We will do the same with this FALSE FLAG tied to our BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCED-BASED SCIENCE-------EVOLUTIONARY THEORY.
GOULD was global banking 1% TRIBE OF JUDAH----not religious.
'Stephen Jay Gould
Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002), paleontologist and historian of science who was well-known for his essay-writing. Along with Niles Eldredge, he proposed the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, which states that changes in fossilizable features occur in bursts, in small offshoot populations that grow to become big, well-represented ones. He has also been a champion of multi-level natural selection as opposed to Richard Dawkins's greater emphasis on genes.
Gould's most significant contribution to evolutionary biology was the theory of punctuated equilibrium, which he developed with Niles Eldredge in 1972. The theory proposes that most evolution is characterized by long periods of evolutionary stability, which is infrequently punctuated by swift periods of branching speciation. The theory was contrasted against phyletic gradualism, the popular idea that evolutionary change is marked by a pattern of smooth and continuous change in the fossil record.
He was a secular Jew, and when asked whether he was an agnostic in this interview in Skeptic magazine], he responded
If you absolutely forced me to bet on the existence of a conventional anthropomorphic deity, of course I'd bet no. But, basically, Huxley was right when he said that agnosticism is the only honorable position because we really cannot know. And that's right. I'd be real surprised if there turned out to be a conventional God'.
Gradualism in evolution is much like STEADY STATE in physics. NATURAL PROCESSES evolve incrementally-----not all of a sudden. Global banking 1% sent in another FREEMASON STAR--------STEPHEN JAY GOULD to create that FALSE FLAG---without coincidence tied to another GLOBAL NEO-LIBERAL economic structure----TRANSHUMANISM meets far-right wing global corporate FASCISM----AKA MARXISM.
Below we see the global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS TRIBE OF JUDAH connection LORD GOULD who promoted the same DEATH THEME as this play of TWO SUICIDES.
LORD GOULD tied to BLAIR focusing on DEATH IN POLITICS no doubt was ringing out REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE LABOR PARTY and ringing in GLOBAL NEO-LIBERALISM as global banking MARXISM.
'The Concept of Death in Philosophy and Experience: Martin ...
Philip Gould, a.k.a Lord Gould of Brookwood, was not a philosopher. His career was spent as a political analyst, and he was instrumental in the conduct of focus-group research for the Labour party, which contributed substantially to Tony Blair’s landslide win in the UK 1997 General Election'.
GOULD created a hypothesis surrounding EVOLUTION which was immediately denounced by EVOLUTIONARY SCIENTISTS----and our RELIGIOUS leaders since GOULD is tied to being ATHEIST/SATANIST. Conservative religious leaders have largely jumped on the wagon of EVOLUTION being a FACT. KNOWING GOULD was up to something may have created the environment for TRADI----COMEDY------as with this PLAY-----SIREN SONG OF STEPHEN JAY GOULD.
This theory as too this PLAY sets the stage for both SCIENCE and RELIGION to MOCK GOULD.
'BANG BANG YOU'RE DEAD
THE SIREN SONG OF STEPHEN JAY GOULD
'Directory of Plays - SANTA BARBARA THEATRE OF THE AIRsb-radiodrama.com/directory-of-plays-player-interviews ♦ Bettenbender, Benjamin: The Siren Song of Stephen Jay Gould (Read a book, then jump off a bridge??!!) ...'
GOULD'S HYPOTHESIS on evolution called PUNCTUATED EVOLUTION is indeed a FALSE FLAG----FAKE NEWS AND DATA------tied to promoting the coming global banking 1% ECONOMIC FAD---------TRANSHUMANISM.
Marxism and Science and Punctuated Evolution
Marxism and Science – Punctuated Evolution
As it turns out, Lenin was right. When examined closely, Darwinian evolution—gradual change from species to species--actually works contrary to the dialectical method. According to dialectical materialism, whenever thesis and antithesis clash, the new synthesis created occurs rapidly, in the form of a sudden jump, rather than a long, gradual process.
Thus, according to this view, both evolution and revolution are necessary in the social sphere to move from a capitalist society to a classless, communist society. The change must occur rapidly, as did the overthrow of the Russian government. When thesis (bourgeoisie) and antithesis (proletariat) clash (through revolution), the resulting synthesis is a necessary leap resulting from the nature and flow of the dialectic. Darwin’s theory of slow and gradual natural selection did not match the Marxist requirements of progress—either natural or social.
Darwin’s theory emphasized gradual progress as opposed to sudden “leaps in being.” Early in the twentieth century, Marxists acknowledged this difference and abandoned Darwin’s natural selection theory. But Marxists did not abandon evolution. Plekhanov espoused the new Marxist attitude toward Darwin when he said, “Many people confound dialectic with the theory of evolution. Dialectic is, in fact, a theory of evolution. But it differs profoundly from the vulgar [Darwinian] theory of evolution, which is based substantially upon the principle that neither in nature nor in history do sudden changes occur, and that all changes taking place in the world occur gradually.”
Marxism and Science – Revolution within Evolution
Marxists expect evolution to work according to the dialectic: when thesis (a species) and antithesis (some aspect of the environment) clash, the synthesis (a new species) occurs rapidly. In 1972, an evolutionary theory that better fit the dialectical process was postulated: punctuated equilibrium, or punctuated evolution. Punctuated evolution allows for jumps, rapid change, and chance. It speaks the language of dialectical materialism. It speaks the language of revolution within evolution.
The evolutionary model of punctuated equilibrium sees biological change “as an episodic process occurring in fits and starts interspaced with long periods of stasis [i.e., lack of change].” New species are said to arise rapidly “in small peripherally isolated populations.” Instead of the Darwinian gradualist model of evolution in which new species occur slowly over long periods of time, punctuated equilibrium calls for long periods marked by little change, and then short, isolated periods of rapid change. American scientists most closely associated with this theory are Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Levins, Richard Lewontin, Niles Eldredge, and Steven Stanley.
Both Gould and Eldredge agree that their theory of punctuated equilibrium coincides with a Marxist interpretation of biology: “Alternative conceptions of change have respectable pedigrees in philosophy. Hegel’s dialectical laws, translated into a materialist context, have become the official ‘state philosophy’ of many socialist nations. These laws of change are explicitly punctuational, as befits a theory of revolutionary transformation in human society. In light of this official philosophy, it is not at all surprising that a punctuational view of speciation, much like our own, but devoid (so far as we can tell) of references to synthetic evolutionary theory and the allopatric model, has long been favored by many Russian paleontologists. It may also not be irrelevant to our personal preferences that one of us [Gould] learned his Marxism, literally, at his daddy’s knee.”
Marxists are pleased with the theory of punctuated equilibrium and how it affirms their worldview. Volkenshtein uses the fossil record as proof for the veracity of Marxist biology, claiming, “Whereas it was believed earlier that evolution occurs slowly, by way of gradual accumulation of small changes, at present biology takes into account a multitude of facts indicating that macroevolution occurred in a jumpwise manner and was not reduced to microevolution. The absence of transient forms in the paleontological records points, in a number of cases, not to a deficiency but to the absence of such forms. Small changes are often not accumulated at all.”6 Volkenshtein cites other “proofs” for punctuated equilibrium as well, pointing out that “no gradual transition can take place between feathers and hair, etc.”
Creationists have cited for years these discrepancies in evolutionary theory. They take on new importance when Marxists use them as “proof” for a new theory of evolution that supports their worldview. Gould explains, “Stasis, or nonchange, of most fossil species during their lengthy geological lifespans was tacitly acknowledged by all paleontologists, but almost never studied explicitly because prevailing theory treated stasis as uninteresting nonevidence for nonevolution… The overwhelming prevalence of stasis became an embarrassing feature of the fossil record, best left ignored as a manifestation of nothing (that is, nonevolution).”
'punctualism as evolution -----rebirth of dinosaurs'.
JURASSIC PARK had another global banking 1% freemason STAR as GOULD-----promoting TRANSHUMANISM via the idea of the reappearance of once extinct DINOSAURS. Suddenly, out of nowhere this island was an example of PUNCTUATED EVOLUTION------the sudden appearance of a SPECIES. GRADUALISM as the evolutionary norm would never allow this island of dinosaurs to exist.
GOULD the scientist and ATHEIST/SATANIST was indeed a EUGENIST-----the global .00014% of OLD WORLD KINGS-----Asian/European/Arabic being SUPREME ----ZEUSES/APOLLOS to all other global people able to be USED anyway these small percent of people want.
THIS IS EUGENICS------THINKING A GROUP OF PEOPLE ARE SUPREME---THE BEST.
We see GOULD made popular during REAGAN/CLINTON----the AYN RAND period of ROBBER BARON sacking and looting raping and pillaging and ending our US SOVEREIGNTY bringing US to colonial status----ergo-----DEATH/SUICIDE/NIHILISM rules.
Author Stephen Jay Gould
Country United States
Subjects Ability testing, Craniometry, Intelligence tests, Personality tests, Racism, Social Science
Publisher W. W. Norton & Company
TRANSHUMANISM is the OPPOSITE of eugenics. It's goals are simply to take those global 99.9% of humans and make them the ideal GMO HUMAN AS WORKER. This is a UTOPIA for those .00014% ------it is a DYSTOPIA for everyone else.
BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM IS NOT STEEPED ONLY ON INTELLIGENCE----SURVIVAL OF FITTEST INVOLVES MANY TRAITS.
The Mismeasure of Man
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Mismeasure of Man is a 1981 book by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The book is both a history and critique of the statistical methods and cultural motivations underlying biological determinism, the belief that “the social and economic differences between human groups—primarily races, classes, and sexes—arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology”.
Gould argues that the primary assumption underlying biological determinism is that, “worth can be assigned to individuals and groups by measuring intelligence as a single quantity”.
It is not all about intelligence----it is all about our genetic makeup. Intelligence does not preclude quality of life these several centuries of AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT I AM MAN----it precludes quality of life in DARK AGES.
'Biological determinism, also known as genetic determinism is the belief that human behaviour is controlled by an individual's genes or some component of their physiology, generally at the expense of the role of the environment, whether in embryonic development or in learning'.
Defending Stephen Jay Gould's Crusade against Biological Determinism
- By John Horgan on June 24, 2011
I used to be tough on Stephen Jay Gould, the great evolutionary biologist, who died in 2002. I found him self-righteous and pompous, in person and on the page. In an August 1995 profile of him for Scientific American I summed up his worldview, which emphasizes the role of randomness, or "contingency," in shaping life, as "shit happens."
But I admired Gould's ferocious opposition to biological determinism, which he defined as the view that "the social and economic differences between different groups—primarily races, classes and sexes—arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology."
I loathe biological determinism, too, and so I must defend Gould against charges that he was a fact-fudging "charlatan," as the anthropologist Ralph Holloway of Columbia University put it.
YOU BOTH ARE MISREPRESENTING WHAT ORIGINAL THEORIES ON BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM. THE EUGENISTS DID THIS AND THEY WERE NOT THE FOUNDATION OF SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT.
Holloway's slur is based on a critique by him and five other anthropologists of Gould's famous 1981 work The Mismeasure of Man (W. W. Norton & Co., 1981), in which Gould exposed case after appalling case of scientists in the past two centuries "proving" the biological inferiority of certain races as well as criminals, the poor, "imbeciles" and women. One chapter focused on the work of a 19th-century physician, Samuel George Morton, who amassed a collection of almost 1,000 skulls from around the world. Morton estimated the brain size of different racial groups by pouring seed and lead shot into the skulls. He concluded that whites have larger brains on average than blacks, confirming his suspicion that the races did not do not share a common ancestry but stemmed from different evolutionary roots.
Defenders of slavery embraced Morton's work. After he died, an editorial in the Charleston Medical Journal and Review declared, "We in the South should consider him our benefactor, for aiding most materially in giving to the Negro his true position as an inferior race." In Mismeasure, Gould reanalyzed Morton’s skull measurements and concluded that the average sizes of blacks' and whites' skulls were roughly equivalent. Gould suggested that Morton's racial bias had led him, probably unwittingly, to "discover" results consonant with his beliefs.
In "The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias," published June 7 in PLoS Biology, Holloway and five colleagues from other institutions stated that Gould's own analysis of Morton "is likely the stronger example of a bias influencing results." The group reported that its re-measurements of the skulls in Morton's collection support Morton's conclusions more than Gould's.
Commenting on Gould's claim that bias often influences science, an unsigned editorial in The New York Times snidely remarked, "Right now it looks as though he proved his point, just not as he intended." The anthropologist and blogger John Hawks claims that the "straightforward" analysis of Holloway et al. shows that Gould clearly engaged in "utter fabulation." Hawks added, "Some of Gould's mistakes are outrageous, with others it is hard for me to believe that the misstatements were not deliberate misrepresentations."
Some caveats are in order here. First of all, Holloway and his colleagues analyzed fewer than half of the skulls in Morton's collection. Second, their analysis, far from being "straightforward," was highly technical and based on many judgment calls, as were those of Gould and Morton. The divergent results depend in part on whether to include or exclude certain skulls that could unduly skew estimates of brain sizes. Third, neither Morton nor Holloway et al. corrected their measurements for age, gender or stature, all of which are correlated with brain size.
Finally, at least one of the PLoS authors, Holloway, is obviously biased against Gould. The Times quoted Holloway saying: "I just didn't trust Gould. I had the feeling that his ideological stance was supreme." Holloway faulted Gould because he "never even bothered to mention" a 1988 paper by John S. Michael that found Morton's conclusions to be "reasonably accurate." But Holloway and his co-authors stated that the paper by Michael, written when he was an undergraduate at the University of Pennsylvania, "has multiple significant flaws rendering it uninformative."
Maybe Gould was wrong that Morton misrepresented his data, but he was absolutely right that biological determinism was and continues to be a dangerous pseudoscientific ideology. Biological determinism is thriving today: I see it in the assertion of researchers such as the anthropologist Richard Wrangham of Harvard University that the roots of human warfare reach back all the way to our common ancestry with chimpanzees. In the claim of scientists such as Rose McDermott of Brown University that certain people are especially susceptible to violent aggression because they carry a "warrior gene." In the enthusiasm of some science journalists for the warrior gene and other flimsy linkages of genes to human traits. In the insistence of the evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne and neuroscientist Sam Harris that free will is an illusion because our "choices" are actually all predetermined by neural processes taking place below the level of our awareness. In the contention of James Watson, co-discoverer of the double helix, that the problems of sub-Saharan Africa reflect blacks' innate inferiority. In the excoriation of many modern researchers of courageous anti-determinists such as Gould and Margaret Mead.
Biological determinism is a blight on science. It implies that the way things are is the way they must be. We have less choice in how we live our lives than we think we do. This position is wrong, both empirically and morally. If you doubt me on this point, read Mismeasure, which, even discounting the chapter on Morton, abounds in evidence of how science can become an instrument of malignant ideologies.
As we start this discussion of REAL EVIDENCE BASED SCIENCE from genius DARWIN we want to remove the corruption always tied to REAL SCIENCE by global banking 1% to promote ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL FADS ------
DARWIN WAS A GREAT SCIENTIST AND GENIUS WHO SPENT HIS LIFE IN TREACHEROUS ENVIRONMENTS BECAUSE OF HIS PASSION FOR FINDING FACTS.
Basic evolution states those organisms able to reproduce are selected to survive. That may be why THE MEEK INHERITED THE EARTH.
'In the aspects of Darwin’s writing dealing with the evolution of plants and animals, the term almost exclusively refers to reproductive success – that is the number of reproductively viable offspring of an individual organism or group of organisms......................... despite this being greatly at odds with evidence concerning reproductive success, as often poorer families had a great many more children than wealthy families'.
The terms tied to DARWIN'S research and theories are ECONOMIC AND RELIGIOUS------as all scientists/geniuses wanting works published and promoted DARWIN had to adopt and redact to the rich.
'Business people are especially guilty of confusing survival of the fittest with evolution'.
Which illustrates another point: it is nonsense to appeal to the “survival of the fittest” to justify any economic or political ideology, especially on the basis that it is “natural”.
Evolution myths: 'Survival of the fittest' justifies 'everyone for themselves'
Life 16 April 2008 By Michael Le Page
The “fittest” can be the most loving and selfless, not the most aggressive and violent. In any case, what happens in nature does not justify people behaving in the same way
The phrase “survival of the fittest“, which was coined not by Darwin but by the philosopher Herbert Spencer, is widely misunderstood.
For starters, there is a lot more to evolution by natural selection than just the survival of the fittest. There must also be a population of replicating entities and variations between them that affect fitness – variation that must be heritable. By itself, survival of the fittest is a dead end. Business people are especially guilty of confusing survival of the fittest with evolution.
What’s more, although the phrase conjures up an image of a violent struggle for survival, in reality the word “fittest” seldom means the strongest or the most aggressive. On the contrary, it can mean anything from the best camouflaged or the most fecund to the cleverest or the most cooperative. Forget Rambo, think Einstein or Gandhi.
What we see in the wild is not every animal for itself.
Cooperation is an incredibly successful survival strategy.
WOW-------THAT IS INDEED DARWIN'S MESSAGE VIA EVOLUTIONARY THEORY--------SURVIVAL OF FITTEST-----BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM COMES FROM GLOBAL BANKING 1% ECONOMICS AND FAKE RELIGIOUS LEADERS.
Indeed it has been the basis of all the most dramatic steps in the history of life. Complex cells evolved from cooperating simple cells. Multicellular organisms are made up of cooperating complex cells. Superorganisms such as bee or ant colonies consist of cooperating individuals.
When cooperation breaks down, the results can be disastrous. When cells in our bodies turn rogue, for instance, the result is cancer. So elaborate mechanisms have evolved to maintain cooperation and suppress selfishness, such as cellular “surveillance” programmes that trigger cell suicide if they start to turn cancerous.
Looked at from this point of view, the concept of the survival of the fittest could be used to justify socialism rather than laissez-faire capitalism. Then again, the success of social insects could be used to argue for totalitarianism. Which illustrates another point: it is nonsense to appeal to the “survival of the fittest” to justify any economic or political ideology, especially on the basis that it is “natural”.
Is cannibalism fine because polar bears do it?
Is killing your brother or sister fine because nestlings of many bird species do it? Is murdering your children fine because mice sometimes eat their own pups? Is paedophilia fine because bonobo adults have sex with juveniles?
Powerful gripJust about every kind of behaviour that most of us regard as “unnatural” turns out to be perfectly natural in some nook or cranny of the animal kingdom. No one can plausibly argue that this justifies humans behaving in the same way.
Yet even though such examples expose the utter absurdity of appealing to what is “natural” to judge right from wrong – the naturalistic fallacy – we seem to have a strange blind spot when it comes to evolution. Survival of the fittest has been claimed to justify all kinds of things, from free markets to eugenics. Such notions still have a powerful grip in some circles.
However, natural selection is simply a description of what happens in the living world. It does not tell us how we should behave.
Seems GOULD and the TRANSHUMANISTS chose those RAPTORS for PUNCTUATED EVOLUTION for a reason----they are the model for HOSTING SERVER NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG------HIT HIM----HIT HER---HIT THEIR CATS AND DOGS.
So, while CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA were MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD for only the global 1%-------STANFORD TOTAL PRISON MODEL using PUNCTUATED EVOLUTION turned our GOOD US CITIZENS INTO EVIL very quickly.
Global banking 1% creating that black market SEX TRADE making money anyway they could------killing all that was GOOD.
This was the UK philosopher LORD GOULD telling us global banking 1% was FLIPPING THE EARTH'S ECONOMIC AXIS from WESTERN HEMISPHERE to EASTERN HEMISPHERE -----a major EXTINCTION of our WESTERN civilization.
MAN---THAT WAS REALLY FAST----you mean PUNCTUATED EVOLUTION? OH, YEAH.
"Velociraptor," Dinosaurs Songs
by StoryBots | Netflix Jr
•Feb 17, 2015
Oh, snap! These rappin' raptors can really bust a rhyme -- and anything else they can get their teeth into!