can’t do without pointing out that reality isn’t based on “perfection”, that sometimes working conditions change many times during a single operation and that we cannot be always aware of how they will change.

The reason why certain tasks are accomplished by men-or women-, is that they can be trained to act in such unsteady conditions adapting their behaviour to the situation.

But will a machine be able to do the same? Couldn’t a Cyber Craft misinterpret given parameters and morph itself into something that performs unintended actions that would be harmful to friendly forces or provide the enemy with information about the sender?

Will it be possible to create a “thinking” machine? and if it will... which would be its limits?