in all my infinite wisdom

Author: alafair Page 6 of 7

75-Year Harvard Study Says Focus on This 1 Thing for a Happier, More Fulfilling Life?

 by Patrick Ewers 

Positive Alacrity is the art of creating micro-experiences that have an emotionally uplifting impact on others. But I’m getting ahead of myself …

A quick Google search for “secret to happiness” brings up over 7,500,000 results.

That’s a lot of people writing about and searching for something that, according to a groundbreaking Harvard study, has already been found.

That’s right: Thanks to Harvard’s Grant and Glueck studies — which tracked 724 participants from varying walks of life over the course of 75 years — we’ve already uncovered the key to long-term happiness and fulfillment.

The answer? Our relationships.

Here’s Robert Waldinger, director of the Harvard Study of Adult Development:

“The clearest message that we get from this 75-year study is this: Good relationships keep us happier and healthier. Period.”

In other words: The quality of our life — emotionally, physically, and mentally — is directly proportional to the quality of our relationships.

But there’s a catch. If there’s one thing most of us have learned, it’s this: Just knowing a lot of people isn’t enough.

True fulfillment in relationships is about genuine connection, and one of the most efficient ways to form that connection is by practicing what we at Mindmaven call Positive Alacrity; a skill we define as creating micro-experiences that cause an emotional uplifting in others.

The Uncomfortable Truth About Relationships

Did we really need a 75-year study to tell us relationships are important?

Probably not; I bet many of you already knew that. So why do we so often struggle to treat many of the most important relationships in our lives with the reverence and priority we know they deserve?

For example, do any of these situations sound familiar?

  • When under stress, you may have a tendency to be ruder to your spouse than you’d ever dream of being to a complete stranger.
  • When building a business, you’re willing to work 60-hour weeks but somehow never “have time” to check in with lifelong friends.
  • Speaking of business: You may fail to consistently and proactively invest in deepening the professional relationships that might provide the breakthrough opportunities you need.

So why do we do this? Because …

Although many things in life are deadline and urgency driven, relationships almost never are.

As a result, they’re often one of the first parts of our lives that we neglect until we “find the time.”

The good news is, building those deep, meaningful relationships isn’t as daunting or time-consuming as it may sound. In fact, by focusing on one habit, anyone can build more fulfilling relationships every day.

The Secret Factor Controlling the Quality of Your Relationships

But what determines the level of fulfillment we find in our relationships?It isn’t simply “knowing” the other person.

What makes you feel happy or fulfilled isn’t the relationship itself, but the interactions that make that relationship up.

Here’s what it comes down to: The only path to achieving the goal of a fulfilling life is to have fulfilling relationships, and those relationships can only be created by consistently connecting through meaningful interactions.

Let me illustrate with a few examples.

#1: “I just want you to know how much I appreciate you.”

John’s wife Sarah welled up with tears as she read the unexpected thank you note her husband had written her before he left on a 6:00am flight for a business trip.

John — the CEO of an aggressively growing startup — thanked his wife for all the support and grace she’d given him over the last three years as he worked long hours to reach his — and his company’s — fullest potential.

The short note left Sarah feeling appreciated, loved, and truly known by her husband.

#2: “Thank you for sacrificing your time for our vision.”

Hannah, a recent intern-turned-engineer at a public company, felt pleasantly surprised and greatly affirmed after Erin, the CEO, walked over to her cubicle specifically to say thank you.

Without prompting, Hannah had recently pulled an all-nighter in order to ensure a backend patch was completed on time to restore server stability. And even though Erin’s visit was shorter than 30 seconds, the fact that the interaction was focused solely on thanking Hannah left her feeling appreciated for stepping up and excited to work for the company.

#3: “So you never have to lose something again.”

Cole — a die-hard Atlanta Falcons fan — laughed in amusement as he wrote back “Thanks, but I hate you lol ;)” to Rob, a friend who had sent him a Tile following the Falcon’s 2017 Super Bowl loss so he’d, “never have to lose something important again.”

The practical joke made Cole smile and deepened the sense of connection and friendly rivalry the two of them shared.

The Science-Backed Power of Positivity

Here’s the key takeaways from those examples: Each time, someone performed a small, lightweight gesture. For example:

  • John’s handwritten note to his wife,
  • Erin’s 30-second interaction, or
  • Rob’s quick email and gift.

And despite the ease of each interaction, they all delivered an uplifting sense of connection to the other person.

But perhaps the best proof of the power of interactions comes from Dr. Martin Seligman’s famous Gratitude Visits. For those unfamiliar, Dr. Seligman — founder of the positive psychology movement — introduced the concept of Gratitude Visits in a University of Pennsylvania study.

Here’s how it worked: Participants were asked to write a 300+ word letter of gratitude to someone in their life, and to then visit the recipient and read the letter aloud to them.

Simple though that may be, the effects were profound: Although Gratitude Visits were one of many positivity practices recorded in the study, they were the only practice that had participants reporting increased happiness and decreased depression for a full month after completing the action.

And while I fully support the practice of Gratitude Visits, they come with a challenge: Most of us don’t have time to sit down and write a 300-word letter every time we feel positive or grateful.

So I figured if Gratitude Visits are truly one of the most fulfilling things we can do, there must be a way we can simplify it into a habit that can be practiced daily.

Building Happy, Fulfilling Relationships with Ease

The solution? Positive Alacrity.

At the end of the day, this concept’s all about consistently delivering small, simple experiences that leave people feeling genuinely uplifted. So how do we do this? It all comes down to a single habit:

When you think something positive and you genuinely believe it, voice it.

As simple as that habit may be, we believe the impact of Positive Alacrity is as profound as Gratitude Visits, with one distinct advantage: That same simplicity allows you to practice it anytime, anywhere, with practically anyone.

Why? Because most of us already think positive thoughts on a daily basis. For example, I wouldn’t be surprised if you often thought things like …

  • “That’s a really insightful way to look at the situation,”
  • “I really appreciate the way she listens to me,” or
  • “Wow, he handled that ordeal really well.”

Pause a moment and test it for yourself: When was the last time you thought something positive? I’d venture to bet it was within the last 24 hours.

The problem is, we often let these thoughts come and go without ever practicing Positive Alacrity. But when we forgo voicing these thoughts to others, we cheat ourselves out of a valuable opportunity to enrich our relationships in three key ways:

  1. When you voice positive thoughts, you make the recipient feel emotionally uplifted.
  2. This feeling elevates their appreciation of you and the relationship you share.
  3. Because you were the source of that interaction, their emotional response creates an incredibly fulfilling sense of happiness and satisfaction in you.

That last part’s key: By uplifting others, we inadvertently uplift ourselves. Why? Because …

The effects of Positive Alacrity go both ways.

For instance, remember the example above with Hannah the CEO and Erin the engineer?

As a seasoned leader, Erin closely observed Hannah as she thanked her for working so diligently on that patch; so she noticed as Hannah’s expression slowly shifted from shocked confusion to recognition and, finally, to realization.

Seeing Hannah’s cheeks flush, smile spread, and eyes gleam made Erin realize she’d just delivered something truly meaningful, and Hannah’s reaction created a tremendous sense of satisfaction and fulfillment in Erin as the one who delivered that interaction.

If you’ve ever been in a similar situation to Erin’s, you probably understand exactly how she’s feeling, and know just how uplifting those feelings can be.

When you practice Positive Alacrity, you’re not only uplifting others. Above all, you’re uplifting yourself.

Positive Alacrity in Action: Mastering the Habit of Intentional Positivity

The action itself is simple: Think something positive? Voice it.

But until we turn that conscious action into an unconscious habit, we won’t be able to fully leverage it to impact our relationships and enrich our lives. And that all starts with a shift in awareness.

By default, positive thoughts often slip through the cracks before they ever reach conscious acknowledgement, let alone vocal affirmation. So how do you become more aware? By becoming intentional.

Once you’ve become aware of a positive thought, consciously label it “Positive,” then ask yourself: Do I genuinely believe this?

If you believe it, voice it. Positivity works so long as it’s perceived as genuine, and as long as you truly believe what you’re saying you can usually count on a positive outcome.

Habitualizing and Compounding the Secret to Happiness

Keep in mind: As with any new habit, practicing Positive Alacrity is probably going to feel a little clumsy or unnatural at first. But as long as you genuinely believe what you say, it doesn’t matter how awkward it comes out because it’s real.

The most important thing is that you’re voicing it. And if you’re able to push through that initial awkwardness, I can practically guarantee the process will become second nature in no time.

So how do you start? Thankfully, the practice is as simple as the theory. Try following this three-step process to utilize Positive Alacrity today.

  1. Recognition: Think of something positive that happened within the last 24 hours, then ask yourself: “Who was the cause of (or involved in) this experience that I could thank or compliment?”
  2. Specificity: Ask yourself: “What specifically did I like or appreciate about this experience/situation?”
  3. Action: Now, voice it. Pay this person a face-to-face visit. If that doesn’t work, call them. If you can’t call them, then text or email them; immediately, before you finish reading this.

Keep in mind: The steps above are an example of how to leverage Positive Alacrity retroactively, but it’s even easier to perform as you move forward in your day-to-day life.

The only thing you have to do is increase your ability to recognize these thoughts as they occur, then voice them as you become aware of them (rather than once a year when the holidays roll around).

John, Erin, and Rob are prime examples of these principles in action:

  • While getting ready to leave on his business trip, John looked over at his sleeping wife and realized just how appreciative he was for her continued understanding about his hectic travel schedule. So instead of just grabbing his jacket and heading out the door, John went over to the study, picked up some stationery, and wrote Sarah a short note expressing those feelings.
  • After learning of Hannah’s all-nighter, all Erin had to do was have a 30-second conversation genuinely thanking her. The only risk she took? Potentially being a few seconds late to her next meeting.
  • And as the Falcon’s loss made Rob realize how long it’d been since he and Cole talked, the only actions he had to take were writing his friend a tongue-in-cheek note and asking his assistant to mail it off along with a package of Tiles.

John, Erin, and Rob all spent less than a minute acting on their positive thoughts, but the uplifting emotions from those simple interactions have the potential to last for months.

And what about Sarah, Hannah, and Cole, the recipients of those interactions? They’re probably going to walk through the rest of the day feeling uplifted and empowered. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if, later that same day, they provided a similar experience for someone else.

That’s the Pay-it-Forward principle in practice:

A single positive interaction can have a multiplicative effect, building and spreading further than you’d ever imagine.

Ultimately, those simple interactions are the heart of Positive Alacrity and the foundation for meaningful relationships. And, as that 75-year Harvard study taught us, those very same relationships are the secret to lifelong happiness and fulfillment.

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

The Damage Humans Have Done in Just 50 Short Years

Study suggests that human population is only 0.01% of all the life forms on Earth. This shows how existence of humans is just a miniscule part if we compare it with the existence of our planet or of the presence of life on earth. But if we go through the events particularly in last 10,000 years (of recorded history of mankind), it becomes clear that the presence of humans on earth brought several changes in both the biological and non-biological components. Most of the striking changes have appeared in last 50 years or so. According to reports, humans have destroyed about 83% of wild mammals and half the species of plants till date. On the whole, humans have consumed 30% of the known resources resulting into scarcer ecosystem services for future generations. If these trends continue, the Earth will soon be experiencing mass extinctions and we will be left with an even more degraded planet.

Humans in last 50 years, because of ever-increasing population associated with pollution and destruction of natural ecosystems have completely changed the face of the Earth. The exponential increase in human population in last few decades brought about many drastic changes on Earth making it look much degraded and bruised. One such phenomenon is Earth’s present carbon dioxide (a potent green house gas) level in the atmosphere which has exceeded 411 parts per million (ppm), much higher as compared to about 323 ppm about 50 years ago, resulting in major environmental issues such as global warming and climate change. According to the Fifth Assessment Report of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, anthropogenic activities have been described as the main cause of increased green house gases level, of which 2/3rd come from burning of fossil fuels and 1/3rd is from land use changes. The increased clearing of forests and vegetated lands, due to overgrazing and industrial transformation, in the 1970s showed disturbed albedo and evapotranspiration leading to warming of earth, change in carbon cycle and global catastrophic events of biodiversity extinction. NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analyzed that the average global temperature of earth has increased by about 0.8 °C since 1880 and two-thirds of this warming has been reported since 1975. The nexus of responses and catastrophic events also point towards the accelerated rate of melting of glaciers with the loss of 226 gigatons/year of ice between 1971 and 2009. The highest impacted glacier loss was reported from Greenland Ice Sheet (about sixfold higher) and Antarctic ice (almost quadrupled) in merely 20 years. Correspondingly, the sea level rise has almost doubled in last 20 years, with increment being 3.1 mm/year since 1993. Chemical and pesticide pollution is another menace to the ecosystems. According to reports, more than 1,40,000 chemicals including pesticides, plastics, etc. have been synthesized till date since 1950 and each year 10 millions tons of toxic compounds are being dumped into the environment leading to land degradation, soil salinization and contamination of water resources. This has resulted in the problem of safe drinking water around the globe. As per reports of CNN, about 500 million tons of heavy metals, toxic sludge and hazardous solvents were estimated to be released in global water supply in 2007 making it unsafe to consume. Plastic pollution is also a big nuisance caused by humans on Earth. The stats show that annual production of plastics during 1970s was about 50 million metric tons and it has increased to over 348 million metric tons at present. In terms of biodiversity losses, WWF’s Living Planet Report highlights that humans have eradicated 60% of the Earth’s wildlife in less than 50 years. About 20% of Amazon forests are lost in the last half century. A recent study revealed that of total global tree cover loss between 2001 and 2015, 27% depreciation came from commodity driven deforestation i.e. conversion of forests permanently in order to expand commodities such as meat, minerals, oils and gas. Other drivers are forestry i.e. loss within the managed forests or tree plantations (26%), shifting agricultural practices (24%), wildfires (23%), and urbanization (0.6%). Half of the shallow-water corals have also been leached out by anthropogenic activities polluting the oceans and seas in last 30 years. The recent analysis shows that the population of freshwater animals has plummeted by 75% since 1970s. Reports say that the damage done is so rapid that even if we end it now, it will take centuries to replenish the natural world.

The global human footprints over the past 50 years are so dominating that even the view of the planet from space shows the modification of various critical ecosystems and the demography. The complementing series of aerial pictures taken through satellites show that many hotspot ecosystems and areas have been tremendously degraded. Focusing on what all we have lost over the past half century, the red list is so long that it cannot be confined in few pages. The Great Barrier Reef visible even from space has shown 50% loss due to severe bleaching by increased temperature of the oceans in just 30 years and is predicted that up to 90% may die within next century. Shrinking of the Dead Sea has shown an alarming rate of around four feet a year and the sea has already lost one-third of its surface area. The increasing temperature has caused high rate of snow melting in the European mountain range The Alps, and the most unsettling event reported in 2017 was that the winter season was 38 days shorter in comparison to that in 1960. The human oriented massive irrigation project over past 50 years has shrunk the fourth largest lake Aral Sea, to only 10% and it will soon be a thing of the past. NASA’s monitoring of Arctic Sea ice since 1978 have detected a steep decline in overall ice content. The polar ice thawing stories over the past half centuries have been highly alarming and Antarctic alone has lost 40 billion tons of ice each year from 1979 to 1989 and this trend rose to 252 billion tons per year in 2009 and today Antarctic has already lost 6 times the ice it had 40 years ago. The ‘Third Pole’ i.e. The Himalayan- Hindu Kush mountain range and the Tibetan Plateau in Central Asia is also impacted by the negative trends of global warming and in the past 50 years this remote region has lost 509 glaciers resulting in the local temperature rise by 1.5 °C. Recently in 2018, a huge chunk of ice in Helheim Glacier in Greenland, about the size of Manhattan, with 10 billion tons of ice, split out and tumbled into sea; this loss was indicated as the most disturbing irreversible loss. The record breaking heat waves in Australia and Europe are already the hard and fast evidences to how much humans have changed the face of Earth. Australia witnessed the hottest summer in the recorded history in the year 2018–2019. The high melting of glaciers and warming of the poles led to the extreme freezing of Chicago, which became colder than Mount Everest, Siberia and the poles. The summers in Iran shockingly changed the size and color of Lake Urmia from green to brown due to blooming of algae and bacteria. Similarly, there are numerous reports which show the decline of fertile lands, increased soil salinity, loss of forests and so on, clearly visible by the satellite images.

A team of researchers’ from several countries including Sweden, Australia, Denmark, USA, England, Canada, Germany and Holland declared climate change and biodiversity loss as the “core boundaries” which if breached can transform Earth to inhabitable state. Stephen Hawking in his recently published book “Brief Answers to the Big Questions” stated that the biggest threat to mankind on Earth is the human induced climate change. Although the technology has advanced at an unprecedented rate and this has improved the living standards a lot but the cost of this development in terms of damage to the planet as a whole is also extraordinary. We share the planet with millions of other species but have almost single handedly exploited it to the extent that every specie is affected one way or the other. The industrial, agricultural and the infrastructural revolution have resulted in over exploitation of resources and pollution of every nook and corner of the planet. The technologies which were developed to adorn and ease our routines has brought antonymic effect threatening the survival and has made it very clear that no human science can replace “nature’s perfect systems” which have been carving the environment and ecosystems of earth to balance it in the zone of habitability.

Fifty years is just a very miniscule fraction of the time if compared with existence of life on Earth, but the changes brought in by the anthropogenic activities in this period are very distinct and serious, endangering the sustainability of life on the planet. Year 2020 marks the 50th anniversary of the celebrations of Earth Day, and it is high time that the unsustainable activities and technologies be replaced with viable measures. This could be achieved by employing green and biological methods, technologies and inputs such as the use of biofertilizers and biopesticides as substitutes to their chemical counterparts, biofuels in place of petroleum products, bioremediation instead of traditional remediation methods, bioplastics and biofilters to minimize pollution, biotechnological advances for food and energy security, study of metagenome for better knowledge of diversity and working of micro-ecosytems at the molecular and biochemical levels. The international policies are also backing up the idea of these holistic approaches for example United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals” have set targets for sustainable development and environment to be achieved by 2030. Last 50 years have changed the demography of the planet Earth in a negative way resulting in its deterioration. Goals for next 50 years should be to carry out the green upliftment of the Earth so as to bring it back to normalcy and natural form as it was about a century ago. The aim of the journal “Environmental Sustainability” is exactly to promote the greener technologies and biotechnological interventions so as to heal the planet Earth back to normalcy and sustain it for the survival and flourishing of all the life forms.

source https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42398-019-00053-5#citeas 
Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

The slightest glimpse of beauty amongst the horror is better than living with closed eyes. -Nathan Saludez.

Dancing Girls (Impatiens Bequaertii)

Laughing Bumble Bee Orchid (Ophrys bbomyblifora)

Parrot Flower (Impatiens Psittacina)

Swaddled Babies (Anguloa Uniflora)

Flying Duck Orchid (Caleana Major)

An orchid that looks remarkably like a tiger

Happy Alien (Calceolaria Uniflora)

And his friends…

Angel Orchid (Habenaria Grandifloriformis)

Dove Orchid Or Holy Ghost Orchid (Peristeria Elata)

White Egret Orchid (Habenaria Radiata)

The Darth Vader (Aristolochia Salvadorensis)

An Orchid That Looks Like A Ballerina

Monkey Face Orchid (Dracula Simia)

Moth Orchid (Phalaenopsis)

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

“The fool has said in his heart, There is no God” (Psalms. 14:1)

~DAVID C. PACK

Why should there be such doubt—such confusion—about the existence of God? For thousands of years, people have debated whether God exists. Most conclude that it cannot be proven—one way or the other. It is surmised that the correct answer lies in the area of abstract philosophy and the metaphysical.

Others become agnostics, asserting that they “don’t know” if God exists. Those who do accept God’s existence often do so passively, merely because they were taught it from childhood. Some do not even care. Such people probably cannot be moved from their apathy.

Atheists have concluded that God does not exist. These people represent a special category that God describes as, “The fool has said in his heart, There is no God” (Psa. 14:1). This scripture is repeated inPsalm 53:1. What follows will explain why God calls atheists “fools.”

Over 45 years ago, I learned of absolute proof that God exists. My studies lasted two-and-a-half years. I came to realize that I did not have to accept His existence “on faith.” Since that time, science has learned much more and the “case” for God’s existence has become far stronger than at any time in history.

This Personal presents numerous absolute, immutable proofs that God does exist. After reading it, you will never again doubt the answer to this greatest of questions! Some proofs will amaze you. Others will inspire you. Still others will surprise or even excite you. All of them will fascinate you with their simplicity. We will first examine some traditional proofs and then consider material that rests on the cutting edge of scientific understanding, before returning to established proofs. You will learn from biology, astronomy, chemistry and mathematics.

Creation or Evolution?

There is an all-important question that is inseparable from the question of God’s existence. The question of whether life on Earth exists, because of blind, dumb luck and chance, through evolution, or because of special creation by a Supreme Being, cannot be avoided in studying the existence of God.

Did all life on Earth evolve over millions of years, as evolutionists assert—or did an all-powerful God author it at Creation? Most people assume evolution is true, just as those who believe in God assume His existence. I also studied this question—evolution vs. Creation—in depth, during the same period that I sought to prove God’s existence.

I learned that it takes far more “faith” to believe in the intellectually chic and fashionable evolutionarymyth than it does to believe in the existence of God. In fact, I learned that evolution is based entirely on faith because no facts or proof have ever been found to support it! (We have prepared a thorough and most inspiring magazine-sized brochure Evolution – Facts, Fallacies and Implications. Those who read this powerful publication will never again doubt the scientific case for Creation!)

Faith and Proof

Faith does play a role in the life of a Christian. For the person who truly wants to seek God and learn to please Him, notice: “Without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him…” (Heb. 11:6).

Faith is vital to a Christian. In fact, without it, no one can please God. Notice that this verse says that those seeking God “must believe that He is.” A deep belief in God, who “rewards” all who “diligently seek Him,” requires proof of His existence. After proof has been established, then—and only then—can one have faith—absolute confidence—that what he does is being recorded in God’s mind, to be remembered when he receives his reward. If you are uncertain that God exists because proof of that existence has not been firmly established, then, under fire, your faith will wane or disappear.

But Which God?

The apostle Paul wrote, “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all thingshowbeit there is not in every man that knowledge…” (I Cor. 8:5-7).

The religions of this world have created many gods of wood, stone and other material. Others exist only in the minds of men. The ancient Greeks alone served 30,000 gods and modern Hindus worship 5 million gods! Truly, there are, and have always been, “gods many, and lords many.” Yet, the God of the Bible created all the materials that men use to design their own gods. But, as Paul said, “there is not in every man that knowledge.”

Such unnecessary ignorance and confusion!

The God of the Bible has shown the way to peace, happiness and abundant life for all people willing tostudy His Instruction Book. Doing this would rid mankind of the confusion and evils that encompass this world. But it is not our purpose here to prove that the God of the Bible is the one true God of Creation. (To learn more, read my booklet Bible Authority…Can It Be Proven?)

What Science Tells Us

Be willing to examine science. As we reason, do not suppose or hope. Stand on indisputable facts. We will see facts from a broad array of different kinds of science. They will demonstrate that an all-powerful Supreme Being, of infinite intelligence, carefully provided more than sufficient proof to remove all doubt that He exists.

The Bible is God’s instruction to mankind. He expects all who are willing to read it to, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (I Thes. 5:21). Surely this God would not then expect us to assume His existence while instructing us to prove everything else from His Word!

Before beginning this study, remember, assumptions do not count! Neither do superstitious myths or traditions based on ignorance! What can be known from science? Only accept facts. Think rationally and clearly. Then accept what can be proven!

The Most Perfect Clock

You probably have a watch. Without it, you would be lost in a world that demands that people “be on time.”

Some watches are more accurate than others. How accurate is yours? How long before it loses a second? When this happens, you adjust it by reckoning from a more accurate source. That source, whatever it is, is also imperfect and has to be regularly updated, though not as often, to be in accord with the Master Clock of the United States at the Naval Observatory in Washington, D.C.

For many years, until 1967, Naval Observatory astronomers “observed” the motion of the earth, in relation to the heavens, to accurately measure time. All clocks in this country were set in relation to these very precise measurements. It was God who made this Master Clock of the Universe! He set the heavens in motion and mankind learned how to use its wonderful accuracy. As marvelous as this Master Clock is, the story does not end here.

In 1967, scientists built an “Atomic Clock.” It uses Cesium 133 atoms because they oscillate (vibrate) at the rate of 9,192,631,770 times per second. This produces accuracy within one second every 30 million years! Wouldn’t you love a watch that accurate? Cesium 133 atoms never vary a single vibration. They are steady—constant—reliable—and cannot be an accident of nature that just “happens” to always turn out exactly the same. God had to design the complexity and reliability of these atoms. No honest mind can believe otherwise. Men merely learned how to capture what God designed, for use in time measurement. Again, the story continues.

Doubters, consider this!

Scientists in Boulder, Colorado, at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, built an opticalclock that is even more accurate. How? By measuring time with light. Time is now measured in what are called femtoseconds—or a million-billionth of a second. These clocks use mercury ions at their “heart” to count the number of times they vibrate in a second.

Optical frequencies regularly oscillate at one million-billion (1,000,000,000,000,000—one quadrillion) times per second. By using lasers and “cooled down” mercury ions, scientists have harnessed God’s precision to better measure time. Optical clocks only slip by one second every 30 BILLION years! This is 1,000 times more accurate than atomic clocks!

All human watchmakers use extraordinary precision in their work. Quartz watches measure time by counting the exact number of oscillations of a quartz crystal through use of a digital counter. Digitalclocks use the oscillations of quartz crystals or power lines (60 cycles per second in the United States), but may also count through use of digital counters. Grandfather clocks use the swing of a pendulum, once every second and recorded by metal gears inside the clock, to keep time.

As with the movement of the heavens, men have learned to capture the reliability of Cesium 133 atoms and the movement of cooled mercury ions to count time. Their number of oscillations per second nevervaries. Could this perfect order be the product of an accident?

In summary, only with great time and effort, the finest watchmakers in the world can, at best, devise several kinds of relatively imprecise clocks. Can any honest, fair-minded person then believe that the three highly precise clocks—the heavens, atomic and optical clocks—came about by accident? In other words, are we to believe that while very sophisticated, humanly devised watches required the effort and ingenuity of skilled, intelligent men to create them, clocks of far greater sophistication, precision and design developed on their own? How utterly ridiculous!

You have seen absolute proof that only the “Greatest Watchmaker” could have devised these “greatest watches.”

First Law of Thermodynamics

What is the truth of modern science regarding the origin of all matter in the universe? Do scientists tell us that it has always existed? Or have they determined that there was a moment in time in which all matter came into existence? The answer to the second question is, yes! But what is the proof that this is true?

The First Law of Thermodynamics is stated as follows: matter and energy can be neither created nor destroyed. There are no natural processes that can alter either matter or energy in this way. This means that there is no new matter or energy coming into existence and there is no new matter or energy passing out of existence. All who state that the universe came into existence from nothing violate the first law of thermodynamics, which was established by the very scientific community who now seem willing to ignore it. In summary, this law plainly demonstrates that the universe, and all matter and energy within it, must have had a divine origin—a specific moment in which it was created by someone who was all-powerful.

With the coming of the Atomic Age, beginning with the discovery of radium in 1898 by Madame Curie, came the knowledge that all radioactive elements continually give off radiation. Consider! Uranium has an atomic weight of 238.0. As it decomposes, it releases a helium atom three times. Each helium atom has a weight of 4. With the new weight of 226.0, uranium becomes radium. Radium continues to give off additional atoms until eventually the end product becomes the heavy inert element called lead. This takes a tremendous amount of time. While the process of uranium turning into radium is very long, the radium turns into lead in 1,590 years.

What are we saying? There was a point in time when the uranium could not have existed, because it always breaks down in a highly systematic, controlled way. It is not stable like lead or other elements. It breaks down. This means there was a specific moment in time when all radioactive elements came into existence. Remember, all of them—uranium, radium, thorium, radon, polonium, francium, protactinium and others—have not existed forever. This represents absolute proof that matter came into existence or, in other words, matter has not always existed!

This flies directly in the face of evolutionary thought—that everything gradually evolved into something else. Here is the problem. You cannot have something slowly come into existence from nothing! Matter could not have come into existence by itself. No rational person could believe that the entire universe—including all of the radioactive elements that prove there was a specific time of beginning—gradually came into existence BY ITSELF!

Through your own efforts, try to build something—anything—from nothing. Even with your creative power engaged in the effort, you would never be able to do it. You would not be able—in a hundred lifetimes of trying—to produce a single thing from nothing!

Can any doubter believe that everything in the entirety of the universe, in all of its exquisite detail, came into existence completely by itself? Be honest. Accept facts. This is proof that the existing natural realm demands the existence of a Great Creator!

Second Law of Thermodynamics

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is best summarized by saying that everything moves towarddisorder—or a condition known as entropy. This bears some explanation and we will consider several examples.

Remember that evolutionists teach that everything is constantly evolving into a higher and more complex order. In other words, they believe things continue to get better and better instead of worse and worse.

If water being heated on a stove is at 150 degrees Fahrenheit, and the burner is turned off, the temperature will drop instead of rise. It will move toward colder rather than hotter. If a ball is placed on a hill, it will always roll downhill and not uphill. Energy used to perform any particular task changes from usable energy to unusable in the performing of that task. It will always go from a higher energy level to a lower energy level—where less and less energy is available for use.

When applied to the universe, the second law of thermodynamics indicates that the universe is winding down—moving toward disorder or entropy—not winding up or moving toward more perfect order and structure. In short, the entire universe is winding down!

Even evolutionists admit that the theory of evolution and the second law of thermodynamics are completely incompatible with each other. Consider: “Regarding the second law of thermodynamics [universally accepted scientific law which states that all things left to themselves will tend to run down] or the law of entropy, it is observed, ‘It would hardly be possible to conceive of two more completely opposite principles than this principle of entropy increase and the principle of evolution. Each is precisely the converse of the other. As [Aldous] Huxley defined it, evolution involves a continual increase of order, of organization, of size, of complexity…It seems axiomatic that both cannot possibly be true. But there is no question whatever that the second law of thermodynamics is true’” (The Twilight of Evolution).

Like a top or a yo-yo, the universe must have been “wound up.” Since the universe is constantly winding down, the second law of thermodynamics looms before us in the form of a great question: who wound it up? The only plausible answer is God!

Theory Debunked

We have established that Creation demands a Creator. Where does this leave evolution?

The theory of evolution is shot full of inconsistencies. Evolutionists have seized on many theories, within the overall theory of evolution, in an attempt to explain the origins of plants, animals, the heavens, and the Earth.

Over and over, these “theorists” try to explain how life evolved from inanimate material into more complex life forms until it reached the pinnacle—human beings.

Yet, as one geologist wrote, “It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as [a] student…have been debunked” (The Nature of the Fossil Record, Proceedings of the Geological Association).

Perhaps the biggest reason that so many theories within the overall theory of evolution collapse is because they contain terrible logic requiring great leaps in faith to believe. Here is one example of a “debunked” theory: “Many evolutionists have tried to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically to apes and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’s closest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: ‘Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Cholesterol level tests indicate that the garter snake is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the chicken is man’s closest relative.’ ‘On the basis of another type of blood chemistry test, the butter bean is man’s closest relative’” (The Twilight of Evolution).

Complexity of Life

Everyone has witnessed explosions. Have you ever seen one that was orderly? Or one that created a watch or a clock? Or one that produced a single thing of exquisite design—instead of the certain result of chaos and destruction? If you threw a million hand grenades, you would see them produce chaos and destruction a million times! There would never be an exception.

Consider the following quotes, involving the likelihood of an explosion creating the entire natural realm of life all around us on Earth—let alone the beautiful magnificence and order seen no matter how far one looks out into space.

Dr. B.G. Ranganathan said, “…the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop” (Origins?). And this only speaks to the likelihood of any life at all, rather than the most highly complex forms such as large animals or human beings—let alone all the different kinds of life that exist today.

In this Personal, we have explained just a tiny fraction of all there is to know about this subject.

[wpvideo RvYPyyOI]

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

Watch “Run Lolita – Song for an Orca” on YouTube

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

A Theory about The Words

I just watched The Words and had to Google to see if Clay really was Rory and came upon this post, which I agree with your theory by the way…

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

Meet the sleazy Monsanto operatives pretending to be journalists for Discover, Slate, The Washington Post and the New York Times

Mainstream media journalists are also Monsanto prostitutes.

Thursday, October 01, 2015
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Tags: Monsanto operatives, Keith Kloor, Jon Entine

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/051393_Monsanto_operatives_Keith_Kloor_Jon_Entine.html#ixzz3nLS0tWKJ

(NaturalNews-http://www.naturalnews.com/051393_Monsanto_operatives_Keith_Kloor_Jon_Entine.html) One of the truly fascinating revelations in the recent Freedom of Information Act emails acquired from university professors who whore themselves out to Monsanto is the fact that mainstream media journalists are also Monsanto prostitutes.

These Monsanto operatives pretending to be journalists write for The Washington Post, New York Times, Discover, Slate, Nature and various “science” websites. Many of them openly admit to being paid by Monsanto and gladly accepting the money. Then they turn around and write stories attacking clean food activists or hawking whatever GMO propaganda Monsanto is pushing that day.

It’s all coordinated by sleazebag Monsanto front men like Jon Entine, a man seething with so much evil that he tried to strangle his wife in front of their own daughter, and installed surveillance equipment to spy on her activities in their own home, according to court documents published here on Natural News.

One of Jon Entine’s “friends” in the industry is Monsanto prostitute Keith Kloor, another industry sleazebag who blogs for Discover and Nature where he systematically lies, distorts evidence, and fabricates false claims against clean food activists. He also writes for Slate, which was just named one of America’s top 12 evil news publishers by EVIL.news.

Entine also rubs elbows with discredited Univ. of Florida academic prostitute Kevin Folta, recently exposed as a Monsanto shill by secretly taking $25,000 from Monsanto and promising them a “return on the investment” to push GMO propaganda. Folta even scammed The Atlantic into printing his propaganda as fact, and The Atlantic seems fine with it, refusing to issue a retraction after it all came to light that Kevin Folta was a paid Monsanto operative.

Folta appears to be guilty of committing a second class felony crime under Florida’s anti-corruption laws, by the way. The University of Florida so far refuses to fire him. Apparently, academic shillery and fraud are totally acceptable to the U of F.

See how Monsanto’s dark operatives tell The New York Times what to write…

Now, the U.S. Right to Know campaign has published an overview of a few of the sleazebag journalists named in the now-public emails acquired via FOIA. These journalists include Tamar Haspel, a Monsanto prostitute writing for The Washington Post, and Amy Harmon, another biotech prostitute writing for The New York Times. These are all journalists who allow themselves to be influenced by people like Jon Entine, a biotech industry dirtbag who attacks women and deliberately fabricates the most outrageous lies imaginable about his intended targets. (He once claimed I ordered Natural News readers to murder him, and to back it up he dredged up a police report of somebody else named Mike Adams who wasn’t even born in the same decade as me. He then insinuated that that person was me. These are the type of sleaze tactics used by these Monsanto front men who interface directly with The New York Times and Washington Post. They wake up each morning, look in the mirror, and asks themselves, “What LIES can we spread today to discredit clean food activists?”)

“FYI, I think I’ve talked Amy Harmon into doing a Hawaii story…” — Jon Entine emailing Renee Kester about how Amy Harmon of The New York Times is on board with his agenda to smear anti-GMO activists in Hawaii. Kester is tied to the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association, an agrichemical industry front group.

Read more about Jon Entine in these Natural News stories, and remember that this is the person The New York Times allows to propose story ideas and influence editorial coverage of GMOs:

Forbes.com writer and biotech shill Jon Entine exposed as violent instigator who physically attacked wife and traumatized daughter – court documents
http://www.naturalnews.com/047665_Jon_Entine…

Jon Entine, biotech shill and character assassination operative, committed domestic violence and child abuse, states wife in court documents
http://www.naturalnews.com/047666_Jon_Entine…

Biotech front man Jon Entine exposed as wikipedia vandal and violent wife abuser in public court documents
http://www.naturalnews.com/047667_Jon_Entine…

Biotech front man Jon Entine part of an shameless gang of propagandists and character assassins targeting GMO skeptics
http://www.naturalnews.com/047668_Jon_Entine…

Why Jon Entine is a poster boy for the biotech industry: violence against women, corporate-funded hate speech and gross journalism misconduct
http://www.naturalnews.com/047685_Jon_Entine…

A Short Report on Journalists Mentioned in our FOIA Requests

To help summarize the dirty tactics and misdeeds of journalists that are corrupted by Monsanto money, the U.S. Right to Know campaign director Gary Ruskin posted an overview of the journalists named in the documents.

Here’s his full text, without all the hyperlinks. To see the fully hyperlinked version of this article, visit the original source:

On September 23rd, Washington Post food columnist Tamar Haspel admitted to receiving “plenty” of money from pro-agrichemical industry sources.

Following her admission, I thought it might be useful to report on journalists – including Haspel — mentioned in the documents we have received from state public records requests.

U.S. Right to Know is conducting an investigation of the food and agrichemical industries, their PR firms and front groups, and the professors who speak for them.

So far, three reporters come up in interesting ways: Amy Harmon, Keith Kloor and Tamar Haspel.

These reporters appear in the context of Jon Entine, who is perhaps the leading PR operative working to promote the views of the agrichemical industry, and its pesticides and GMOs. Entine is founder and executive director of the Genetic Literacy Project, which, along with the PR firm Ketchum’s GMO Answers, are the agrichemical industry’s two most visible front groups. Entine is also founder and president of the PR firm ESG MediaMetrics, whose clients have included the agrichemical giant Monsanto.

Amy Harmon

Amy Harmon is a reporter for the New York Times. She was part of a Times team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2001, and in 2008 she won a Pulitzer for explanatory reporting.

On September 23, 2013 at 7:44pm, Jon Entine emailed Renee Kester: “FYI, I think I’ve talked Amy Harmon into doing a Hawaii Hawaii [sic] story. . . and I gave her your and Kirby’s email information, so she may call at some point if she indeed pursues this.” Kirby Kester is president of the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association, an agrichemical industry front group.

On January 4, 2014, the New York Times published a front-page article by Amy Harmon, titled “A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops.” The story is datelined from Kona, Hawaii.

In 2014, Harmon won second place for the Society of Environmental Journalists “Kevin Carmody Award for Outstanding In-depth Reporting, Large Market” for “The Facts About GMOs,” a series that included the article “A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops.”

On September 30th, Harmon is scheduled to speak to the Cornell Alliance for Science, a group funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to promote GMOs. The group is running a petition against U.S. Right to Know’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Keith Kloor

Keith Kloor is a freelance journalist who has written for Nature, Science Insider, Discover, Slate and other outlets. Kloor has written many pro-GMO articles that have been featured by Jon Entine’s Genetic Literacy Project.

Kloor is mentioned in two places in the FOIA documents.

In one email, Jon Entine refers to Keith Kloor as a “very good friend of mine”.

In another email, on October 18, 2014, Dr. Channapatna Prakash, a GMO advocate and dean at Tuskegee University, emails Adrianne Massey of the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), along with several others, to forward an alert from Lorraine Thelian, vice chairman of the PR firm Ketchum that “the hacker community Anonymous is planning a series of attacks on biotechnology and food industry websites…Trade association and corporate websites of CBI [Council for Biotechnology Information] members are being targeted in this planned attack.” Dr. Prakash writes, “Adrianne I have copied Kevin Folta, Karl von Mogel, David Tribe and Keith Kloor here as well.”

Dr. Prakash cc’d the email to Jay Byrne (former director of corporate communications for Monsanto), Jon Entine, Bruce Chassy (agrichemical industry advocate) Val Giddings (former VP of BIO), Henry Miller (agrichemical industry advocate), Drew Kershen (agrichemical industry advocate), Klaus Ammann, Piet van der Meer, Martina Newell-McGloughlin (agrichemical industry advocate), Karl Haro von Mogel (member of the board of directors of Biology Fortified, a pro-GMO website), Kevin Folta (agrichemical industry advocate), Keith Kloor and David Tribe (agrichemical industry advocate).

Keith Kloor was the only journalist who received this email.

The email implies that Kloor works closely with the agrichemical industry’s prominent advocates.

Kloor has written three articles that were critical of U.S. Right to Know’s FOIA requests, in Science Insider, Discover and Nature.

On March 23rd, 2015, Kloor gave a talk for the Cornell Alliance for Science, which is hosting a petition against U.S. Right to Know’s FOIA requests.

Tamar Haspel

Tamar Haspel is a columnist at The Washington Post. She has written many columns for the Post defending or praising GMOs that have later been featured by Jon Entine’s Genetic Literacy Project.

In 2015, Haspel won the James Beard Foundation Award for her Post columns.

In June 2014, Haspel spoke to a pro-industry conference about “How can scientists best engage the GMO debate with a skeptical public?” The conference was coordinated by Jon Entine and Cami Ryan, who is currently social sciences lead for Monsanto. The conference was led by two agrichemical industry front groups, the Genetic Literacy Project and Academics Review, along with the University of Florida, which receives major funding from agrichemical companies, as noted in a September 6 article in the New York Times.

Haspel also moderated a panel organized by the North Carolina Biotechnology Center, which “provides long-term economic and societal benefits to North Carolina through support of biotechnology research, business, education and strategic policy statewide.”

In a September 23 chat hosted by The Washington Post, answering a question about whether she receives money from industry sources, Ms. Haspel wrote that, “I speak and moderate panels and debates often, and it’s work I’m paid for.” Later that day, I asked Ms. Haspel on Twitter how much money she had received from the agrichemical industry and its front groups. She replied, “Since any group believing biotech has something to offer is a ‘front group,’ plenty!”

Is it appropriate for a Washington Post columnist to write glowing columns about GMOs while appearing at such pro-industry conferences? Is it a conflict of interest for Haspel to accept money from agrichemical company interests that she covers as part of her beat as a Post food columnist? How much money has Haspel received from agrichemical industry interests?

Some journalists have criticized journalists for “buckraking” on speakers’ circuits. For example, former Washington Post Executive Editor Ben Bradlee said, “I wish it would go away. I don’t like it. I think it’s corrupting. If the Insurance Institute of America, if there is such a thing, pays you $10,000 to make a speech, don’t tell me you haven’t been corrupted. You can say you haven’t and you can say you will attack insurance issues in the same way, but you won’t. You can’t.”

Haspel wrote in the Washington Post that she will only speak at events where “if for-profit companies are involved in the event (which they often are), they can’t be the only voice. So, I will speak at a conference co-sponsored by, say, Monsanto and the USDA and NC State University, but not an event sponsored by Monsanto alone.” However, at the June 2014, conference at which Haspel spoke, no consumer advocates were slated to speak, only pro-industry advocates.

On October 16, Haspel is scheduled to speak to the Cornell Alliance for Science, a pro-GMO group that is hosting a petition against U.S. Right to Know’s FOIA requests.

Haspel has been critical of the U.S. Right to Know FOIA requests. On August 17, on Twitter, she wrote: “The money/time/brainpower wasted on @garyruskin’s mean-spirited, self-interested attack on @kevinfolta! Can we move on to something useful?” Others did not agree with her news judgment. On September 6th, two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Eric Lipton wrote an article largely based on our FOIA requests – especially of University of Florida Professor Kevin Folta – which ran on the front page of the Sunday New York Times. The article revealed how Folta, who repeatedly denied ties to Monsanto, in fact had received an undisclosed $25,000 grant, as well as writing assignments from the company, and worked closely with it and its PR firm Ketchum, which ghostwrote text for him and organized media and lobbying meetings for him.

U.S. Right to Know is a consumer advocacy group. We try to expose what the food industry doesn’t want us to know. We believe it is useful for the public to see how the food and agrichemical companies do their public relations work. That is one way we can help consumers to assess the claims and information they receive from the companies involved in our food production, their PR firms and operatives, and the journalists who work with them.

Sources for this article include
http://usrtk.org/gmo/a-short-report-on-journ…
http://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/16438-ne…
http://gmo.news/2015-09-15-academic-hall-of-…

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/051393_Monsanto_operatives_Keith_Kloor_Jon_Entine.html#ixzz3nLR61MeI

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

Meat and dairy mafia are fighting back as Cowspiracy is a huge success on Netflix

The meat and dairy industry have their puppets trolling Netflix and posting negative reviews for Cowspiracy! Feel threatened Big Ag?

cowspiracy

From Kip and Keegan:

Dear Friends,

We’re so thrilled that the Netflix release of Cowspiracy was such a huge success! Since the release just a week ago, we had a restaurant start the transition of going entirely vegan, helped a reporter from the Huffington Post to re-consider her stand on veganism and thousands of people are currently taking our 30-Day Vegan Challenge on our website.

But proponents of meat and dairy are noticing the impact our film is having, and they are fighting back!

Right now there are hundreds of negative reviews popping up on Netflix in order to give the film a bad rating. Studies show, a film with a low rating is watched overwhelmingly less, than a film with a solid 5 stars.

So, today we’re asking you to please help us to fight off this attack! If you watched Cowspiracy and liked the film, will you please leave a review on Netflix? Every positive review will have a huge impact on how many people will be watching the film.

Thank you so much in advance!

Kip & Keegan

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

“I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!!”

[wpvideo zIzmRtHS]

“I don’t have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It’s a depression. Everybody’s out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel’s worth; banks are going bust; shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter; punks are running wild in the street, and there’s nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there’s no end to it.

We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat. And we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that’s the way it’s supposed to be!

We all know things are bad — worse than bad — they’re crazy.

It’s like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don’t go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we’re living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, “Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won’t say anything. Just leave us alone.”

Well, I’m not going to leave you alone.

I want you to get mad!

I don’t want you to protest. I don’t want you to riot. I don’t want you to write to your Congressman, because I wouldn’t know what to tell you to write. I don’t know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street.

All I know is that first, you’ve got to get mad.

You’ve gotta say, “I’m a human being, xoddammit! My life has value!”

So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!!~howard beale from the 1976 movie network

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

Watch “Kim Kardashian is selfish and disgusting!!” on YouTube

Share to your social media, print, email, text, copy link

Page 6 of 7

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén