RSS Output
French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Gab@StFerdinandIII - Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands.  Cults everywhere:  Islam, the State, the cult of Gay and Queer, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, 'Science', Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion....a nice variety for the human-hater, amoral, anti-rationalist to choose from.  It is so much fun mocking them isn't it ?

Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death 

Archive - June 2021

Not one single experiment or observation proves Evolution, abiogenesis, or life from chance

Where is the PROOF?

Bookmark and Share


Richard Dawkins, a non-scientist, metaphysician and rhetorician [where exactly are his 'experiment's proving lemurs became humans?]; admitted that life originating by chance was impossible: “If the odds of life originating spontaneously on a planet were a billion to one against …” [in the God Delusion, p. 138, maybe he needs to write an autobiography entitle the Dawkins Delusion and its Raving mad Rhetoric....]


A single billion to one is only 1 in 10 to the 9th power. It is quite impossible. However, Dawkins is wrong, he underestimates the improbability of life from dead matter, or for that matter, the arrangement of proteins through luck and chaos. The average protein length is 150 to 200 or so amino acids, wired together with specified information and functionality. There are 300 amino acids to choose from, with 20 being the most used.


The probability of even one single protein molecule consisting of 200 amino acids arising spontaneously by chance is 1 in 10 raised to power of 260. This is calculated by raising 20 (the number of different types of amino acids available) to the power of 200 (the number of amino acids in the protein chain). 20260 is more atoms than exist in the universe. Even if the entire universe was filled with nothing but amino acids, you would not form one single protein – ever.


But for the math-challenged cult of Evolution it gets worse. Proteins are 'made' by genes in the cell, specifically a manufacturing process involving DNA [the software], RNA, and Ribosomes. All are needed to be present together. All are interdependent.



·        The average human gene consists of 3000 nucleotide bases, but sizes vary greatly, with the largest known human gene being dystrophin at 2.4 million bases [how did this complexity form by chaos or 'selection', selecting from what?]


·     The total number of human genes is estimated at 20,000 [show one experiment where one gene was 'created' from mutations and chaos?]


·   The human genome has some 3 billion DNA base pairs ! [3 billion by chance?]


·      The arrangement of all proteins in a cell is called a proteome, which changes from minute to minute in response to tens of thousands of intra- and extracellular environmental signals. A protein’s chemistry and behavior are specified by the gene sequence and by the number and identities of other proteins made in the same cell at the same time and with which it associates and reacts. [How did this arise by time and mutations?]


·        Finally, It is estimated that the human body may contain over two million different proteins, each with a unique function. It may be as high as 10 million [we don't know for sure].


Evolution has not proven that the above factors appeared together by chance, working and functioning in complete harmony. In fact, Evolution has nothing to say about any of the constituent components be it DNA, or proteomes, or amino acids, let alone the complex entirety of the composition. Evolution has no explanation at all, of how dead matter, or 'nothing', would have created this vast inter-related nano world of technological prowess. Not one single experiment, observation or even common-sense proof is offered. Nothing.


Science fiction is not science. Neither is Evolution which offends basic mathematical and bio-chemical laws.


From the Enlightenment to Communism, Nazism, Ronaism.

Atheism and the cults of death.

Bookmark and Share


Darwin's “survival of the fittest” ideas powerfully shaped the belief systems of mass murderers like Hitler, Trotsky, and Stalin.


Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) endorsed a program in Germany to breed a superior race. The scheme was based on a horrific evolutionary theory called “eugenics” that was founded by Charles Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton. The idea of eugenics was to improve humanity using principles promoted in the theory of evolution.


The idea was simple: partition the human race into two groups, the “fit” and the “unfit.” Eugenics seemed to be a way to make sure the “fit” had children and the “unfit” did not. In Germany, the leaders of the eugenics movement got monstrous laws enacted that allowed sterilization of people regarded as “unfit,” and restriction of immigrants who were supposedly “biologically inferior.” (The United States and other countries enacted similar laws, but the Nazis took it to the extreme when Jews, blacks, and others were ruthlessly murdered to prop up the theory.)


The German people were being seduced to accept that they could be the “master race” by exterminating the “unfit.” If evolution was right, they reasoned, and “survival of the fittest” was merely a positive, evolutionary process, then what could be wrong with hastening the deaths of the “unfit”?


Eugenics could only become popular because the theory of evolution seemed to have quashed the need for the sovereign Creator, God, who had given humankind absolute moral laws. When you do away with moral laws, outrageous racism and crimes like compulsory sterilization, Hitler's death camps, and mass murder on a maniacal scale can no longer be said to be evil.


Trotsky … another monster brainwashed by evolution

He confiscated food from peasants, brutalized the Ukrainian army of insurgent peasants, and killed its guerrilla leader, N. I. Makhno.


He inflicted torture and violence against Christians, mercilessly trashed churches, and led the Society of the Godless to get rid of religion.


Trotsky was mesmerized by Charles Darwin's Origin of Species. He said: “Darwin stood for me like a mighty doorkeeper at the entrance to the temple of the universe.” He said that Darwin's ideas “intoxicated” him. And he could not understand in the slightest how belief in God could find room in the same head as belief in Darwin's ideas.


Like Hitler, Trotsky was a tyrant who saw Darwin's theory of evolution as scientific justification for dismissing God's moral laws. He clearly saw that the two ideas, God and evolution, were totally incompatible. His atrocities were consistent with this belief, for when you do away with the idea of the God who created you and who has given instructions for the right way to live, there is no reason to avoid despicably violent crimes. Even if this means murdering everyone who disagrees with you.


World's worst mass-murderer was influenced by Darwin at 19

Russian dictator and revolutionist, Joseph Stalin (1879-1953), was studying at Tiflis Theological Seminary when he started to read the works of Charles Darwin. One of his friends later said in a book that when Stalin read Darwin, he became an atheist. The theological seminary expelled Stalin at the age of 19 because of his revolutionary connections.



What it all means

None of these ‘thinkers’, these mass-murdering, pathologically and psychologically diseased half-wits, ever worked.  None created or built.  None prayed.  None considered the immaterial, the moral, the emotional or the non-physical to be important.  Not one believed in humanity, human nature, or the complexity of human existence.  Not one cared about human life.  All were demonic. 


Nazism, Communism, Medical Fascism or ‘Ronaism’, is of course the inevitable output of ‘Enlightenment’-materialist theology.  The Enlighteners and their offspring, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Hitler, the current corpus of medical Fascists, is reductionist.  They reduce human life to symbols and numbers, 20.000 genes, a trillion cells, a GDP output, a consumer of x litres per annum of carbon energy, a tax number contributing y dollars per annum in taxes, a potential virus host and spreader who could infect and kill z number of others and is thus a risk that must be neutralised if not eliminated, given that Gaia can only house a certain number of the animal named human. 


For the Enlighteners killing millions means nothing.  Thieving, murdering, plundering, debasing and humiliating humans is of no importance.  Since no higher order exists, since truth is optional, since life is simply random molecules and chance; no framework other than that power and might should exist, using ‘reason’ or ‘science’, or ‘dialecticism’, or ‘evolution’, or ‘phase theories’, or ‘a virus crisis’ as the theological principle and absolute.  Absolutism is the natural outcome of the Enlightenment.





THE Enlightenment and the erasure of Homo Sapiens

I Jab, therefore I will be not.

Bookmark and Share



The cult of Science, or Scientism is a direct derivative of THE ‘Enlightenment’.  The cult of reason leads to a Technocratic elite, in which an elite decides on THE definition of reason, THE single narrative to explain a hypothesis or data set; THE only way to view current or past activities, THE accepted manner of group think.  The self-evident and critical flaw in the philosophe of THE ‘Age of Reason’ is that the entire structure of the cult, indeed its own hypothesis that somehow ‘reason’ is an obvious object of truth, plain to all, is a fallacy and shallow minded. 


The very word ‘reason’ itself is never defined by THE Enlighteners, and since it is obvious that reason is mostly contextual, intensely and often personal and specific, and that objective truth is often over-shadowed by other factors of culture, viewpoint, the immaterial, the emotional and perhaps even the irrational; there can never be ONE answer as to what constitutes reason, or even ONE answer as to what composes an object and its function.  It is entirely valid that more than ONE ‘reasonable’ process, analysis and answer constitutes a ‘reasoned’ view.  The interpretative reality of real-world experience is lost on THE Enlighteners.  The complexity of human interpretation is ignored.  An idea is always based on subjectivity, as is the hypothesis and by definition a conclusion formed by that hypothesis.  ‘Reasonability’ has many forms, and truth can often be many-sided.


The French Revolution and its ‘Church of Reason’, born from THE Enlightenment, which slaughtered millions through strife and war; was as unreasonable as its offspring materialism which easily passed into Nazism based on Evolution and racism, as well as Communism premised on the settled science of socialist-phase theories).  We now have Medical Fascism, based on ‘science’ we are told, and ‘reason’ built on ‘data’, guiding the implementation of Totalitarian systems to deal with a Coronavirus, which is no deadlier than the average flu. 


This descent into Medical Fascism merged with Green Nazism or Communism is an inevitable by-product of THE Enlightenment.  Wittgenstein and Heidigger provide detailed and apposite criticisms on what the cult of Reason will lead to, namely an unreasonable dictatorship of power.  Central to both Wittgenstein and Heidigger’s critique is that the de-humanising aspect of THE Enlightenment, leads to a theocracy of ‘science’ or scientism.  Political-social order changes from being concerned with the totality of existence, to viewing humans as simple math symbols, unmoored from culture, heritage, faith, experience or emotions. Given that ‘reason’ must be uber-alles, Humans eventually must become math symbols, at best, producers of economic output, or at worst, just a virus.  For THE Enlightenment life itself is only concerned with material and mathematical facts, and the application of objective reason. The problem is that reason and reality are often entirely objective.  There never is only ONE reason. 


Corona fascism and tyranny is easily viewed in the long duration of history as an inevitable by-product of THE Age of ‘Reason’.   Every action, thought, deed and death is at the mercy of THE experts, THE technocracy, THE elite who apply reason to the entire cycle of life.


Medieval era: Humans are unique, special made in the image of God. We have a purpose. Reason is personal, open to interpretation.


Enlightenment: Humans are just another animal often devoid of reason, steeped in superstition. There is only ONE right think and that is naturalist rationality.  Reason is entirely declarative and obvious.


Materialism: Humans share traits and functions with other animals, humans are not unique, maybe even poorly designed.


Rationalism: Humans are simply 20 K genes, and 3 million genomic base pairs of info. We can edit this software for the benefit of all.


Post Modernism: Humans are a virus killing Gaia, we need to eliminate most of the human virus and change the software to a new version.


Transhumanism/eugenics: Humans need to be rebuilt using technology to change the genome and transforming the human into a machine.


Polanyi and the Atheist Philosopher Kuhn say much the same thing. ONE reason, to rule them all. Only ONE Rona narrative that you must follow. There can never be alternative intepretations or solutions. Never.


In the long duration of history, what is the end-goal of Globalism and its anti-human animus?  The end goal is to end homo sapiens and develop a new technological hybrid.


‘The’ Enlightenment and Scientism and the cult of non-Science

Not much rationality in the demands of the 'Rationalists'.

Bookmark and Share


There is precious little ‘Science’ in the cult of Scientism.  There is plenty of darkness in ‘The’ Enlightenment (roughly 1650-1750), as if there was only ‘one’ era in history which saw an increase in ‘scientific’ understanding, or technological application.  As if this ‘Era’, and this one alone, stood up, self-standing, a monolith with no prior dependencies or influences, a stand-alone century or two, independent of culture and heritage, supremely alone, an ‘Age’ which burst through the rotted timbers of all things past, rendering what was existing and previous as irrelevant, dark, dank, sordid and superstitious.  This is what the propaganda, shrill, sterile, simple and stupid, screams.  None of it is true.


The ineluctable conclusion of ‘Enlightenment’ thought is Totalitarianism.  The main objective of the Enlightenment era if one reads the Philosophes, Jefferson, the ridiculous Voltaire, the American founders, Locke, Hume et al, is simply this:  there is only ONE rational current of acceptable thought that must be implemented, with all legacies, cultures and religious immaterialism expunged and ignored.  Only one rational interpretation or ‘right think’ can be allowed.  There can only be one narrative.  One interpretation of data.  One expression of social control.  One uniformity of culture and attitudes.  One definition of science.  One imperative.  Only one idea which is protected that of the one rationalism.  Nothing else is tolerated.  We see this Totalitarian Scientism most clearly expressed in the cults of Evolution (bacteria grew brains), Warming (trace chemical produced by climate causes the same), and Corona (for a 0.3% virus death rate you must be Stabbed with experimental drugs, since your immune system does not really exist). 


The problem for the Enlighteners, expressed by many critical thinkers as diverse as Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Russell Kirk, C.S. Lewis and Nietzsche (amongst many others), was the core of their cult, namely: ‘what is reason, what is the correct definition of reason, what is rational inquiry and how does one know that there is only one ‘reason’, one ‘rationalism’, if true critical inquiry will present many?’ 


The question over ‘right reason’ was never answered by the Enlighteners.  They simply expressed ‘reason’ as some independent, abstract legal entity, a constant, almost a product, to be understood by all, and available to all to be reused in various patterns, consistent in its core and design.  In essence, the Enlighteners and their progeny have never bothered to prove or consider the core of their cult, namely, why is there only one philosophical and material rationalism?  Wouldn’t many exist, based on experience, viewpoints, context and desired outcomes?  If there is only ‘One’ rationalism, wouldn’t that limit inquiry, science and technological application?  Wouldn’t that lead to technocracy and statism based on the ‘One’ narrative?


What about the immaterial, the cultures of heritage, faith, virtues, morality, emotions and non-material objects and values?  Does the immaterial have no role to play in the intersection of a person with his/her reality?  Wouldn’t denying the immaterial offend the very notion of being human?  By denying the immaterial isn’t ‘The Enlightenment’ anti-human?  Doesn’t the cult of Reason as expressed in the Atheist French Revoluion reduce a person to a rational mathematical symbol, part of an equation, unimportant in herself or himself, just part of a process which must support ‘rationalism’, itself never defined as an idea which comports with reality?  Are you really just a mathematical expression or a GDP producer?  Is that all life means?


When you elevate the absurdity of ‘The Enlightenment’ with its many flaws and failures (abiogenesis, witch burnings, book burning, massive thefts of treasure, wars etc); as the ‘One’ model to emulate and follow, the inevitable outcome will be Totalitarianism.  Far from being ‘diverse’, ‘tolerant’, or ‘proud of constituent parts’, the modern technocratic state is fascistic, control-obsessed, intolerant of dissenting opinions and beliefs, dismissive of counter-narratives, murderous in implementing its ‘One’ model, its ‘One’ program of ‘right think’ and ‘group think’ in which all must conform to and accept.  Ironically, the end result of ‘The’ Enlightenment is Darkness.


The Worshipping of the Cult of Science leads ineluctably to Rona Fascism

Anti-Science, Anti-Reality

Bookmark and Share


An excellent compendium and summary of the Rona Medical Fascism and attendant hysteria – long planned with dry runs in 2009 and 1976.  It is a rounding error disease; it affects a small subset of the elderly; masks are useless as protection; the jabs are killing, maiming and injuring and do nothing to stop transmission or even reduce symptoms.


COVID-19 is a disease defined by symptoms and not a virus. It’s therefore not transmitted nor can you test for it using nasal or throat testing kits. SARS-CoV-2 is the coronavirus that prompted the worldwide pandemic response.


In at least 80% of cases, the virus produces either no symptoms or a mild cold-like illness. The infection fatality rate for COVID-19 is 0.15%-0.2%. This brings it close to seasonal flu which is around 0.1%-0.2%.


·       Children have a greater chance of being struck by lightning than dying of COVID-19.

·       Adults are more likely to die in a car accident.

·       Most of the population have no risk of dying from COVID-19. Studies show that 99.94% survive COVID-19 and will be resistant for a long time. The QCovid risk calculator from Oxford University can be used to calculate your risk of death or hospitalisation.


The people at risk from COVID-19 are clearly defined and should be protected with targeted measures. Children are not susceptible to it nor do they transmit the virus.


However, COVID-19 can be deadly for older and vulnerable people so it’s important to protect them. This will help eliminate hospital overcrowding. Nevertheless, the average age of someone who dies from COVID-19 is around 82 years. This is higher than the average life expectancy in the UK which is around 81 years.


Lockdowns will prevent population immunity and prolong the problem. Isolating the vulnerable and allowing the remaining population to practice safe distancing has been a historically proven way of dealing with flu-like viruses.

Fear instilled by panic and hysteria in the media is causing more people to die. Many are refusing to seek medical care because they are afraid to leave their homes. Others have not received proper medical care because of new procedures put in place.


There is no strong medical evidence that face masks prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19. This is even stated in government guidelines for businesses.


COVID-19 style social distancing has little to do with the historically proven practice of isolating sick people. There is no scientific evidence that these measures prevent the spread of the disease.