Again: No Evidence of Evolution In Recent Scientific Discovery

Stick men
Image by ElisaRiva from Pixabay

Fox News reported that paleontologists have discovered fossils of 130 million years old insects. Here is a quote from the report: It also “proves through direct fossil evidence how some morphological traits related to hatching and linked behaviors, at least in insect embryos, have been subject to a high degree of evolutionary conservatism,” according to the study’s abstract. What’s evolutionary conservatism? They are saying that it’s evolution has been conservative. That is, has not happened “much.” This discovery is contrary to evolution.

The Greenland shark: A huge sluggish shark: one of the largest at 21 feet and 2,100lbs and suspected to be able to live up to 300 years. Does not reach sexual maturity until 150 years old. No evidence of evolutions despite being on Earth for @300 million years.

Turtles: No evidence of evolution for millions of years. Really? The current turtle is the best “model” that evolution could come up with? One has to lay hundreds of eggs just so one or two can make it to maturity and, thus, reproduce?

Alligators: No evidence of evolution for millions of years.

Humans: Hit the evolutions jackpot in that they evolved in an improbable, dubious, and impossible short time period.

The alternative? God? So much more, so little time. More to come.

McCain Hero or Pseudo-Hero?

Only a Democrat would disagree with the premise that John McCain spent much of his Senate years undermining the conservative values that his party, Republican, stood for or at least tried to stand for. He was sent to the Senate to fill Barry Goldwater’s shoes, not Nancy Pelosi’s. Goldwater was extremely conservative. It was because of members like McCain that Republicans often– usually–failed. McCain was given a pass because he was a war hero. Americans blindly accept any malfeasants if committed by a “hero.” Does America know that mafia “made-men” also served in WW-II? And some even got medals for their heroism? When these crooks returned to the USA should they have been given a pass on the extortion, loan sharking, bookmaking and more, that they committed upon this return?

Today we learn that the McCain organization actively worked behind the scenes to undermine the democratic principles of the country he served in. He was complicit in the scheme by traitors to overturn the will of the people by defaming President Trump in the hope of impeaching him. FoxNews and a court filing reveal that that contrary to McCain’s perjurious statements, he was sending his agents all over the world to collect information concerning the infamous Steele Dossier and then he provided it surreptitiously to news outlets to be “leaked” to the public. A dossier that all who were involved with it knew was not true. He practiced very poor morals at the least.

Does someone who works contrary to his constituent’s desires and the reasons they sent him to Washington. And then he lies about it, and pays those agents (spies by any other name) to bring down the Party he was supposed to be strengthening. Should he be called a hero? He wore one face publicly while behind the scenes he was the opposite. e

McCain was a darling to the mass media. When it was learned that while he was a POW in Hanoi, and he was offered to be set free and he rejected the offer. The media portrayed it as a heroic gesture by McCain, thus, proving him a hero. Not really. The media neglected to tell their readers that the military code of conduct forbids him from accepting an offer that is not made to all the POW.

Hanoi said the release gesture was because John was the son of a high-ranking officer in the US Navy. This is contrary to all that the communist stand for. Communist are mean, hateful, evil people. They give up nothing out of good will. But we must not read too much into this. The point is that he was not a hero for denying the offer of being freed.

Here is an exception: Hanoi did make the offer to another POW. Before being released he was given the task of memorizing the names of every known POW. He at first refused, he did not want the disgrace of being released early. Upon his release the US Military nearly court marshaled him. He eventually convinced the military that his acceptance of the release was something all the other POWs wanted: It would help to ensure that they would be released at the end of the war.

Finally, there is proof that what most believed about McCain is true. He served his country while in the Navy. Just like millions of others. They were all heroes. McCain’s heroism stopped when he returned. His career and life since is filled with less than honorable occurrences from graduating 894th out of 899 in his academy class, constantly defying authority, breaking rules, and to many–many affairs (he readily admitted to this). One writer correctly listed him as, “the maverick, the former maverick, the curmudgeon, the bridge builder, the war hero bent on transcending the call of self-interest to serve a cause greater than himself, the sore loser, old bull, last lion, loose cannon, happy warrior, elder statesman, lion in winter.”

He was all over the place. One thing he wasn’t is conservative. He did not represent his state well. One final blow of lack of loyalty was when Sarah Palin was not invited to his funeral. McCain, no doubt, requested that before his demise.

Why Guilty For Lying To FBI But Not For Crime Being Investigated?

When one is in the crosshairs of the FBI one doesn’t stand a chance.

All you need to know:
The FBI is not held accountable for their actions and has become a “loose cannon.” If they don’t like you, for any reason, they can terrorize you. The FBI in concert with the Democratic Party attempted a coup to overthrow President Trump’s election results.

Details: We see a lot of people being found guilty of lying to the FBI but not guilty of the crime being prosecuted. This phenomenon of placing one under investigation and then taking a plea deal for lying is all too common with the FBI; it often occurs when the FBI can’t prove the original charge. 

The reason for the success of this tactic is that the FBI does not record any interviews. When they ask the victim a question the only account of both the question and the answer is the written account of the agent. And no, the victim can not record the session either. Often, later in the investigation, the same question is asked, but this time in a different way and the victim will often answer differently. Why? Because the victim may perceive the subject of the question differently than from the first, and thus, answers the new question differently. Then FLASH, the agent produces the first account, in a 302 (the agent’s written report) and shows it to the victim: If offered a plea deal the victim must take it, after all, it is his/her verbal account against the agent’s written one and a lesser sentence versus one for years in prison.

There have been several court cases where a defendant is guilty of the actual crime being investigated, and yet. the judge tosses out the case because there is no recording of statements when the opportunity, by the FBI, was abundantly clear. In this tech-filled world, why would the FBI not record them? Recordings are required in other courts whenever possible; why not hold the FBI to the same standard of excellence that local law enforcement is? 

Yes, of course, the vast rank and file of the FBI are perfectly honorable. Really? How do we know? If they don’t follow commonly accepted practices (of ethics), the same ones that all other law enforcement agencies do, there’s nothing to compare them to. They should at least match the quality being achieved by our smallest police departments.

One infamous event: At the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta GA, Richard Jewel, who was working as a security officer, discovered a suspicious backpack. Thinking it might be a bomb he alerted authorities and he and fellow officers began trying to move the throngs of attendees out of the way. It was a bomb and it detonated before the clearing was finished. One person was killed and over a hundred were injured. Richard was heralded as a hero by all but the FBI. They thought it suspicious that an uneducated common man could be doing his job at that level of excellence. 

A very public investigation was started by the FBI. With the press present, Richard’s house was searched– twice. The FBI said that he matched a profile of a lone bomber who would plant a bomb just to find it and become a hero. Richard obtained a layer, who was an ex-FBI agent.

The FBI was so convinced of his guilt that they approached him, when his attorney was not present, and ask if he would be a part of a training exercise to be used to teach law enforcement personnel. He was flattered. They took Richard to a recording studio and gave him a script to read. In the script, Richard realized he was playing the part of the bomber, not the hero. He questioned this and hesitated. In his script, he was confessing to planting the Olympic bomb. Meanwhile, his attorney was trying to find him and he did find him just before Richard was about to be recorded. The recording was set up to sound as if it was obtained by a wiretap on Richard.  It had to be a wiretap because the FBI doesn’t record statementnts, unless it benefits them.

Eventually, the real bomber was caught and found guilty of this bombing plus three others at different locations. He was a civil terrorist.

Would the FBI send an innocent man to prison just so they could clear a very public crime? On a hunch? Yes, but only because they wrongly thought him guilty. Richard successfully sued three news outlets that went along with the FBI”s leaked lies. He was eventually acknowledged as a hero and was very popular. He went from certainly going to prison to a career in law enforcement.  It is very probable that the FBI agents were never punished, the FBI won’t tell.

The upper Escalon of this FBI, in concert with the Democratic Party, attempted nothing less than a silent coupe. Had Hillary won the presidency democracy, as a true democracy, would have died in the USA. We have had major security breaches and crimes committed by Democrats who are then given a pass while the tiniest tweet by President Trump is heavily investigated. There can be no argument to the fact that the FBI attempted to overthrow the Republican Party. When candidate Trump said to the press that his campaign was being wiretapped the main-stream media, and even myself, thought him over-dramatic. The media blasted him. Who would wiretap a US Presidential Candidate? After all, this isn’t Russia. 

What a shock to find out that our own FBI WAS wiretapping Trump. That they sent in a mole to try to entrap his campaign. The FBI and the media just couldn’t believe that they could fail in doing this, but they did. While Trump isn’t perfect he has proven himself to be much more honest than the deep-state Washington DC types. The FBI as it is today must be, in effect, overthrown. It requires someone in charge that will clean house. I personally I still have a wait and see position on that.

Liberals have openly claimed that they will overthrow the government. Huh? When did they say that? In the ’60s the communist supported radicals said they would slowly infiltrate the government, and our institutions of education, and overthrow it before the public caught on. The current FBI and Democratic Party are the proof it is working. Oh, and just one more tidbit; John Brennon, director of the CIA under Obama, was a card carrying communist. Before joining the CIA he wondered if his support and vote for the communist presidential candidate, in the election just before he applied to the CIA, would derail his security clearance by the CIA. It didn’t. It appears it enhanced his career, thus, we had a communist as the director of the CIA.