#GZ-5 energy unit | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

joycox · 3 years

Text

Eight chapters of "The Roadmap to Axon Enterprises - A Professional View"

Axon Enterprises was formed in the mid 90's by the merger of two companies, namely Data East and Landmark Communications. The new company was sold to Underwriter Magazine Incorporated in a public offering. The business was later purchased by Vista Equity Corp. and became AXON ENTries. The brand has since expanded into over forty distribution points around the world.

The company's focus is on four segments - Real Estate, Placement Software, Real Estate Management and Education/Certified Legal Assistant programs. Real estate segment offers professional law enforcement agencies and courthouses access to a full assortment of real estate related information through the axon enterprises property search resources. In the education/certified legal assistant category, the axon enterprises LPCS licenses offer qualified individuals access to the company's comprehensive training curriculum on topics such as paralegal practices, attorney practices, and criminal law.

The axon enterprises business is primarily focused on three core markets: telecommunications, networking and automotive. It's an industry leader in its field and has been successful in creating a loyal customer base. The company also manufactures and distributes a full range of electronics and related products. Some of their most popular products are Panasonic automobiles, Panasonic digital cameras, Panasonic vacuum cleaners and other auto accessories, Panasonic plaques, pans, lcd televisions and camcorders, cell phones and cell phone accessories.

The axon enterprises software, networking and automotive business segments are driven by key players, which are Nissan Motors, Toyota, Daewoo, Boeing, Cisco and Motorola. This list of key players illustrates the depth of relationships that the company enjoys. These key players work closely with the engineers and technicians at the axon enterprises body-worn camera business. The software application for the body worn camera business is named transcend information.

Transcend Information gathers and integrates consumer and technical information to forecast market trends. This forecasts supply, demand and promotional activities that will drive product lifecycle profitability and adoption rates. The forecast also takes into account competitive landscape. The competitive landscape refers to the current and future competitive landscape of the company and the industry it caters to. The forecasts allow the axon enterprises to evolve and respond to market changes efficiently and effectively.

The competitive landscape of the company has changed dramatically. The business overview also outlines how the competitive landscape has changed since the last year. These changes have impacted the business in a number of ways. These include the following: the marketplace has expanded to include more than two hundred countries and the Company's sales in Asia Pacific have increased more than tenfold to more than forty billion dollars annually. This growth has significantly influenced the Company's business model, strategy and growth.

The fifth chapter in the report titled "Forecast the Future of Axon Enterprise market " provides an outlook for the Company's performance during the next five years. This section provides an industry-wide outlook for the industry, including the Company's product line, revenues and market status. This chapter was prepared by analysts conducting research in the field and has been reviewed by management and board of directors. The data reviewed is gathered from the year ended July 30, 2012. Data is provided for six different industry areas: Consumer Products; Consumer Services; Energy and Utilities; Global Services and Telecommunications; Health Care; High Technology Products and Services; and Global Sourcing.

The eighth chapter titled "Forecast the Future of Axon Enterprise Solutions - Eight Steps to Assess the Company for the Sixteenth Year," provides an industry-wide outlook for the Company's performance during the next six years. This section provides the latest statistical data on the Company's revenues and market status by countries, type, manufacturers and downstream industries. The statistics used in this report include the Company's revenues by country and type. It also provides the Company's revenues by industry and the breakdown by types. Data is provided on all manufacturing categories that form a part of the Company's business.

Europe 5G devices market reached $270 million in 2019 and will grow by 39.6% over 2020-2030 owing to the rising adoption of advanced 5G devices in the region. Highlighted with 41 tables and 69 figures, this 129-page report “Europe 5G Devices Market 2020-2030 by Device Type, Frequency Band (High-band, Mid-band, Low-band), Application, End User (Residential, Enterprises, Government), and Country: Trend Forecast and Growth Opportunity” is based on a comprehensive research of the entire Europe 5G devices market and all its sub-segments through extensively detailed classifications. Profound analysis and assessment are generated from premium primary and secondary information sources with inputs derived from industry professionals across the value chain. The report is based on studies on 2015-2019 and provides forecast from 2020 till 2030 with 2019 as the base year. (Please note: The report will be updated before delivery so that the latest historical year is the base year and the forecast covers at least 5 years over the base year.) In-depth qualitative analyses include identification and investigation of the following aspects: • Market Structure • Growth Drivers • Restraints and Challenges • Emerging Product Trends & Market Opportunities • Porter’s Fiver Forces The trend and outlook of Europe market is forecast in optimistic, balanced, and conservative view by taking into account of COVID-19. The balanced (most likely) projection is used to quantify Europe 5G devices market in every aspect of the classification from perspectives of Device Type, Frequency Band, Application, End User, and Country. Based on Device Type, the Europe market is segmented into the following sub-markets with annual revenue and unit shipment for 2019-2030 included in each section. • Smartphones • Tablets • 5G Hotspot Devices • Wearable Devices Based on Frequency Band, the Europe market is segmented into the following sub-markets with annual revenue and unit shipment for 2019-2030 included in each section. • High-band (mmWave) • Mid-band (sub 6 Gz) • Low-band (sub 1 Gz) Based on Application, the Europe market is segmented into the following sub-markets with annual revenue and unit shipment for 2019-2030 included in each section. • Smart Home • Autonomous Driving • Smart Cities • Industrial IoT • Smart Farming • Other Applications Based on End User, the Europe market is segmented into the following sub-markets with annual revenue and unit shipment for 2019-2030 included in each section. • Residential • Enterprises • Government Geographically, the following national/local markets are fully investigated: • Germany • UK • France • Spain • Italy • Russia • Rest of Europe (further segmented into Belgium, Denmark, Austria, Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania) For each of the aforementioned countries, detailed analysis and data for annual revenue are available for 2019-2030. The breakdown of key national markets by Device Type, Application, and End User over the forecast years are also included. The report also covers current competitive scenario and the predicted trend; and profiles key vendors including market leaders and important emerging players. Specifically, potential risks associated with investing in Europe 5G devices market are assayed quantitatively and qualitatively through GMD’s Risk Assessment System. According to the risk analysis and evaluation, Critical Success Factors (CSFs) are generated as a guidance to help investors & stockholders identify emerging opportunities, manage and minimize the risks, develop appropriate business models, and make wise strategies and decisions. Key Players (this may not be a complete list and extra companies can be added upon request): Analog Devices Cavium China Mobile Cisco Ericsson Huawei Intel Korea Telecom Leapfrog 5G Devices MACOM Mediatek NEC Nokia Qorvo Samsung SK Telecom T-Mobile Verizon Communications ZTE (Please note: The report will be updated before delivery so that the latest historical year is the base year and the forecast covers at least 5 years over the base year.)

For more details contact as https://www.reportmines.com/contact-us.php

0 notes

xyrid-kassai · 4 years

Text

MOTHER NATURE 2 US

She looks like my spelt and quinoa turd I passed yesterday, same colour too. It’s a clear indication that they don’t give a fuck about your life so called “black” people.

The God gene hypothesis proposes that human spirituality is influenced by heredity and that a specific gene, called vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2), predisposes humans towards spiritual or mystic experiences.[1] The idea has been proposed by geneticist Dean Hammer in the 2004 book called The God Gene: How Faith is hardwired into our Genes.

The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies.[2] The major arguments of the hypothesis are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality provides an evolutionary advantage by providing individuals with an innate sense of optimism

According to the God Gene hypothesis, spirituality has a genetic component, of which (VMAT2) comprises one component by contributing to sensations associated with mystic experiences, including the presence of God and feelings of connection to a larger universe.

The research uses the self-transcendence scale developed by psychologist Robert Cloninger to quantify spirituality using three sub-scales: "self-forgetfulness" (as in the tendency to become totally absorbed in some activity, such as reading); "transpersonal identification" (a feeling of connectedness to a larger universe); and "mysticism" (an openness to believe things that remain unproven, such as ESP). Cloninger suggests that taken together, these measurements are a reasonable way to quantify (make measurable) an individual's propensity to spiritual.

The self-transcendence measure was shown to be heritable by classical twin studies conducted by Lindon Eaves and Nicholas Martin. Their work demonstrated that approximately 40% of the variation in self-transcendence was due to genes. By contrast, specific religious beliefs (such as belief in a particular deity) were found to have no genetic basis and are instead cultural units or memes. Similar conclusions were drawn from studies of identical twins reared apart.

In order to identify some of the specific genes involved in self-transcendence, Hamer analyzed DNA and personality score data from over 1,000 individuals and identified one particular locus, VMAT2, with a significant correlation. VMAT2 codes for a vesicular monoamine transporter that plays a key role in regulating the levels of the brain chemicals serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine. These monoamine transmitters are in turn postulated to play an important role in regulating the brain activities associated with mystic beliefs.

Hamer hypothesized that self-transcendence might provide an evolutionary advantage by providing human beings with an innate sense of optimism that gives people the will to keep on living and procreating, despite the inevitability of death, and promoting better health and recovery from diseases.

In the brain, VMAT2 proteins are located on synaptic vesicles. VMAT2 transports monoamine neurotransmitters from the cytosol of monoamine neurons into vesicles. PZ Myers argues: "It's a pump. A teeny-tiny pump responsible for packaging a neurotransmitter for export during brain activity. Yes, it's important, and it may even be active and necessary during higher order processing, like religious thought. But one thing it isn't is a 'god gene.'"[3]

Carl Zimmer claimed that VMAT2 can be characterized as a gene that accounts for less than one percent of the variance of self-transcendence scores. These, Zimmer says, can signify anything from belonging to the Green Party to believing in ESP. Zimmer also points out that the God Gene theory is based on only one unpublished, unreplicated study.[4] However Hamer notes that the importance of the VMAT2 finding is not that it explains all spiritual or religious feelings, but rather that it points the way toward one neurobiological pathway that may be important.

Religious response

John Polkinghorne, an Anglican priest, member of the Royal Society and Canon Theologian at Liverpool Cathedral, was asked for a comment on Hamer's theory by the British national daily newspaper, The Daily Telegraph. He replied: "The idea of a God gene goes against all my personal theological convictions. You can't cut faith down to the lowest common denominator of genetic survival. It shows the poverty of reductionist thinking." [5][6]

Walter Houston, the chaplain of Mansfield College, Oxford, and a fellow in theology, told the Telegraph: "Religious belief is not just related to a person's constitution; it's related to society, tradition, character everything's involved. Having a gene that could do all that seems pretty unlikely to me."

Hamer responded that the existence of such a gene would not be incompatible with the existence of a personal God: "Religious believers can point to the existence of God genes as one more sign of the creator's ingenuity—a clever way to help humans acknowledge and embrace a divine presence."[6] He repeatedly notes in his book that, "This book is about whether God genes exist, not about whether there is a God."

Vesicular monoamine transporter 2

The vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2) also known as solute carrier family 18 member 2 (SLC18A2) is a protein that in humans is encoded by the SLC18A2 gene.[5] VMAT2 is an integral membrane protein that transports monoamines—particularly neurotransmitters such as dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, and histamine—from cellular cytosol into synaptic vesicles.[6] In nigrostriatal pathway and mesolimbic pathway dopamine-releasing neurons, VMAT2 function is also necessary for the vesicular release of the neurotransmitter GABA.

Binding sites and ligands

VMAT2 is believed to possess at least two distinct binding sites, which are characterized by tetrabenazine (TBZ) and reserpine binding to the transporter.[8] Amphetamine (TBZ site) and methamphetamine (reserpine site) bind at distinct sites on VMAT2 to inhibit its function.[8] VMAT2 inhibitors like tetrabenazine and reserpine reduce the concentration of monoamine neurotransmitters in the synaptic cleft by inhibiting uptake through VMAT2; the inhibition of VMAT2 uptake by these drugs prevents the storage of neurotransmitters in synaptic vesicles and reduces the quantity of neurotransmitters that are released through exocytosis. Although many substituted amphetamines induce the release of neurotransmitters from vesicles through VMAT2 while inhibiting uptake through VMAT2, they facilitate the release of monoamine neurotransmitters into the synaptic cleft by simultaneously reversing the direction of transport through the primary plasma membrane transport proteins for monoamines (i.e., the dopamine transporter, norepinephrine transporter, and serotonin transporter) in monoamine neurons.[medical citation needed] Other VMAT2 inhibitors such as GZ-793A inhibit the reinforcing effects of methamphetamine, but without producing stimulant or reinforcing effects themselves.[9]

Inhibition

VMAT2 is essential for enabling the release of neurotransmitters from the axon terminals of monoamine neurons into the synaptic cleft. If VMAT2 function is inhibited or compromised, monoamine neurotransmitters such as dopamine cannot be released into the synapse via typical release mechanisms (i.e., exocytosis resulting from action potentials).

Cocaine users display a marked reduction in VMAT2 immunoreactivity. Sufferers of cocaine-induced mood disorders displayed a significant loss of VMAT2 immunoreactivity; this might reflect damage to dopamine axon terminals in the striatum. These neuronal changes could play a role in causing disordered mood and motivational processes in more severely addicted users.[10]

In popular culture

Geneticist Dean Hamer has suggested that a particular allele of the VMAT2 gene correlates with spirituality using data from a smoking survey, which included questions intended to measure "self-transcendence". Hamer performed the spirituality study on the side, independently of the National Cancer Institute smoking study. His findings were published in the mass-market book The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-Wired Into Our Genes.[11][12] Hamer himself notes that VMAT2 plays at most a minor role in influencing spirituality.[13] Furthermore, Hamer's claim that the VMAT2 gene contributes to spirituality is controversial.[13] Hamer's study has not been published in a peer reviewed journal and a reanalysis of the correlation demonstrates that it is not statistically significant.[13][14]

Psychometry (paranormal)

Psychometry (from Greek: ψυχή, psukhē, "spirit, soul" and μέτρον, metron, "measure"),[1] also known as token-object reading,[2] or psychoscopy,[3] is a form of extrasensory perception characterized by the claimed ability to make relevant associations from an object of unknown history by making physical contact with that object.[4] Supporters assert that an object may have an energy field that transfers knowledge regarding that object's history.[4]

There is no scientific evidence that psychometry exists and the concept has been widely criticized

Pseudoscience

Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method.[1][Note 1] Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been experimentally discredited. The term pseudoscience is considered pejorative,[4] because it suggests something is being presented as science inaccurately or even deceptively. Those described as practicing or advocating pseudoscience often dispute the characterization.[2]

The demarcation between science and pseudoscience has philosophical and scientific implications.[5] Differentiating science from pseudoscience has practical implications in the case of health care, expert testimony, environmental policies, and science education.[6] Distinguishing scientific facts and theories from pseudoscientific beliefs, such as those found in astrology, alchemy, alternative medicine, occult

beliefs, religious beliefs, and creation science, is part of science education and scientific literacy.[6][7]

Pseudoscience can be harmful. For example, pseudoscientific anti-vaccine activism and promotion of homeopathic remedies as alternative disease treatments can result in people forgoing important medical treatment with demonstrable health benefits.

Etymology

The word pseudoscience is derived from the Greek root pseudo meaning falseand the English word science, from the Latin word scientia, meaning "knowledge". Although the term has been in use since at least the late 18th century (e.g., in 1796 by James Pettit Andrews in reference to alchemy), the concept of pseudoscience as distinct from real or proper science seems to have become more widespread during the mid-19th century. Among the earliest uses of "pseudo-science" was in an 1844 article in the Northern Journal of Medicine, issue 387:

That opposite kind of innovation which pronounces what has been recognized as a branch of science, to have been a pseudo-science, composed merely of so-called facts, connected together by misapprehensions under the disguise of principles.

An earlier use of the term was in 1843 by the French physiologist François Magendie, that refers to phrenology as "a pseudo-science of the present day".[13][14] During the 20th century, the word was used pejoratively to describe explanations of phenomena which were claimed to be scientific, but which were not in fact supported by reliable experimental evidence. From time-to-time, though, the usage of the word occurred in a more formal, technical manner in response to a perceived threat to individual and institutional security in a social and cultural setting.[15]

Relationship to science

Pseudoscience is differentiated from science because – although it claims to be science – pseudoscience does not adhere to accepted scientific standards, such as the scientific method, falsifiability of claims, and Mertonian norms.

Scientific method

A number of basic principles are accepted by scientists as standards for determining whether a body of knowledge, method, or practice is scientific. Experimental results should be reproducible and verified by other researchers.[17] These principles are intended to ensure experiments can be reproduced measurably given the same conditions, allowing further investigation to determine whether a hypothesis or theory related to given phenomena is valid and reliable. Standards require the scientific method to be applied throughout, and bias to be controlled for or eliminated through randomization, fair sampling procedures, blinding of studies, and other methods. All gathered data, including the experimental or environmental conditions, are expected to be documented for scrutiny and made available for peer review, allowing further experiments or studies to be conducted to confirm or falsify results. Statistical quantification of significance, confidence, and error[18] are also important tools for the scientific method.

A number of basic principles are accepted by scientists as standards for determining whether a body of knowledge, method, or practice is scientific. Experimental results should be reproducible and verified by other researchers.[17] These principles are intended to ensure experiments can be reproduced measurably given the same conditions, allowing further investigation to determine whether a hypothesis or theory related to given phenomena is valid and reliable. Standards require the scientific method to be applied throughout, and bias to be controlled for or eliminated through randomization, fair sampling procedures, blinding of studies, and other methods. All gathered data, including the experimental or environmental conditions, are expected to be documented for scrutiny and made available for peer review, allowing further experiments or studies to be conducted to confirm or falsify results. Statistical quantification of significance, confidence, and error are also important tools for the scientific method.

Falsifiability

During the mid-20th century, the philosopher Karl Popper emphasized the criterion of falsifiability to distinguish science from nonscience.[19]Statements, hypotheses, or theories have falsifiability or refutability if there is the inherent possibility that they can be proven false. That is, if it is possible to conceive of an observation or an argument which negates them. Popper used astrology and psychoanalysis as examples of pseudoscience and Einstein's theory of relativity as an example of science. He subdivided nonscience into philosophical, mathematical, mythological, religious and metaphysical formulations on one hand, and pseudoscientific formulations on the other.[20]

Another example which shows the distinct need for a claim to be falsifiable was stated in Carl Sagan's publication The Demon-Haunted World when he discusses an invisible dragon that he has in his garage. The point is made that there is no physical test to refute the claim of the presence of this dragon. Whatever test one thinks can be devised, there is a reason why it does not apply to the invisible dragon, so one can never prove that the initial claim is wrong. Sagan concludes; "Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all?". He states that "your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true",[21] once again explaining that even if such a claim were true, it would be outside the realm of scientific inquiry.

Mertonian norms

During 1942, Robert K. Merton identified a set of five "norms" which he characterized as what makes a real science. If any of the norms were violated, Merton considered the enterprise to be nonscience. These are not broadly accepted by the scientific community. His norms were:

Originality: The tests and research done must present something new to the scientific community.

Detachment: The scientists' reasons for practicing this science must be simply for the expansion of their knowledge. The scientists should not have personal reasons to expect certain results.

Universality: No person should be able to more easily obtain the information of a test than another person. Social class, religion, ethnicity, or any other personal factors should not be factors in someone's ability to receive or perform a type of science.

Skepticism: Scientific facts must not be based on faith. One should always question every case and argument and constantly check for errors or invalid claims.

Public accessibility: Any scientific knowledge one obtains should be made available to everyone. The results of any research should be published and shared with the scientific community.[22]

Refusal to acknowledge problems

During 1978, Paul Thagard proposed that pseudoscience is primarily distinguishable from science when it is less progressive than alternative theories over a long period of time, and its proponents fail to acknowledge or address problems with the theory.[23] During 1983, Mario Bunge has suggested the categories of "belief fields" and "research fields" to help distinguish between pseudoscience and science, where the former is primarily personal and subjective and the latter involves a certain systematic method.[24] The 2018 book by Steven Novella, et al. The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe lists hostility to criticism as one of the major features of pseudoscience.[25]

Criticism of the term

Philosophers of science such as Paul Feyerabend argued that a distinction between science and nonscience is neither possible nor desirable.[26][Note 2] Among the issues which can make the distinction difficult is variable rates of evolution among the theories and methods of science in response to new data.[Note 3]

Larry Laudan has suggested pseudoscience has no scientific meaning and is mostly used to describe our emotions: "If we would stand up and be counted on the side of reason, we ought to drop terms like 'pseudo-science' and 'unscientific' from our vocabulary; they are just hollow phrases which do only emotive work for us".[29] Likewise, Richard McNally states, "The term 'pseudoscience' has become little more than an inflammatory buzzword for quickly dismissing one's opponents in media sound-bites" and "When therapeutic entrepreneurs make claims on behalf of their interventions, we should not waste our time trying to determine whether their interventions qualify as pseudoscientific. Rather, we should ask them: How do you know that your intervention works? What is your evidence?"[30]

Alternative definition

For philosophers Silvio Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz "pseudo-science may be defined as one where the uncertainty of its inputs must be suppressed, lest they render its outputs totally indeterminate". The definition, in the book Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy (p. 54),[31] alludes to the loss of craft skills in handling quantitative information, and to the bad practice of achieving precision in prediction (inference) only at the expenses of ignoring uncertainty in the input which was used to formulate the prediction. This use of the term is common among practitioners of post-normal science. Understood in this way, pseudoscience can be fought using good practices to assesses uncertainty in quantitative information, such as NUSAP and – in the case of mathematical modelling – sensitivity auditing.

The astrological signs of the zodiac

History

The history of pseudoscience is the study of pseudoscientific theories over time. A pseudoscience is a set of ideas that presents itself as science, while it does not meet the criteria to be properly called such.[32][33]

Distinguishing between proper science and pseudoscience is sometimes difficult.[34] One proposal for demarcation between the two is the falsification criterion, attributed most notably to the philosopher Karl Popper.[35] In the history of science and the history of pseudoscience it can be especially difficult to separate the two, because some sciences developed from pseudosciences. An example of this transformation is the science chemistry, which traces its origins to pseudoscientific or pre-scientific study of alchemy.

The vast diversity in pseudosciences further complicates the history of science. Some modern pseudosciences, such as astrology and acupuncture, originated before the scientific era. Others developed as part of an ideology, such as Lysenkoism, or as a response to perceived threats to an ideology. Examples of this ideological process are creation science and intelligent design, which were developed in response to the scientific theory of evolution.[36]

Remote viewing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This article is about the parapsychology claim of abilities similar to telepathy. For the use of technology to see a remote scene, see Television.

Remote viewing (RV) is the practice of seeking impressions about a distant or unseen target, purportedly using extrasensory perception (ESP) or "sensing" with the mind.[1]

Remote viewing experiments have historically been criticized for lack of proper controls and repeatability. There is no scientific evidence that remote viewing exists, and the topic of remote viewing is generally regarded as pseudoscience.[2][3][4][5][6][7]

Typically a remote viewer is expected to give information about an object, event, person or location that is hidden from physical view and separated at some distance.[8]

Physicists Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff, parapsychology researchers at Stanford Research Institute (SRI), are generally credited with coining the term "remote viewing" to distinguish it from the closely related concept of clairvoyance,[9][10] although according to Targ, the term was first suggested by Ingo Swann in December 1971 during an experiment at the American Society for Psychical Research in New York City.[11]

Remote viewing was popularized in the 1990s upon the declassification of certain documents related to the Stargate Project, a $20 million research program that had started in 1975 and was sponsored by the U.S. government, in an attempt to determine any potential military application of psychic phenomena. The program was terminated in 1995 after it failed to produce any actionable intelligence information.[n 1][12]

Precognition

Precognition (from the Latin prae-, "before" and cognitio, "acquiring knowledge"), also called prescience, future vision, future sight is a claimed psychic ability to see events in the future.

As with other paranormal phenomena, there is no accepted scientific evidence that precognition is a real effect and it is widely considered to be pseudoscience. Precognition also appears to violate the principle of causality, that an effect cannot occur before its cause.

Precognition has been widely believed throughout history. Despite the lack of scientific evidence, many people believe it to be real; it is widely reported and remains a topic of research and discussion within the parapsychology community.

Retrocognition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Retrocognition (also known as postcognition or hindsight[1]), from the Latin retro meaning "backward, behind" and cognition meaning "knowing," describes "knowledge of a past event which could not have been learned or inferred by normal means."[2] The term was coined by Frederic W. H. Myers.[3]

Overview

Retrocognition has long been held by scientific researchers into psychic phenomena to be untestable, given that, in order to verify that an accurate retrocognitive experience has occurred, it is necessary to consult existing documents and human knowledge, the existence of which permits some contemporary basis of the knowledge to be raised.[4]

For instance, if you purport retrocognitive knowledge that "Winston Churchill killed a parrot", the only way of verifying that knowledge would be to consult extant sources of Churchill's activities. If it is found that he did, indeed, kill a parrot at one time, it could be said that you "simply" obtained contemporary knowledge of this fact (by clairvoyance or telepathy, if need be, of the relevant documents or someone's knowledge of them), rather than directly perceived – in the manner of retrocognition – any event in Churchill's past. Given this fundamental logical difficulty, there has been very little experimental investigation by parapsychologists of retrocognition. The evidence for retrocognition has, therefore, been limited to naturalistic cases suggestive of the phenomenon.

The most popularly celebrated case of retrocognition concerns the visions in 1901 of Annie Moberly and Eleanor Jourdain – two scholars and early administrators of British university education for women – as they tried to find their way to Marie Antoinette's private château, the Petit Trianon. Becoming lost on their way, they believed that they instead came unto the Queen's presence itself. They published an account of their experience in 1911 as An Adventure. Moberly and Jourdain described how they had become convinced, over the following weeks, that persons they saw and even spoke to on that occasion – given certain details of dress, accent, topography and architecture – must have been of a presumed recollection by Marie Antoinette, on 10 August 1792, of her last days at Trianon in 1789. While often considered in popular literature as evidence for retrocognition, the book was immediately dismissed by Eleanor Sidgwick, a leading member of the British Society for Psychical Research, in an article published in its Proceedings, as the product of mutual confabulation.[5][6]

Telepathy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

For other uses, see Telepathy (disambiguation).

This article is about the paranormal phenomenon. For the performing art, see Mentalism.

The Ganzfeld experiments that aimed to demonstrate telepathy have been criticized for lack of replication and poor controls.[1][2]

Telepathy (from the Greek τῆλε, tele meaning "distant" and πάθος/-πάθεια, pathos or -patheia meaning "feeling, perception, passion, affliction, experience")[3][4] is the purported vicarious transmission of information from one person to another without using any known human sensory channels or physical interaction. The term was coined in 1882 by the classical scholar Frederic W. H. Myers,[5] a founder of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR),[6] and has remained more popular than the earlier expression thought-transference.[6][7]

Telepathy experiments have historically been criticized for lack of proper controls and repeatability. There is no convincing evidence that telepathy exists, and the topic is generally considered by the scientific community to be pseudoscience.

Intuition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

For other uses, see Intuition (disambiguation).

A phrenological mapping[1] of the brain – phrenology was among the first attempts to correlate mental functions with specific parts of the brain

Intuition is the ability to acquire knowledge without recourse to conscious reasoning.[2][3] Different writers give the word "intuition" a great variety of different meanings, ranging from direct access to unconscious knowledge, unconscious cognition, inner sensing, inner insight to unconscious pattern-recognition and the ability to understand something instinctively, without the need for conscious reasoning.[4][5]

The word intuition comes from the Latin verb intueri translated as "consider" or from the late middle English word intuit, "to contemplate".[2]

8 External links

Philosophy

Both Eastern and Western philosophers have studied the concept in great detail. Philosophy of mind deals with the concept.

Eastern philosophy

In the East intuition is mostly intertwined with religion and spirituality, and various meanings exist from different religious texts.[6]

Hinduism

In Hinduism various attempts have been made to interpret the Vedic and other esoteric texts.

For Sri Aurobindo intuition comes under the realms of knowledge by identity; he describes the psychological plane in humans (often referred to as mana in sanskrit) having two arbitrary natures, the first being imprinting of psychological experiences which is constructed through sensory information (mind seeking to become aware of external world). The second nature being the action when it seeks to be aware of itself, resulting in humans being aware of their existence or aware of being angry & aware of other emotions. He terms this second nature as knowledge by identity.[7] He finds that at present as the result of evolution the mind has accustomed itself to depend upon certain physiological functioning and their reactions as its normal means of entering into relations with the outer material world. As a result, when we seek to know about the external world the dominant habit is through arriving at truths about things via what our senses convey to us. However, knowledge by identity, which we currently only give the awareness of human beings' existence, can be extended further to outside of ourselves resulting in intuitive knowledge.[8]

He finds this intuitive knowledge was common to older humans (Vedic) and later was taken over by reason which currently organises our perception, thoughts and actions resulting from Vedic to metaphysical philosophy and later to experimental science. He finds that this process, which seems to be decent, is actually a circle of progress, as a lower faculty is being pushed to take up as much from a higher way of working.[9] He finds when self-awareness in the mind is applied to one's self and the outer (other) -self, results in luminous self-manifesting identity; the reason also converts itself into the form of the self-luminous intuitional knowledge.[10][11][12]

Osho believed consciousness of human beings to be in increasing order from basic animal instincts to intelligence and intuition, and humans being constantly living in that conscious state often moving between these states depending on their affinity. He also suggests living in the state of intuition is one of the ultimate aims of humanity.[13]

Advaita vedanta (a school of thought) takes intuition to be an experience through which one can come in contact with an experience Brahman.[14]

Buddhism

Buddhism finds intuition to be a faculty in the mind of immediate knowledge and puts the term intuition beyond the mental process of conscious thinking, as the conscious thought cannot necessarily access subconscious information, or render such information into a communicable form.[15] In Zen Buddhism various techniques have been developed to help develop one's intuitive capability, such as koans – the resolving of which leads to states of minor enlightenment (satori). In parts of Zen Buddhism intuition is deemed a mental state between the Universal mind and one's individual, discriminating mind.[16][17]

Islam

In Islam there are various scholars with varied interpretations of intuition (often termed as hadas (Arabic: حدس), hitting correctly on a mark), sometimes relating the ability of having intuitive knowledge to prophethood. Siháb al Din-al Suhrawadi, in his book Philosophy Of Illumination (ishraq), finds that intuition is knowledge acquired through illumination, is mystical in nature, and also suggests mystical contemplation (mushahada) to bring about correct judgment.[18]Ibn Sīnā finds the ability of having intuition as a "prophetic capacity" and describes it as knowledge obtained without intentionally acquiring it. He finds that regular knowledge is based on imitation while intuitive knowledge is based on intellectual certitude.[19]

Western philosophy

In the West, intuition does not appear as a separate field of study, and early mentions and definitions can be traced back to Plato. In his book Republic he tries to define intuition as a fundamental capacity of human reason to comprehend the true nature of reality.[20] In his works Meno and Phaedo, he describes intuition as a pre-existing knowledge residing in the "soul of eternity", and a phenomenon by which one becomes conscious of pre-existing knowledge. He provides an example of mathematical truths, and posits that they are not arrived at by reason. He argues that these truths are accessed using a knowledge already present in a dormant form and accessible to our intuitive capacity. This concept by Plato is also sometimes referred to as anamnesis. The study was later continued by his followers.[21]

In his book Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes refers to an “intuition” as a pre-existing knowledge gained through rational reasoning or discovering truth through contemplation. This definition is commonly referred to as rational intuition.[22] Later philosophers, such as Hume, have more ambiguous interpretations of intuition. Hume claims intuition is a recognition of relationships (relation of time, place, and causation) while he states that "the resemblance" (recognition of relations) "will strike the eye" (which would not require further examination) but goes on to state, "or rather in mind"—attributing intuition to power of mind, contradicting the theory of empiricism.[23][24]

Immanuel Kant’s notion of “intuition” differs considerably from the Cartesian notion, and consists of the basic sensory information provided by the cognitive faculty of sensibility (equivalent to what might loosely be called perception). Kant held that our mind casts all of our external intuitions in the form of space, and all of our internal intuitions (memory, thought) in the form of time.[25]Intuitionism is a position advanced by Luitzen Egbertus Jan Brouwer in philosophy of mathematics derived from Kant's claim that all mathematical knowledge is knowledge of the pure forms of the intuition—that is, intuition that is not empirical. Intuitionistic logic was devised by Arend Heyting to accommodate this position (and has been adopted by other forms of constructivism in general). It is characterized by rejecting the law of excluded middle: as a consequence it does not in general accept rules such as double negation elimination and the use of reductio ad absurdum to prove the existence of something.[citation needed]

Intuitions are customarily appealed to independently of any particular theory of how intuitions provide evidence for claims, and there are divergent accounts of what sort of mental state intuitions are, ranging from mere spontaneous judgment to a special presentation of a necessary truth.[26] In recent years a number of philosophers, especially George Bealer have tried to defend appeals to intuition against Quinean doubts about conceptual analysis.[27] A different challenge to appeals to intuition has recently come from experimental philosophers, who argue that appeals to intuition must be informed by the methods of social science.[citation needed]

The metaphilosophical assumption that philosophy ought to depend on intuitions has recently been challenged by experimental philosophers (e.g., Stephen Stich).[28] One of the main problems adduced by experimental philosophers is that intuitions differ, for instance, from one culture to another, and so it seems problematic to cite them as evidence for a philosophical claim.[29]Timothy Williamson has responded to such objections against philosophical methodology by arguing that intuition plays no special role in philosophy practice, and that skepticism about intuition cannot be meaningfully separated from a general skepticism about judgment. On this view, there are no qualitative differences between the methods of philosophy and common sense, the sciences or mathematics.[30] Others like Ernest Sosa seek to support intuition by arguing that the objections against intuition merely highlight a verbal disagreement.[31]

Psychology

Freud

According to Sigmund Freud, knowledge could only be attained through the intellectual manipulation of carefully made observations and rejected any other means of acquiring knowledge such as intuition, and his findings could have been an analytic turn of his mind towards the subject.[32]

Jung

In Carl Jung's theory of the ego, described in 1916 in Psychological Types, intuition is an "irrational function", opposed most directly by sensation, and opposed less strongly by the "rational functions" of thinking and feeling. Jung defined intuition as "perception via the unconscious": using sense-perception only as a starting point, to bring forth ideas, images, possibilities, ways out of a blocked situation, by a process that is mostly unconscious.[33]

Jung said that a person in whom intuition is dominant, an "intuitive type", acts not on the basis of rational judgment but on sheer intensity of perception. An extraverted intuitive type, "the natural champion of all minorities with a future", orients to new and promising but unproven possibilities, often leaving to chase after a new possibility before old ventures have borne fruit, oblivious to his or her own welfare in the constant pursuit of change. An introverted intuitive type orients by images from the unconscious, ever exploring the psychic world of the archetypes, seeking to perceive the meaning of events, but often having no interest in playing a role in those events and not seeing any connection between the contents of the psychic world and him- or herself. Jung thought that extraverted intuitive types were likely entrepreneurs, speculators, cultural revolutionaries, often undone by a desire to escape every situation before it becomes settled and constraining—even repeatedly leaving lovers for the sake of new romantic possibilities. His introverted intuitive types were likely mystics, prophets, or cranks, struggling with a tension between protecting their visions from influence by others and making their ideas comprehensible and reasonably persuasive to others—a necessity for those visions to bear real fruit.[33]

Modern psychology

In more-recent psychology, intuition can encompass the ability to know valid solutions to problems and decision making. For example, the recognition primed decision (RPD) model explains how people can make relatively fast decisions without having to compare options. Gary Klein found that under time pressure, high stakes, and changing parameters, experts used their base of experience to identify similar situations and intuitively choose feasible solutions. Thus, the RPD model is a blend of intuition and analysis. The intuition is the pattern-matching process that quickly suggests feasible courses of action. The analysis is the mental simulation, a conscious and deliberate review of the courses of action.[34]

Instinct is often misinterpreted as intuition and its reliability considered to be dependent on past knowledge and occurrences in a specific area. For example, someone who has had more experiences with children will tend to have a better instinct about what they should do in certain situations with them. This is not to say that one with a great amount of experience is always going to have an accurate intuition.[35]

Intuitive abilities were quantitatively tested at Yale University in the 1970s. While studying nonverbal communication, researchers noted that some subjects were able to read nonverbal facial cues before reinforcement occurred.[36] In employing a similar design, they noted that highly intuitive subjects made decisions quickly but could not identify their rationale. Their level of accuracy, however, did not differ from that of non-intuitive subjects.[37]

According to the works of Daniel Kahneman, intuition is the ability to automatically generate solutions without long logical arguments or evidence.[38]

Colloquial usage

Intuition, as a gut feeling based on experience, has been found to be useful for business leaders for making judgement about people, culture and strategy.[39] Law enforcement officers often claim to observe suspects and immediately "know" that they possess a weapon or illicit narcotic substances, which could also be action of instincts.[40] Often unable to articulate why they reacted or what prompted them at the time of the event, they sometimes retrospectively can plot their actions based upon what had been clear and present danger signals. Such examples liken intuition to "gut feelings" and when viable illustrate preconscious activity.[41]

Honours

Intuition Peak in Antarctica is so named "in appreciation of the role of scientific intuition for the advancement of human knowledge."[42]

BOOKS ON SCIENCE

In Search of the 'God Gene'

By John Langone

Nov. 2, 2004

· · "The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-Wired Into Our Genes," by Dr. Dean Hamer. Doubleday, $24.95.

Why, the geneticist-author of this provocative book asks, is spirituality such a powerful and universal force? Why do so many people believe in things they cannot see, smell, taste, hear or touch?

Dr. Dean Hamer, a molecular geneticist, argues persuasively that genes predispose humans to believe that "spirituality is one of our basic human inheritances," and that, indeed, there is a specific individual gene associated with faith. "I propose," he writes, "that spirituality has a biological mechanism akin to birdsong, albeit a far more complex and nuanced one."

Genes, Dr. Hamer adds, do not tell the whole story. Humans' genetic predisposition for spiritual belief is expressed in response to personal experience and the cultural environment, and it is shaped by them.

But the genes, he says, "act by influencing the brain's capability for various types and forms of consciousness, which become the basis for spiritual experiences."

The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired Into Our Genes

Dean Hamer

Doubleday, 2004 256 pp. hardcover, $24.95 ISBN 0-38550-058-0 | ISBN: 0-38550-058-0

Geneticists are the first to admit that genes don't explain everything, and that the most important features of human behavior represent a complex interplay among many genes and the environment. Although we have now learned the most fundamental secrets of the human genome, and understood hundreds of mendelian genetic traits in molecular detail, we have been far less successful in our studies of the traits and genes that are vastly more important from the medical, economic, social and intellectual perspectives. We have been gun-shy when it comes to dealing with questions about how genetics interprets cognitive ability, race, personality and behavior. Once again, National Institutes of Health molecular biologist Dean Hamer fills the gap with a radical treatment of no less than the genetic basis for spirituality.

His book runs the gamut from the nature and measurement of personality traits such as spirituality to the estimation of heritability with twin studies, and on to molecular genetics. It is beautifully written and concisely stated in just over two hundred pages. In Hamer's argument, spiritual experiences and religion are nearly universal human attributes. Hamer measures spirituality on a scale of 'self-transcendence', or the ability to see beyond oneself, a concept first introduced by psychologist Robert Cloninger. He draws a sharp distinction between spirituality, which is a personality trait that some of us have to a greater or lesser extent than others, and religion or belief in a particular god, which is a culturally transmitted expression of spirituality. It might be that some of that variation in spirituality is explained by genetics, although spirituality is probably a complex trait influenced by many genes as well as the environment. If there are genetic influences, ever-more-sophisticated techniques in molecular genetics should be able to tease them out. These genetic factors may have been favored during human evolution because spirituality has some positive effect on the individual's ability to reproduce. Hamer identifies one candidate gene (SLC18A2, also called VMAT2, which encodes vesicular monoamine transporter 2), which controls the transport of key neurochemicals called monoamines and may account for a fraction of the genetic variation in spirituality. In fact, monoamine modulation is the mechanism through which many psychoactive drugs may work and through which some of these drugs (such as psilocybin) might produce intense experiences sometimes described as spiritual or religious.

To be sure, Hamer spends plenty of time on shaky ground. Hamer admits in his introduction that the volume is misnamed; he isn't talking about genes for being a god, but rather about those that predispose us to religion-neutral spiritual beliefs, experiences and interpretations. Spirituality is not controlled by the product of a single gene but is complex, involving many genes, each making a small contribution to the phenotype, combined with a very strong environmental influence. But these days, a title like Environmental and Minor Genetic Influences on Spiritual Behavior doesn't sell books as well as one like The God Gene. Most of the complexities of inheritance are explained with care and accuracy in the book, but Hamer often falls into less-rigorous language for convenience. Unfortunately, the nonrigorous shorthand, such as “God gene”, sticks, facilitating misinterpretation and enraging critics.

The most important words in Hamer's book surely are the last ones, where readers will find a take-home message. Unfortunately, the final pages seem to have a few unintentional slips. For example, “Spirituality is based in consciousness, religion in cognition. Spirituality is universal, whereas cultures have their own forms of religion. I would argue that the most important contrast is that spirituality is genetic, while religion is based on cultures, traditions, beliefs, and ideas. It is, in other words, mimetic.” Well, even the most die-hard genocentrist would say that there are genetic influences that underlie a tendency toward spirituality, not that “spirituality is genetic.” Hamer goes on: “The fact that spirituality has a genetic component implies that it evolved for a purpose.” Although the question of why spirituality might have an evolutionary advantage is an important one, I haven't yet given in to the notion that every base pair of my DNA has some higher purpose.

Although we might like to ignore the strained leap from the laboratory bench to the Ark of the Covenant, a cover story in Time (25 October 2004) has brought the discussion to the general public. As scientists, we have, yet again, a choice between denigrating an idea as so preposterous that it does not merit even a cursory conversation, much less a read, or entering into productive discussion of the idea with people from all walks of life. Religion and spirituality pervade virtually all societies. “It's high time,” says Hamer, “that people with a natural scientific bent get interested.” Were it not for the fervor of Osama bin Laden and his radical cult, America's election might have been dominated by contrasting religious views about the rights of cultured embryonic cells. Perhaps we still have a great deal to learn about the chasms that divide various human constituencies from one another and that threaten to undermine the success of our species on earth. Genetics probably plays but a small part, but we could surely benefit from at least some understanding of that small part. These first preliminary studies seem to suggest that there might be good reason to view spirituality as just another part of the rich genetic and cultural variety that makes us human, and an even better reason to learn to respect and enjoy the full range of that variety.

From mapping genomes to belief in God, at least one scientist has made the connection.

The Bajau people can stay under water for as long as 13 minutes as they hunt for fish and harvest natural objects for crafts. A DNA mutation may be responsible.

These nomadic peoples wander the waterways surrounding the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia and have spleens 50% larger than their mainland counterparts. A large spleen is also characteristic of seals and other water dwelling vertebrates who spend a significant amount of time under water. This startling Bajau characteristic has been attributed to a particular gene variation, as noted in this article from MSN

You might be wondering: Well that is really amazing, but why do we care? And–how did they figure that out?

The answer to the first question is hinted at in the article which suggests this finding may lead to research in hypoxia, a sudden, low oxygen condition which can cause death in emergency situations.

Ok, so there are potential life-saving benefits to understanding the body’s response to low oxygen levels.

But just how do you locate a gene responsible for a larger spleen?? The interesting back story began in 1911, with the first ever gene mapping of the tiny fruit fly Drosophilia (with only 14 genes), but by 1990 gene mapping grew into an international effort to map the entire human genome.

In 2003, the Human Genome Project completed its ambitious goal a full two years ahead of schedule. Identifying 20,000 to 25,000 genes among the 3.1 billion letters of what has been called our DNA instruction book, the completion of this project promised to change our understanding of disease and the practice of medicine in the years to come.

It has, and gene therapy is one outgrowth of that promise. (In case you need a refresher in genetics, you can go here and to learn more about gene therapy go here.)

This international and collaborative project was led by Dr. Francis Collins, MD, PhD. He is also the author of The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.

A former atheist, Dr. Collins describes the origin of his journey to faith at the bedside of his patients. As a committed materialist, he found “no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry”, until he realized he had no answers to questions posed by his patients about the meaning of life and suffering. While seeking answers that his beloved science could not provide, he became convinced that Jesus was a historical person and moreover was inspired by His “astounding” message of loving your neighbor. Since that time, he describes questions people ask about being a scientist and a believer:

So, some have asked, doesn’t your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren’t evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?

His response is unequivocal: “Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers.”

In fact, he states, “I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome.”

Indeed, it should be no surprise that a competent and committed scientist “can be found in the cathedral” as well as in the laboratory!

For the complete article (which contains a link to an interview in which Dr. Collins describes his journey to faith) go here.

Maggie Ciskanik, M.S.

Armed with a B.A. in Philosophy and a minor in science, Ciskanik landed in a graduate nursing program. With the support of her enthusiastic husband, an interesting career unfolded while the family grew: a seven year stint mostly as a neurology nurse, 15 years as a homeschooling mom of six, and a six year sojourn as curriculum developer and HS science teacher (which included teaching students with cognitive differences). These experiences added fuel to her lifelong interest in all things related to God’s creation and the flourishing of the human spirit—which has found a new home on the Magis blog.

Collins: Why this scientist believes in God POSTED: 9:37 a.m. EDT, April 6, 2007

By Dr. Francis Collins Special to CNN

Adjust font size:

Editor's note: Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D., is the director of the Human Genome Project. His most recent book is "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief."

ROCKVILLE, Maryland (CNN) -- I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.

As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan.

I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked "What do you believe, doctor?", I began searching for answers.

I had to admit that the science I loved so much was powerless to answer questions such as "What is the meaning of life?" "Why am I here?" "Why does mathematics work, anyway?" "If the universe had a beginning, who created it?" "Why are the physical constants in the universe so finely tuned to allow the possibility of complex life forms?" "Why do humans have a moral sense?" "What happens after we die?" (Watch Francis Collins discuss how he came to believe in God )

I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that "I know there is no God" emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, "Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative."

But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.

For me, that leap came in my 27th year, after a search to learn more about God's character led me to the person of Jesus Christ. Here was a person with remarkably strong historical evidence of his life, who made astounding statements about loving your neighbor, and whose claims about being God's son seemed to demand a decision about whether he was deluded or the real thing. After resisting for nearly two years, I found it impossible to go on living in such a state of uncertainty, and I became a follower of Jesus.

So, some have asked, doesn't your brain explode? Can you both pursue an understanding of how life works using the tools of genetics and molecular biology, and worship a creator God? Aren't evolution and faith in God incompatible? Can a scientist believe in miracles like the resurrection?

Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.

But why couldn't this be God's plan for creation? True, this is incompatible with an ultra-literal interpretation of Genesis, but long before Darwin, there were many thoughtful interpreters like St. Augustine, who found it impossible to be exactly sure what the meaning of that amazing creation story was supposed to be. So attaching oneself to such literal interpretations in the face of compelling scientific evidence pointing to the ancient age of Earth and the relatedness of living things by evolution seems neither wise nor necessary for the believer.

I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.

0 notes