Header 1

Our future, our universe, and other weighty topics


Friday, December 31, 2021

Sociobiology Was a Flop, but Socially Constructed Biology Went Viral

Many years ago biologist E.O. Wilson came up with a theory he called sociobiology, a theory he presented in a 697-page 1975 book with the pretentious title Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Wilson defined sociobiology as "the study of the biological basis of all social behavior," making an incredibly dubious claim by using such a definition. Sociobiology was basically the idea that genes largely determine behavior.  Wilson came up with the idea after studying the complex social behavior of insects such as ants. We can imagine the thinking of a materialist ant biologist, maybe something along these lines:

"Ants have all these complex behaviors, and they don't seem to learn them at all. It can't be something they think of, because their brains are so tiny. So it must be their genes. Genes must control behavior!"

But the idea that genes control behavior should seem nonsensical to anyone familiar with what a gene is. A gene is a tiny part of a DNA molecule. A particular gene gives the sequence of amino acids that make up the polypeptide chain that is kind of the starting point of a protein molecule. Can we say that a particular gene specifies a protein molecule? That is not quite right, because genes seem to have no specification at all of the complex shape of a protein molecule.  

Here is a good analogy for the situation. Imagine I specify a sequence of characters such as "UYUEEIBUIBAWWIRBIAWUBW," Opening a box of Alpha Bits cereal, you find a matching set of letters. Using thread, you make these letters into a chain, rather like a chain of beads.  You then shape this chain-like structure into some very distinctive 3D shape, like some origami structure.  Did my original string of characters specify the final origami structure? No, my sequence of characters only specifies part of that final structure, which sequence of letters it used. Similarly, a gene seems to specify only the amino acid sequence of a protein molecule, not its 3D shape. The genetic code used by genes is something capable only of specifying amino acids, not complex shapes built from amino acids.  How the complex 3D shapes of protein molecules arise is an unsolved mystery in biology, called the protein folding problem. 


protein folding

Now, if a gene is so limited that it does not even specify the 3D shape of a protein molecule, what can we say about claims that genes specify anatomical structures or that genes determine social behaviors? Simply that they are laughable falsehoods. 

A gene is part of a DNA molecule, and DNA molecules do not and cannot specify the anatomy of any organism.  The claim that DNA is a blueprint or recipe for making an organism is a falsehood that many biologists have stated, for ideological reasons (because such a claim is convenient for advancing Darwinist dogma).  At the post here you can read the statements of more than twenty biology experts who state that DNA is neither a blueprint nor a recipe nor a program for building organisms.  DNA not have anything like a specification for building organisms, and does not have any anatomical information. Even if DNA had such information, it would not explain morphogenesis (the progression from a speck-sized human egg to a full-grown adult body), simply because blueprints don't build things. Blueprints are things read by intelligent agents such as construction workers, who use the blueprints to build complex things. There is nothing in the human body below the neck capable of reading instructions for building a human body if they happened to exist in DNA (instructions that would be vastly more complex than construction blueprints for building a house or an office tower). 

As for the claim that genes specify social behavior, it is even more nonsensical than the claim that genes specify how to build organisms. Consisting only of a nucleotide sequence specifying a sequence of amino acids, a gene can no more specify social behavior than a mouse can specify a plan for interstellar travel.  To try to back up his claims, Wilson appealed to a controversial doctrine of group selection, which many other evolutionists such as Dawkins and Pinker denounced as rubbish.  The bitter feud over whether group selection exists is a civil war within Darwinism, one that is rarely mentioned to the general public so that the idea of a unified front can be presented. 

In a recent interview,  probably his last, Wilson (who recently died)  spoke very falsely about the success level of his theory of sociobiology. He states, "I think sociobiology is now well-accepted." We can do some preprint server queries to show how untrue this claim is. Searching on the main biology preprint server for biology paper titles using the word "sociobiology," I find zero matches. Conversely, a search for papers with "synaptic plasticity" in their title finds 131  matches. Searching on the main biology preprint server for biology paper titles using the word "sociobiology" in their abstracts, I find only 3 matches. Conversely, a search for papers with "synaptic plasticity" in their abstracts or titles finds 633 matches.

Doing the same searches on the main physics preprint server (which includes quantitative biology papers),  a search for papers using the term "sociobiology" gives zero matches, but a search for papers using the term "synaptic plasticity" finds 73 matches. A search on the same server for papers using "sociobiology" in their abstracts returns only 4 matches. Conversely, a search for papers with "synaptic plasticity" in their abstracts finds 251 matches.

So the sociobiology theory of Wilson was clearly a flop, and when Wilson claimed in the recent interview that his sociobiology theory is "well-accepted," he was making a bogus claim. But in a strange example of boot-licking fawning, the Vox page with the interview of Wilson hails him as a "legendary figure," one "who's considered a modern Darwin." Of course, the interview is all softball questions, like 99% of interviews of scientists these days.  Nowadays when science journalists interview scientists, they act like North Korean journalists interviewing government officials. 

Sociobiology as presented by Wilson was bunk, because there is no "biological basis of all social behavior" and there is not even a biological basis for half or a third of social behavior. But there is an intersection of the social and the biological that is all too real: the fact that some of the most important claims of today's biologists are socially constructed claims. 

We may distinguish between two general types of claims: empirically mandated claims and socially constructed claims. An empirically mandated claim is one that is forced on us by observations.  An example of an empirically mandated claim is the claim that sharks exist.  We are forced to believe that because so many have reported seeing sharks. 

A socially constructed claim, on the other hand, is one that people were never forced to make by observations, but a claim that people started to make largely because making the claim had benefits for one or more social groups, and a claim that people continued to make largely because of factors such as social contagion, the influence power of long-standing social organizations,  and group conformity pressure.  Modern biology is dominated by two socially constructed claims: the Darwinist claim that all species arose because of accidental biological effects,  and the claim that all of the main mental phenomena are produced by the brain. 

It is rather easy to make a crude sketch of the social construction of such ideas. There appeared an overconfident authority (Darwin) who did not even understand a hundredth of the incredibly complex organization  of human bodies (not yet discovered in his time);  and he taught a "this explains it all" theory so simple it can be written on the back of a postcard. Such a person was put on a pedestal, just as a hundred previous overconfident thinkers were put on pedestals by social communities that wanted a nice, simple explanation.  There was a group of people (atheists) yearning for some explanatory story that would allow them to avoid believing in anything higher than themselves, and these people jumped eagerly to embrace a modern day creation myth purporting to explain biological origins as accidental occurrences.  Claiming to understand origins mysteries a thousand miles over their little heads, professors yearning to portray themselves as  Grand Lords of Explanation jumped on this bandwagon of social contagion, starting to claim they understood the great mystery of biological origins, just as a thousand previous priests or preachers or visionaries or doctrinaires had portrayed  themselves as Grand Lords of Explanation with some glorious special insight. Millions started to believe the nice simple claims that humans arose merely because of random mutations, and that all mental phenomena come from the brain and that memories are stored in brains, largely because people like nice simple explanations, and people like to look up reverently to authorities (whether priests, presidents or professors) who have been put on pedestals and who claim to have simple answers to long-standing mysteries.  In an effect that is sometimes called "compliance," very many with no natural inclination to believe such ideas reluctantly started to endorse them,  to "fit in" and because they were afraid of being labeled as nonconformists.  Such people were like those in the 1950's who hated to dress up with neckties and put on hats before departing to go to their office jobs, but who did so anyway every weekday because of the power of social conformity effects.  Back in the 1950's almost all men would wear ties and hats when going to office jobs, so everyone thought, "I've got to dress like everyone else is dressing."  And nowadays people parrot very dubious and unproven dogmas of biology, thinking, "I've got to explain like the others are explaining."

If Wilson had been a wise man, after spending so much time studying very complex purposeful behavior in ants and honeybees, he would have concluded that such very complex purposeful behavior could not have come from their very tiny brains, and he might have counted this as a reason for thinking that minds do not come from brains (many such reasons exist).  Instead he unwisely  concluded that the behavior of such insects must be caused by genes, things that merely specify low-level chemical information, and cannot specify complex purposeful behavior. 

Monday, December 27, 2021

When a Court Case Was Won by Mind Reading

In 2016 I wrote a post lamenting the miserably bad coverage of the paranormal that has long occurred in the pages of the New York Times.  At some time in the twentieth century, the New York Times seemed to turn into a kind of Pravda for materialists.  Pravda was an ideologically-driven paper that was one of the two main party organs of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, from 1912 (before the formation of the Soviet Union) until 1991 (when the Soviet Union broke up). During that period of nearly eighty years, a Communist in Moscow would pick up his daily edition of Pravda, and be almost invariably reassured that the world was working just exactly the way a Moscow Communist would expect it to work. The paper very rarely reported facts or reports clashing with the belief system or expectations of Communists; and in the rare cases when such things were reported, they were mentioned in such a biased way that the Communist faith of the reader would never be shaken. 

For many decades the New York Times has reported in a similar way in its treatment of the paranormal. It has seemed to follow the policy of never publishing stories that caused a dogmatic materialist to question his assumptions about the way the world works.  Evidence of this can be found by using a search phrase of "parapsychology site:www.nytimes.com" with the Google search engine.  The first ten results are all from before 1986. The next ten results are all from before the year 2000. 

When we finally get (in the 30th search result) the first link to something in the New York Times other than an obituary written in the past twenty years and dealing with parapsychology, it is a poison-pen piece inaccurately defaming parapsychology research and unreasonably calling its researchers and subjects "shallow."   The book review discusses an excellent 500-page book detailing at great length a host of evidence for the paranormal, very much of it very good scientific evidence produced under controlled lab conditions by prestigious authorities.  

The reviewer (a person with no substantial writings on the topic of the paranormal or parapsychology)  is allowed to dismiss the book's very weighty evidence on the grounds that "none of the experiments described in 'Phenomena' struck me as scientific," which is a very impressionistic, unscientific statement. After making unsubstantiated insinuations that the testers were credulous dupes,  the reviewer most inaccurately states that there were no "efforts to replicate results," which is very false (very many of the results described in the book were well replicated).  It sounds very much like the reviewer didn't even read the book being reviewed, or how could he have made so large an error? The writer gives as his main evidence against paranormal phenomena the fact that he spent lots of some rich person's money searching for paranormal results without finding anything that convinced him, on the grounds that they could be duplicated by magicians (a factor that is irrelevant when you are testing subjects that you have made sure are not using any of the fancy mechanical and electronic equipment of magicians). Of course, given a sufficiently skeptical observer with enough hatred for those who make claims of the paranormal (someone like the reviewer), a negative result will always be claimed no matter what was observed. It's just the kind of book review we would expect to get in a paper that has for decades served as a kind of Pravda for materialists. 

The New York Times has in recent years published some noteworthy articles on UFO sightings, but such articles should not cause us to regard this as much of any change of attitude at the paper. You can be a die-hard materialist unreasonably denying the mountain of evidence for psi phenomena, and still believe that Earth is being visited by spaceships from other solar systems. The "kneel before the high priests of academia" attitude of the New York Times is often shown in its science articles, where unfounded dogmas, groundless speculations, poorly designed experiments and poorly-established boasts of professors tend to be treated with reverent credulity.  There are very good reasons for thinking that some of the most important claims made in the Science section of the New York Times are untrue (reasons which may be found by reading other posts of mine). 

If we consider its coverage of the saving of Lily Groesbeck, we can find an illustrative typical example of the "don't tell materialists anything that might upset them" policy that seems to be in effect at the New York Times.   About 10:30 PM on March 6, 2015, a car carrying Lynn Groesbeck and her 18-month-old daughter Lily flipped over and crashed into the bottom of a small river. Apparently the mother was killed by the impact, but her daughter survived. Strapped into her toddler car seat, the toddler hung upside down in the overturned car. About 14 hours later an angler noticed the car, and called the police.

Three police officers and a fireman arrived. They reported hearing a voice coming from the car. “The four of us heard a distinct voice coming from the car,” officer Jared Warner told CNN. “To me, it didn't sound like a child's voice.”

"It felt like I could hear someone telling me, 'I need help,' " Officer Bryan DeWitt told CNN affiliate KSL. "It was very surreal, something that I felt like I could hear."

Tyler Beddoes, a third officer on the scene said this to CNN: "All I know is that it was there, we all heard it, and that just helped us to push us harder, like I say, and do what we could to rescue anyone inside the car.”

Upon opening the car, the officers found the mother had suffered severe trauma, and was apparently dead. By all indications she died when the overturned car plunged into the river. The child was “definitely unconscious and not responsive," says Warner. The 18-month-old child, thankfully, survived and was reported to be in good health.

The question is: how could such a voice have been heard, when the mother was dead, and the child unconscious? We have here a dramatic incident of great interest, a seemingly paranormal event. The CNN article on the saving of Lily Groesbeck gave us the officer quotes above, which were later corroborated by a dramatic head-cam video that I saw on www.youtube.com, but which is no longer available there.  In the video the officers speak just exactly as if they were hearing a voice urging them on to save the child. 

But what did we read in the New York Times article on the amazing event? The New York Times article merely mentioned that a baby had been saved, without telling us anything about the mysterious voice urging on the officers.  The paranormal part of the story was apparently censored or suppressed by the New York Times. 

And so it is, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year, and decade after decade at the New York Times. Objective attempts to measure how many people have paranormal experiences produce very substantial percentages.  To thousands of people this question was once put: "Have you ever, when believing yourself to be completely awake, had a vivid impression of seeing or being touched by a living being or inanimate object, or of hearing a voice, which impression, so far as you could discover, was not due to any external physical cause?" Of the 27,339 replies to this question  3,266 answered in the affirmative. A signficant fraction of the human population seems to have out-of-body experiences (about 10% to 20% according to the surveys listed here).  In a survey of 300 students and 700 non-student adults in  Charlottesville, Virginia  (not at all a hotbed of New Age thinking), the result was more than half of the respondents claimed an extraordinary ESP experience.  We live in a world in which psychic phenomena and paranormal events are extremely common, with a very substantial fraction of the population experiencing or reporting them. But you would never know that from reading the pages of the New York Times.  

It was not always that way. Long ago, rather than seeming to follow a motto of "all the news that won't shake the cherished beliefs of a certain class of people,"  the New York Times actually lived up to its motto of "all the news that's fit to print." When a psychic demonstrated ESP in a court room in 1915, the New York Times was not afraid to report what happened. 

Here is the report published in the New York Times in 1915, as quoted in the interesting 1951 book Second Sight in Daily Life, written by an author (W.H. W. Sabine) providing many first-hand examples of ESP and precognition:

"W. Bert Reese, whose 'mind reading' demonstrations have mystified many scientists, including Thomas A. Edison and Dr. William Hanna Thompson, author of Brain and Personality, was discharged yesterday by Judge Rosalsky in General Sessions on his appeal from a conviction by Magistrate Barlow of disorderly conduct, under a section dealing with fortune telling. Reese convinced Judge Rosalsky, Assistant District Attorneys Bostwick and Flint, and two reporters by demonstrations in court that he was not a disorderly person, but a man with apparently unusual powers." 

"Reese was arrested at 230 West 99th Street on February 26 on complaint by Detective Adele Priess, who said she had paid him $5 to have her fortune told. Reese denied that he had told her fortune or accepted any money. He was found guilty and held in $1,000 bonds to keep the peace for one year."

"When his case came before Judge Rosalsky yesterday on appeal, Reese asked permission to demonstrate his abilities to the court. He told Judge Rosalsky to write something on each of three pieces of paper, and to fold them so that he might not be able to read what had been written. Judge Rosalsky put the papers in different pockets after he had mixed them up so that he could not distinguish them himself. Then Judge Rosalsky produced one of the folded papers and pressed it against Reese's forehead." 

" 'You ask me how much money you have in a certain bank,' he said. 'Fifteen dollars is the answer.' Judge Rosalsky admitted that the answer was correct and produced the second piece of paper. 'This piece contains the name of one of your old school teachers Miss O'Connor,' Reese said. The third question, which he read correctly but did not answer, was: 'What was the rule in Shelley's case?' " 

"Reese performed similar demonstrations for the benefit of Mr. Bostwick, Mr. Flint, and the reporters. His last feat was to give the maiden name of the mother of one of the reporters. All the questions were written on General Sessions stationery, which Judge Rosalsky supplied." 

" 'I do not consider you a disorderly person,' Judge Rosalsky said, when the demonstrations were finished. 'You are honorably discharged." 

The book by Sabine says this about Reese (the man who prevailed in the court case):

"Reese was repeatedly tested by scientific men under their own conditions, and satisfied them of his supernormal powers. Schrenck-Notzing [a physician] described him as the most extraordinary man of the day, and his demonstration to judge, lawyers and reporters amply bears that out." 

The New York Times allows us to search its archives, but wants you to pay for any articles you read from such archives. Using its archive search facility without paying anything, I can find the headline below, which corroborates that the book quote from the New York Times is an accurate one:

Newspaper report of mind reading

One of the skills in question was an inexplicable ability to describe contents hidden in sealed envelopes or closed boxes. In the nineteenth century such an ability was demonstrated countless times in public exhibitions, and also documented at length by distinguished writers, as discussed here and here. Evidence for such an ability is also to be found abundantly in the twentieth century (see here for example or the post here describing a very similar ability).  There is a mountain of good evidence for the reality of telepathy, much of it gathered at universities under good experimental protocols (see here for example).

The fascinating 632-page book "Psychical and supernormal phenomena, their observation and experimentation" by Dr. Paul  Joire is teeming with evidence for paranormal phenomena, and most abundantly documents evidence for telepathy and clairvoyance.  On page 337 we read one of countless cases in the literature of parapsychology in which reliable witnesses describe someone's ability to inexplicably tell what is inside closed boxes or the inner contents of sealed envelopes inside sealed envelopes. A clairvoyant was given a page with two verses, enclosed like this: "there  were  two  envelopes  and  two  sheets  of  paper to  pass  through  before  coming  to  the  sheet  containing  the inscription  to  be  read." One of the envelopes was opaque, and various seals were applied to make sure that the clairvoyant had not opened either of the envelopes. The clairvoyant accurately quoted the verses contained within, which should have been unknown to her by normal sight or hearing:

"Votre  parti  certainement 

Se  tue  par  rassainissement"

The success of this experiment was sworn to by eight distinguished witnesses, including a mayor, a lawyer and a journalist. 

Online the New York Times nowadays is mostly behind a paywall. You can read its headlines at www.nytimes.com, but after reading a few articles a month you will get a prompt that stops you from reading further and asks you to pay for a subscription that costs 52 dollars a year. This at least has the advantage that fewer people are exposed to the paper's biased and often misleading articles and book reviews related to topics of minds, brains, nature, science and spirit. But I hear the paper has pretty good coverage about health, arts, sports, politics, world affairs and local affairs.

Postscript: The book Science and Psychical Phenomena by G. N.M. Tyrrell has a description of an even more careful preparation of a sealed envelope to test clairvoyant reading of its contents. On pages 75-76 we read this

"The mode of preparation of the sealed packet, carried out by Mr. Besterman in his office at the rooms of the Society for Psychical Research in London, was as follows. He took a sheet of paper measuring 93 mm. by 107 mm., and ruled with lines, from a loose-leafed note-book, and drew on it a rough sketch of an ink-bottle, writing in capital letters the words SWAN INK, one on each side of the bottle. Under the word SWAN, which was on the left of the bottle, he drew a blue line, and under the word ink on the other side he drew a red line. Then he folded the paper twice at right angfes, one of the folds running right through the word swan. 'This,' says Mr. Besterman, ‘was placed in a reddish-orange Ensign light-tight envelope (that is not transparent to white light), measuring 94 mm. by 119 mm. This envelope was in turn enclosed in a black Ensign  light-tight envelope, measuring 106 mm. by 130 mm. This black envelope was finally enclosed in a large Manilla envelope doubled in two, and thus measuring 114 mm by 152 mm. Each of these envelopes was closed in a special way and bore private and invisible marks. The outer doubled envelope was, in addition, sealed with surgical tape arranged in a special way and signed by me.' "

On page 77 we read of how the contents of the elaborately sealed packet were almost perfectly identified by the test subject located far away:

"It is a curious fact that M. Ossowiecki’s ‘readings’ did not take the form which suggested that he was actually reading the contents of the packet. Instead, he went backwards in time and described the scene in Mr. Besterman’s office when the packet was being prepared, giving, in fact, certain details about Mr. Besterman’s surroundings and the time of the day when the packet was sealed, and so forth, which could not possibly have been obtained from anything in the packet itself. He then took a pencil and drew an approximation to a bottle with a line on either side of it, adding ‘something written and something red.'  Next, he drew an unmistakable bottle with the letters SWA on the left and the letters IN on the right. Finally, he made a complete drawing of a bottle in the middle of the paper, and the word SWAN on the left and INK on the right, both in capital letters. Some distance below the word SWAN (not immediately underneath it as in the original), he drew a line with his pencil, which he said was red. Actually, in the original, SWAN was underlined in blue and the word INK on the other side of the bottle was underlined in red. But for this mistake, the reproduction was perfect, the shape of the bottle being exact."

The news story below appeared in the Washington Post on September 26, 1958:

"Swindling Charge Dismissed

Mind Reader Tested in Berlin Court Wins Acquittal by his Performance 

By Richard O’Regan 

BERLIN, Sept. 25, (AP)—Six spectators in a courtroom in sub- urban Berlin raised their hands. Yes, they told the judge they were willing to have their minds read by the man on trial.

They wrote six questions and handed them to the bench. The judge turned to Gerhard Belgardt, 39, otherwise known as Hanussen II, Germany’s No. 1 Mind reader.

None of the spectators nor the mind reader had been told that they might take part in a mind reading test.

Belgardt was accused of swindling clients in private seances by professing to give news of missing relatives.

The judge: “What is on the first piece of paper?’

Belgardt: “The lady is asking about her sister. She is an inch taller, considerably younger and works in a public building.’

The questioner: “That’s right. My sister works as a medical assistant.’

The judge: “What is on the next paper?’

Belgardt: “The man has asked about his son. He will come along well in school.’

The man: ‘Correct.’

The judge: 'The next questioner is a city detective. What has he written?’

Belgardt: ‘He asks about his mother or his grandmother. I have no contact. Either the question is phony or she is dead. The man has suffered long—a concentration camp. Is that correct?’

The detective: ‘Correct. I asked about my grandmother. She is dead. I was in a concentration camp.’

Three further questions were asked and Belgardt got the answers relatively right.

The judge dismissed the case declaring ‘the accused has a certain validity to his claims as a mind reader’.

Hanussen II, embracing his wife: ‘I had foreseen that I would be freed.' "

Thursday, December 23, 2021

A Little-Known Classic of Parapsychology

People who make serious study of the paranormal tend to be well aware of certain classic volumes of parapsychology, such as the often-mentioned works below:

Conversely, the 576-page work Man and His Relations by Samuel Byron Brittan MD is almost never cited, although it seems to be in the same class as most of the often-mentioned books above.  Maybe the work failed to get the attention it deserved because it lacked an intriguing memorable title such as The Night Side of Nature or Death and Its Mystery. It sure didn't help that the book's full title was the way-too-long and boring-sounding title "Man and his relations : illustrating the influence of the mind on the body : the relations of the faculties to the organs, and to the elements, objects and phenomena of the external world." From that dull-sounding title, you would never guess that the chapters are rich with fascinating material. Let's take a took at some of the book's very interesting contents, which discuss very many topics in psychology and parapsychology. 

Samuel Byron Brittan MD

After dozens of pages of well-written but not-very-interesting prose, we have on page 67 the first very interesting account of the book:

"Mr.  Charles  Lawrence,  with  whom  the  writer  was  for  several  years  on  familiar  terms,  possessed  a remarkable  voluntary power  over  sensation  and  vital  motion.  He  could  so  paralyze the  censor  nerves  that  his  skin  might  be  punctured without  causing  pain,  and  a violent  blow  did  not  occasion the  least  suffering.  By  the  power  of  his  volition  he  could immediately  accelerate  the  pulsation  in  a surprising  degree  ; and  he  could  also  entirely  suspend  the  heart’s  action  in  three minutes ! These  effects  were  repeatedly  produced  in  the presence  of  the  writer,  before  public  asssemblies,  and  to the  satisfaction  of  several  committees  composed  of  members of  the  medical  profession."

The author mentions Eastern holy men with similar abilities, and modern reports corroborate such claims.  In 2021 the Daily Mail reported the following:

"Russian scientists are actively studying Tibetan monks in the hopes of garnering tips for astronauts on future long-distance space missions. Experts from Moscow State University are examining ancient techniques for putting the human body into a 'semi-lethargic state' - 'suspended animation', before returning to normal weeks later."

A similar anomaly involves mysterious cases of Buddhist monks whose bodies seem to not decay for a very long time after death.  At the mainstream materialist site www.bigthink.com, we read this: "After the apparent death of some monks, their bodies remain in a meditating position without decaying for an extraordinary length of time, often as long as two or three weeks."

Most of the first two hundred pages of the book aren't very interesting.  On page 197 there begins a discussion of psychometry. We read on page 202 this remarkable claim: "The  capacity  of  certain  impressible  persons  to  perceive,  by an  exquisite  power  of  cognition,  or  semi-spiritual  sensation, the  general  and  particular  characteristics  of  distant  and  unknown  persons,  by  merely  holding  their  autographs  in  the hand,  or  against  the  forehead,  has  been  demonstrated  to  the satisfaction  of  numerous  experimental  observers."  On page 204 we read this similar claim, mentioning the "animal magnetism" experiments that are now called hypnotism: "The early  experimenters  in  Animal  Magnetism  did  not  fail  to observe  that  persons  of  acute  sensibility  were  enabled  to establish  a sympathetic  rapport  with  others  at  a distance,  by holding  a lock  of  hair,  an  article  of  clothing,  or  a finger-ring which  the  absent  party  had  worn  ; or,  indeed,  by  taking  in the  hand  any  small  article  of  personal  property  that  had been  in  contact  with  the  body." 

The claims may seem outrageous, but it matches what was reported at great length by a nineteenth century physician (Joseph R. Buchanan) and also an early twentieth century investigator (Osty), as reported hereEven in recent decades similar things may be reported, as we read below:

"In 1991, when her daughter’s rare, hand-carved harp was stolen, Lisby Mayer’s familiar world of science and rational thinking turned upside down. After the police failed to turn up any leads, a friend suggested she call a dowser—a man who specialized in finding lost objects. With nothing to lose—and almost as a joke—Dr. Mayer agreed. Within two days, and without leaving his Arkansas home, the dowser located the exact California street coordinates where the harp was found."

This was before the Internet was widely available. The account above matches what Brittan states on pages 204-205:

"Crimes  and  criminals were  occasionally  discovered  in  this  way.  The  smallest fragment  of  a cravat,  worn  by  a thief,  would  hold  him  fast ; a shirt  was  a better  means  of  detection  than  a sheriff  ; and an  old  shoe  would  suffice  to  put  the  sensitive  explorer  on  the track  of  those  who  were  either  concealed,  absent  or  lost. When  the  search  resulted  in  finding  the  object,  not  only physical  conditions  and  specific  localities  could  be  described, and  pointed  out,  but  the  memory  became  an  open  book,  that could  be  read  in  the  darkness  of  midnight  ; the  unspoken thoughts  of  men  were  mysteriously  revealed  ; and  the  most secret  purposes  were  disclosed  before  time  had  afforded  an opportunity  for  their  actual  accomplishment."

On page 207 Brittan gives us some very specific examples to back up such claims. Referring to Semantha Mettler, whose first decades are documented in the biography here, Brittan states the following: 

"While  Mrs. Mettler  was  holding  a sealed  letter  from  Dr.  Buchanan — who  was  at  that  time  editing  the  Journal  of  Man — she declared  that  the  chief  study  of  the  writer  was  ‘Man,  in  his whole  nature.'  When  an  envelope  enclosing  some  [poetry] stanzas written  by  a convict,  was  placed  in  her  hand,  she  observed, that  the  author  had  a double  character — the  sphere  was unpleasant,  but  that  the  person  could  'write  poetry  tolerably well.'  A letter  written  by  Kossuth,  immediately  after  the delivery  of  a powerful  speech  in  St.  Louis,  caused  her  to  gesticulate as  if  she  were  addressing  a multitude,  and  this  was folloved  by  a feeling  of  extreme  exhaustion.  The  letter  of an  insane  man,  who  had  killed  his  own  child,  occasioned sympathetic  delirium  and  convulsions.  Some  irregular pencil  lines  and  scratches,  traced  by  the  hand  of  an  infant child  gave  no impression.  A very  delicate  picture  on  silk — painted  by  Miss  Thomas,  of  Edwardsburg,  Mich.,  and  presented to  the  writer — was  handed  to  Mrs.  M.,  under  the cover  of  a sealed  envelope,  whereupon  she  affirmed  that  the author  of  the  contents  of  the  envelope  had  painted  her  idea, instead  of  expressing  it  in  words."

On page 252 we read of the astonishing success that Dr. James Esdaile had in India in performing dramatic surgeries in patients who were given no anesthesia but had only been hypnotized to a state of deep trance:

"He  found  the  natives  of  Bengal  extremely  impressible, and  a few  trials,  by  himself  or  his  assistants, generally  subdued  their  natural  powers  of  resistance,  leaving them  in  a state  of  profound  coma,  and  insensible  of  pain.  In the  short  period  of  eight  months  he  performed,  at  Hoogly, no  less  than  seventy-three  painless  operations  in  surgery,  embracing among  others  the  dissection  and  amputation  of  different members  of  the  body,  operations  for  scrotocele  and hydrocele,  removal  of  scrotal  and  other  tumors,  actual and  potential  cauteries,  etc.,  etc.  In  these  operations  the subjects  were  entirely  deprived  of  physical  sensation  ; with rare  exceptions,  they  were  altogether  unconscious,  and  often expressed  the  greatest  surprise  on  learning  what  had  been done  to  them  during  the  interval  of  oblivious  repose."

On pages 286-287 Brittan discusses successful ESP experiments he did with various subjects. In one a subject was able to instantly identify flowers shown on a dozen or more cards Brittan was looking at but the subject could not see. In another a subject was able to identify tastes Brittan was experiencing. 

On page 287 he describes astonishing success doing experiments with a Mrs. Rice, one involving a "traveling clairvoyance" very widely reported in nineteenth century literature:

"Mrs.  Rice,  of  Worcester,  Mass.,  was  distinguished  for  a most  delicate  susceptibility  of  mental  impressions.  Having been  invited  to  visit  her  one  afternoon — at  her  residence,   and  in  company  with  several  friends — I seated  myself  at  her side,  at  the  same  time  requesting  her  to  take  an  excursion,   and  to  describe  whatever  she  might  observe  by  the  way. Without  giving  the  slightest  intimation  respecting  the  direction we  were  to  travel,  I proceeded  on  an  ideal  [mental] journey,  by  railroad  and  steamboat,  to  New  York.  Madam  Rice described  with  singular  fidelity  all  the  important  objects  on  the  route  of  which  the  writer  could  form  a distinct  conception— spoke  of  persons  whom  she  met  by  the  way,  and  repeated  the  very  words  they  were  by  me  supposed  to  utter. On  the  same  occasion,  I imagined  a letter  to  be  placed  before her,  when  she  suddenly  exclaimed,  “ Here  is  a letter from  Mr. -----' mentioning  the  name  of  an  absent  friend  of whom  I was  thinking  at  that  moment ; and  going  through with  the  appropriate  motions,  as  if  she  were  really  breaking a seal  and  unfolding  the  sheet,  she  commenced  and  read  verbatim, from  my  mind,  for  several  minutes.  These  were  the first  and  only  experiments  made  with  Mrs.  Rice."

On page 288 Brittan describes a telepathy experiment with a Mrs. Mills of Albany:

"This  gentleman  having  expressed  a desire  to  witness  the experiment,  it  was  agreed  that  I should  cause  the  lady  to  leave  her  place  at  the  opposite  side  of  the  room,  and  occupy a vacant  chair  by  his  side.  In  less  than  one  minute  she obeyed  the  silent  action  of  my  will  and  seated  herself  in  the unoccupied  chair.  In  like  manner  she  was  impelled  to change  her  position  several  times,  and  finally  to  leave  the room  temporarily,  with  no  specific  object  in  view,  and  without  so  much  as  suspecting  the  origin  of  an  impulse  she  was  quite  unable  to  resist."

Later we read of a similar ESP experiment:

"Miss.  A.  promptly  obeyed  the  silent  mandate of  my  mind,  and  going  to  the  center-table,  selected  a particular  book,  that  had  been  singled  out  from  among  a number  of  others  equally  conspicuous.  Some  one  required that  she  might  be  incited  to  take  up  another  book,  of  five hundred  pages,  and  turn  to  a short  poem — somewhere  about the  middle  of  the  volume — which  was  accordingly  done  without the  least  hesitation.  Again,  by  a similar  effort,  this  lady was  influenced  to  make  choice  of  a particular  engraving, from  amongst  a number  contained  in  an  annual."

On page 290 Brittan reports a dramatic case of ESP in which a distant person was apparently telepathically summoned:   

"On  one  occasion,  while  spending  a few  days  at  Waterbury,  Conn.,  I found  it  necessary  to  see  a young  man  in  the  village.  The  immediate  presence  of  the youth  was  of  considerable  importance  to  me,  but  not  knowing his  residence,  place  of  business,  or  even  his  name,  I could not  send  for  him.  In  this  emergency,  I undertook  to  [mentally] telegraph him,  by  concentrating  my  mind  on  the  young  man,  with a fixed  determination  to  bring  him  to  me.  Some  ten  minutes had  elapsed  when  he  came  to  the  house  and  inquired  for  the writer.  Meeting  a gentleman  at  the  door,  he  asked,  with much  apparent  interest,  whether  1 wanted  to  see  him.  On being  interrogated  by  this  individual,  he  stated  that  a few moments  before,  and  while  actively  engaged  in  his  workshop — distant  one  fourth  of  a mile — he  suddenly  felt  that  he  must seek  my  presence  without  delay." 

On page 335 we have this account of information apparently acquired in a dream:

"Some  years  since  the  Highland  Eagle  of  Westchester County,  New  York,  published  the  fact  that  Mr.  Dykeman, Deputy  Sheriff  of  Putnam  County,  had  made  a singular  discovery in  a dream.  It  was  stated  that  George  F.  Sherman, of  Cold  Spring,  had  lost  his  pocket-book,  containing  three hundred  and  seventy-two  dollars.  On  the  night  following the  Deputy  Sheriff  dreamed  that  a clerk  by  the  name  of McNary  had  the  money.  Unable  to  resist  the  suspicion excited  in  his  mind,  Mr.  Dykeman  arrested  McNary,  who thereupon  made  a confession,  and  restored  over  three  hundred dollars  of  the  money,  which  he  had  concealed  in  places indicated  in  the  dream."

On page 362 we have some fascinating accounts of people who performed very complex tasks while sleepwalking:

 "Dr.  Gall  gives  an  account of  a miller  who  was  in  the  habit  of  rising  every  night and  running  his  mill.  Mertinet  mentions  the  case  of  a saddler who  worked  at  his  trade  when  sleeping; and  Dr.  Prichard that  of  a farmer  who  got  out  of  bed,  dressed  himself, saddled  his  horse,  and  rode  to  market  while  asleep.  Professor Soave  reports  the  case  of  an  Apothecary’s  clerk  who not  only  walked  while  asleep,  but  would  kindle  his  fire  ; pursue  his  studies,  examining  authorities,  classify  botanical specimens  ; engage  in  animated  controversies — with  his  employer or  Professor  Soave — on  Chemistry  and  other  scientific themes  ; and,  indeed,  perform  any  duty  or  service  that he  was  accustomed  to  do  in  his  waking  hours.  He  would carefully  compound  medicines,  according  to  the  prescriptions that  were  before  him,  but  conscientiously  declined  filling false  prescriptions,  or  such  as  would  be  likely  to  injure  the patient.  Mrs.  Newton,  a relative  of  the  writer,  was  a skillful  seamstress  and  was  accustomed  to  the  unconscious use  of  her  needle  for  hours at  night,  when  there  was  no light  in  her  room.  A friend, who  was  an  accomplished horseman,  often  rode  many  miles  while  he  was  in  a profound slumber  ; and  it  is  a still  more  remarkable  fact — but  well authenticated — that  in  the  disastrous  retreat  of  Sir  John Moore,  before  the  battle  of  Corunna,  many  of  the  soldiers fell  asleep,  yet  continued  to  march  with  their  comrades."

On page 389 we hear this account of the legendary scientist and clairvoyant Immanuel Swedenborg:

"It  is  alleged  by  M.  Dieudonne  Thiebault,  Professor  of  Belles Letters  in  the  Royal  Academy  of  Berlin,  that  the  Count  de Montville,  Ambassador  from  Holland  to  Stockholm,  having died  suddenly,  a shopkeeper  demanded  of  his  widow  the  payment of  a bill,  which  she  remembered  had  been  paid  in  her husband’s  lifetime.  Not  being  able  to  find  the  shopkeeper’s receipt,  she  was  induced  to  consult  the  distinguished  Seer, though  she  did  so  less  from  credulity  than  curiosity.  Swedenborg informed  her  that  her  deceased  husband  had  taken the  shopkeeper’s  receipt  on  a certain  day  (also  naming  the hour),  while  he  was  reading  such  an  article  in  Bayle’s  Dictionary, in  his  cabinet  ; and  that  his  attention  being  called immediately  to  some  other  concern,  he  put  the  receipt  into the  book  to  mark  the  place  at  which  he  left  off ; where,  in fact,  it  was  found  at  the  page  described!" 

The next page tells another account about Swedenborg that was well authenticated:

"When  Swedenborg  was  in  Gottenburg,  three  hundred miles  from  Stockholm,  he  announced  the  occurrence  of  a great  fire  in  his  native  city,  giving  the  facts  respecting  the time,  place,  and  circumstances  of  its  origin,  and  accurately describing  its  progress  and  termination.  It  was  on  Saturday night  that  this  conflagration  was  described  as  occurring  at that  time.  The Seer  repeated  the  substance  of  his  statement to  the  Governor  on  Sunday  morning.  This  was  substantially confirmed  by  a dispatch,  received  from  Gottenburg on  Monday  evening,  and  on  Tuesday  morning  the  arrival of  the  royal  courier  furnished  an  unqualified  attestation of  the  truth  of  all  the  particulars  of  the  clairvoyant revelation.  These  facts  rest  on  no  doubtful  authority.  Their authenticity  is  sanctioned  by  Kant,  the  great  German  metaphysician, in  whose  judgment— to  use  his  own  words — they 'set  the  assertion  of  the  extraordinary  gift  of  Swedenborg out  of  all  possibility  of  doubt.' "

Kant's original account of the incident above can be read here

The book gives many other accounts of clairvoyance, including the well-documented case of Alexis Didier, which I won't repeat since I already described it here.  We then read of a case I had not previously heard of:

"Mrs.  Semantha  Mettler,  of  Hartford,  Conn.,  has  long  exercised her  clairvoyant  powers  in  discovering  the  immediate and  remote  causes  of  disease,  its  organic  relations — noting, at  any  distance,  its  essential  character  and  its  phenomenal aspects  - and  in  selecting  from  the  great  pharmacopeia  of Nature  the  appropriate  remedies  for  her  patients.  During a period  of  fifteen  years  she  has  been  constantly  before  the public,  in  a professional  capacity,  and  her  diagnoses — made in  the  course  of  her  daily  transfigurations—  amount  to  more than  40,000  in  number.  In  numerous  instances  the  representatives  of  accredited  science  have  been  put  to  shame  by Mrs.  Mettler’s  disclosures  respecting  the  original  cause,  the particular  seat,  the  precise  nature,  and  the  ultimate  result  of a disease,  when  these  were  previously  all  unknown  by  the afflicted  parties,  and  not  to  be  detected  by  ordinary  professional sagacity."

The case of Semantha Mettler (comparable to that of Edgar Cayce) was so remarkable that she inspired an 1853 biography that detailed her rise from abject poverty and extreme bad luck to an apparent wonder worker.  Brittan's work dates from 1865, so apparently that 1853 biography detailed only part of Mettler's success.  The Brittan work gives this example:

"The  writer  could  easily  fill  a volume  of  facts  illustrative of  the  Clairvoyance  of  Mrs.  Mettler,  but  a brief  digest  of  a few  well-authenticated  facts  must  suffice  in  this  connection. Mrs.  William  B.  Hodget,  of  Springfield,  Mass.,  had  extreme pain  and  inflammation  in  one  of  her  limbs.  Mrs.  M.  made an  examination  at  the  distance  of  twenty-four  miles,  and  discovered a  fine  cambric  needle  concealed  in  the  flesh.  This staggered  the  faith  of  Mr.  Hodget,  and  the  family  Physician was  equally  skeptical  on  the  point  of  the  needle  ; but,  to remove  all  doubts,  he  applied  his  lancet,  when  the  needle was  discovered  and  removed."

Brittan recounts a case of a man who was shot in the pocket, and who did not recover from his wound.  We read this:

"On  my  return  from  the  West I took  an  early  opportunity  to  submit  this  distressing  case to  the  clairvoyant  inspection  of  Mrs.  Mettler,  merely  telling her  that  she  was  requested  to  examine  a young  man  who  had been  shot.  There  was  no  intimation  respecting  the  circumstances attending  the  accident,  the  seat,  or  the  extent  of  the injury  ; nor  was  the  existing  condition  of  the  young  man  in any  way  implied  or  referred  to.  In  the  course  of  the  investigation and  diagnosis — conducted  at  Hartford,  while  the patient  was  in  Central  Michigan  — Mrs.  M.  discovered  a piece  of  copper  in  the  limb,  and  observed  that  the  wound would  not  heal  until  it  was  removed.  But  young  Barker was  sure  that  he  had  no  copper  in  his  pocket  at  the  time  of the  accident  ; and,  inasmuch  as  the  medical  attendant  had made  no  such  discovery,  it  was  presumed  that  the  Seeress was  mistaken.  But  some  time  after  the  foreign  substance described  became  visible,  when  Mr.  Barker’s  mother — with a pair  of  embroidery  scissors — removed  a penny  from  the wound  ! In  such  a case  science  is  a stupid,  sightless  guide, and  must  stand  out  of  the  way.  The  doctors  in  Michigan could  not  see  that  penny  when  it  was  within  their  reach, and  their  eyes  were  wide  open  ; but  this  Seeress  discovered it  at  a distance  of  nearly  1,000  miles  with  her  eyes  closed !"

Call it a case of telemedicine before there was what we now call telemedicine. The next pages of the book give us equally impressive accounts involving the same Mrs. Mettler. 

On page 427 the author tells us that he personally witnessed an astonishing case of accurate prophecy:

"The  writer  and  several  other  persons  were  witnesses  of a prophetic  announcement  of  the  destruction  of  the  steamer Henry  Clay,  on  the  Hudson  River,  made  by  Mrs.  Harriet Porter,  at  Bridgeport,  Connecticut,  on  the  27th  day  of  July, 1852 — the  day  before  that  boat  was  actually  burned.  On the  28th,  at  about  tbe  hour  of  three  o’clock,  p.  m.,  Miss. Porter — being  entranced  in  presence  of  several  persons — again  referred  to  the  subject,  and  proceeded  to  describe  the terrible  catastrophe,  which  was  then,  as  she  affirmed,  being enacted  before  her.  She  declared  with  great  emphasis  that a steamboat  was  burning  on  the  Hudson ; that  she  could  see the  name — Henry  Clay;  and  that  the  village  of  Yonkers was  also  distinctly  visible.  She  appeared  to  be  thrilled  and terrified  at  the  spectacle,  and  expressed  the  deepest  anguish on  account  of  the  loss  of  so  many  lives.  On  the  following morning  the  public  journals  contained  the  verification  of  all she  had  said,  in  the  details  of  the  mournful  disaster,  so  mysteriously foreshadowed  and  so  graphically  portrayed  at  the very  hour  of  the  fatal  occurrence."

Bridgeport, Connecticut is more than 25 miles from the closest part of the Hudson River. Wikipedia.org lists the fire on the Henry Clay as occurring at about 3 PM on July 27, 1852, with a loss of nearly 50 lives, as the ship passed near Yonkers (40 miles from Bridgeport). The details in the wikipedia.org article exactly match the details given above. 

On page 476 of this book written more than a century before the terms "near-death experience" and "out-of-body experience" became widely used, we have an account of a near-death experience that included an out-of-body experience:

"A few  months  since,  an  eminent  Presbyterian  divine  in New  York  was  borne  by  disease  to  the  very  portals  of  the invisible  world.  He  had  a distinct  consciousness  of  his  condition. Veiled  in  light,  his  spirit  rose  and  hovered  over  the body.  He  could  distinctly  see  the  wasted  form,  stretched on  the  couch  ‘beneath  him,  pale,  pulseless  and  cold,  but  his immortal  self  was  thrilled  with  inexpressible  peace  and  joy. Just  then  his  wife,  to  whom  he  was  tenderly  but  strongly attached,  called  to  him  with  the  deep  earnestness  of  that  undying love  which  can  endure  all  things  but  separation  from the  object  of  its  devotion.  The  potent  magnetism  of  that loving  heart  counterpoised  the  combined  attractions  of  the spheres,  and  even  recalled  the  unshackled  spirit  from  the Heavens  just  opening  to  receive  it.  He  returned  to  the body.  The  next  moment  a gentle  voice — calling  his  name in  tones  of  mingled  tenderness  and  grief— vibrated  on  the outward  ear,  reminding  him  that  he  was  still  a dweller  in the  earth." 

Sunday, December 19, 2021

"Ancient Aliens" Mixes Marvels, Mysteries and Misconceptions

The long-running TV series "Ancient Aliens" has long been a strange mixture of the daring, the dazzling and the dubious. On the positive side, the show often draws our attention to interesting anomalies worthy of our attention, anomalies that have too often been wrongly swept under the rug by mainstream scientists.  Also on the positive side, "Ancient Aliens" often raises objections to doubtful dogmas of academia that should indeed be questioned. On the negative side, "Ancient Aliens" often pushes its owns doubtful dogmas, along with speculations that are not very credible.

The show sometimes suggests ETs had something to do with Stonehenge

Such strengths and weaknesses were shown in a recent episode of "Ancient Aliens" entitled "The Human Experiment," one that was a weird smorgasbord of interesting journalism, unbelievable speculations, weighty considerations well-worth pondering, and untrue claims. The episode was mainly devoted to advancing an  unbelievable claim constantly repeated on the show: that humans became humans because extraterrestrials tinkered with our DNA. 

The reason why this claim is unbelievable is not because of some impossibility that extraterrestrials visited us in the past. The two main reasons why this claim is unbelievable are these:

(1) There are no conceivable modifications in DNA that can explain the physical origin of human bodies, because DNA does not specify anatomy, contrary to the mythical claims to the contrary that have often been made by scientists and science writers. DNA uses a system called the genetic code in which chemicals in DNA (called nucleotide base pairs) stand for amino acids that make up proteins. But under such a system there is only a very limited capacity for specification. DNA (and the genes that make up DNA) can only specify low-level chemical information such as  the amino acids that make up proteins, and the contents of RNA molecules. When scientists discovered the genetic code used by DNA, they only discovered an extremely limited coding scheme completely incapable of specifying complex three-dimensional structures such as the layout of a human body or the structure of an eye or the layout of the human reproductive system or even the structure of any cell.  Read the posts here, here and here for more on why DNA cannot be a specification of anatomy. In the post here you will read quotations from more than twenty biologists, chemists and doctors who say that DNA is not a blueprint or a recipe or a program or an algorithm for building a human body. 

(2) Things such as the origin of language and the origin of the human mind cannot possibly be explained by extraterrestrials tinkering with human DNA.  Because DNA does not specify anatomy, DNA changes cannot explain the physical structure of the brain. Also, the brain does not explain the human mind or the capabilities of human memory, for reasons abundantly explained in the posts of the site here.  In short, DNA does not explain brains, and brains don't explain minds. So the idea that humans got their advanced minds and language by extraterrestrials modifying our DNA is unbelievable. 

I would describe the "ancient astronaut theorists" constantly evoked on the "Ancient Aliens" program as being half-rebels or quarter-rebels. On one hand, such theorists are willing to rebel against the silly origins dogmas of academia, by pointing out that human minds and human culture appeared on the scene too quickly to be explained by any ideas of mainstream professors.  On the other hand, such ancient astronaut theorists seem to accept "hook, line and sinker" some of the least believable ideas of mainstream professors. Our ancient astronaut theorists seem to uncritically accept incorrect ideas that DNA is some "explain-it-all" molecule that can explain human minds and anatomy. It is no such thing, but merely a piece in the grand puzzle of human origins.  Such ancient astronaut theorists also seem to accept "hook, line and sinker" unwarranted claims that human minds can be explained by brains. 

In the recent "Ancient Aliens" episode on DNA, we had several misstatements about DNA.  The narrator claimed that DNA is a molecule that defines every creature on Earth. DNA is no such thing, but merely a very important chemical database used by living things.  The structure of cells is not specified by DNA, nor is the anatomy of organisms.  We had a statement by biologist Kirsten Fisher, making this give-us-the-wrong-idea  claim: "The DNA code is essentially like a language consisting of genes that confer particular traits like eye color, hair color, all these traits basically that we recognize." DNA is only a code by which nucleotides stand for amino acids, and is not "essentially like a language," because it has nothing but the tiniest vocabulary  consisting only of about 25 nouns (each an amino acid), no verbs except "stop," no adjectives, and no grammar. 

DNA has no power to specify things three-dimensional arrangements of parts the way languages do.  While DNA may be important in determining eye color and hair color, it is very false indeed to claim that it confers "all the traits basically that we recognize." DNA does not specify human anatomy or even the anatomy of cells, nor does it specify human intellectual traits such as the ability to think, consciousness, morality, the ability to form memories, the ability to recall memories,  and so forth.  For example, the traits that we have ten fingers and ten toes and two eyes and one nose and one mouth are not specified by DNA. So it is very false to claim that DNA confers "all these traits basically that we recognize." The genome is not a blueprint," says Kevin Mitchell, a geneticist and neuroscientist at Trinity College Dublin, noting "it doesn't encode some specific outcome.""DNA cannot be seen as the 'blueprint' for life," says Antony Jose, associate professor of cell biology and molecular genetics at the University of Maryland, who says, "It is at best an overlapping and potentially scrambled list of ingredients that is used differently by different cells at different times."  

We should have suspected that we were being given the wrong idea by biologist Fisher by the fact that she only gave the specific  examples of eye color and hair color as traits conferred by DNA.  When she said, "The DNA code is essentially like a language consisting of genes that confer particular traits like eye color, hair color, all these traits basically that we recognize," it sounded like some male suitor saying, "I'm so rich: I have a pencil and a small jar of coffee and every other thing a man could possibly dream of having."

We then hear another scientist (Adam Siepel) making the  also untrue statement that "in a sense DNA is a program that gets run by the computer, and the computer is a cell." No, DNA is not a program, and it lacks the essential characteristic of a computer program, which are conditional logic statements such as "if/then" statements.  The correct computer analogy for DNA is to compare to not to a program but to a primitive database -- not a modern relational database which can include logic in the form of stored procedures, but merely the simplest databases that merely have data.  Although cells are vastly more complex than molecules (way too complex to be explained by anything in DNA), cells are not computers that run programs. 

Beware of biologists using phrases such as "essentially like," "basically" and "in a sense." Alarms bells should go off in our minds when we hear such words, and we should be suspicious that at best someone is saying something that is not literally true, and that at worst someone is starting to shovel baloney. 

In the "Ancient Aliens" episode I am discussing someone claims that DNA is "essentially digital." That is untrue.  Information either is digital or is not digital, and calling something "essentially digital" is like saying someone is "essentially pregnant." When information is digital, it consists of sequences equivalent to ones and zeros, sequences such as 1010101001111100010101.  None of the information in DNA is digital. 

The "Ancient Aliens" episode unconvincingly tries to cite human genetic engineering with CRISPR as something that helps supports claims that aliens tampered with human DNA. It is suggested that "DNA knots" are evidence of extraterrestrial tampering. We have a rather ridiculous attempt to persuade us that some short slightly winding symbol found in ancient Egyptian art is a depiction of the double helix, something we are told "cannot be by chance." Someone describes the DNA double helix co-discoverer Francis Crick as someone who promoted the idea that extraterrestrial visitors were the origin of "human DNA." But in his paper on the topic, Crick merely spoke vaguely of extraterrestrials being the origin of "terrestrial organisms," and said "the scientific evidence is inadequate at the present time to say anything about the probability."

We hear the very strange suggestion that humans are smarter than chimps because we have two fewer chromosomes than chimps. After a long attempt to convince us that humans arose because extraterrestrials modified our DNA, the episode went into a discussion of other topics. There was a discussion of people claiming that they were abducted by extraterrestrials,  people such as Betty Hill and Barney Hill. We hear an interesting account from a woman who claimed that her pregnancy ended when extraterrestrials extracted the growing 4-month-old child from her womb. 

The "Ancient Aliens" episode then has some noteworthy footage of blindfolded children apparently demonstrating powers of clairvoyance.  The demonstration seems persuasive, because the large completely opaque blindfolds are very solid material maybe twice as large as large sunglasses, extending way below the eyes; and the children are looking straight ahead at targets two meters away at eye level, without tilting their heads backwards (ruling out the "looked through the bottom crack of the blindfold" objection made by skeptics).  The footage is from the film "Superhuman: The Invisible Made Visible" by Caroline Cory.  

I strongly suspect that neither cheating nor faking is going on here, because of the factors mentioned above and because similar clairvoyance results by children have been very well documented in the Soviet Union and China, as discussed in my post here, entitled "EHF: Reports of Chinese Kids With Paranormal Powers."  I asked only one person from China whether she had ever heard of such reports, without any reason to think that she had. She said that she had a relative who had demonstrated such powers as a child  (including the power to see inside a closed box), and that this relative was brought to Beijing to be tested by the government.  

The fact is that we have nearly two hundred years of well-documented evidence for human clairvoyance, from all over the globe, provided by a host of reliable witnesses. The evidence stretches back all the way to the report of the French Royal Academy of Medicine issued in 1831, one finding in favor of clairvoyance. Clairvoyance has been well-documented by esteemed authorities such as Professor William Gregory, a chemistry professor at the very prestigious University of Edinburgh who documented at very great length his observations of clairvoyant subjects.  The written nineteenth century evidence and early twentieth century evidence for clairvoyance during states of hypnotism and trance is extremely abundant, and clairvoyance was well-demonstrated in a host of public exhibitions and experiments.  The fact that so many contemporary professors deny the existence of clairvoyance is one of the most outrageous modern examples of denying solid evidence, typically made by people who never studied the original source evidence (such as the cases discussed here). 

The fact that the "Ancient Aliens" episode on DNA has presented some modern evidence for clairvoyance is commendable. But in the same episode we are shown the filmmaker Caroline Cory who has filmed this evidence, participating in a panel discussion with ancient astronaut theorists. Perhaps to fit in with all of their talk about extraterrestrials tinkering with human DNA, Caroline suggests that extraterrestrials might have upgraded our DNA to give humans the power of clairvoyance.  Caroline not only suggests this idea, but says "I guarantee you" that extraterrestrials are modifying our DNA. 

This explanation makes no sense at all.  Clairvoyance and other psychic phenomena such as telepathy and near-death experiences can never be explained by anything in DNA, nor can they be explained by anything in human brains. Such phenomena can only be explained by ideas such as the hypothesis that humans have souls, or some spiritual capability that is the equivalent of having souls.  This is very probably why materialists have for so long stubbornly refused to accept almost two hundred years of very convincing evidence for clairvoyance: because they know that once you admit the existence of clairvoyance, the existence of something like a human soul is all but certain. 

There is no evidence that people who score higher on ESP tests or clairvoyance tests have different DNA than average people. There is no evidence that anyone has DNA much different from average people, with the exception of people with birth defects.  Contrary to clickbait headlines exaggerating small changes, human DNA has changed very little over the past two thousand years, with the main changes being mainly related to not-very-important things such as eye color, hair color and lactose digestion. So genome analysis does not support a claim that extraterrestrials are modifying our DNA.  

It's rather a shame that the "Ancient Aliens" show originally chose the title of "Ancient Aliens." That title is kind of a ball-and-chain that its writers are tied to, a kind of prison that limits them. It would have been better if the show had a more noncommittal title, something like perhaps "Mysterious Beginnings" or "Contrarian Theories." That way, the show could have progressed beyond its Erich von Daniken beginnings. But with the title "Ancient Aliens" the show is kind of chained to an original hypothesis, not very free to move out to more credible theorizing. Conversely, I am glad that I chose for this blog the noncommittal title of "Future and Cosmos," along with a subtitle ending with the phrase "...and other weighty topics." With such a title and subtitle I have felt free to move in whatever direction I felt was most consistent with what I have learned during years of study on a very wide variety of topics, without having to feel that I have to stay consistent with some box-me-in title. If you ever start a new blog detailing your thoughts on philosophy, politics, science or religion, I advise picking some blog title that does not box-you-in to some position you may later move away from. 

Postscript: On the Travel Channel's UFO Witness show, we have an account by one of the people claiming an alien abduction experience. We are told the account arose after "hypnotherapy." But accounts told under hypnosis are suspect, because under hypnosis subjects can be extremely suggestible. This was reported by Professor William Gregory as far back as the nineteenth century, on the page here, where he indicates that hypnotized people can be made to believe almost anything suggested.  To judge the reliability of the "abduction account," we would need to read a transcript of what the hypnotist and patient said.  Did the account of extraterrestrials arise after such an idea was suggested by the hypnotist? Or did it arise when the hypnotist acted neutrally, asking something like "Tell me about what happened on the night when you were puzzled by what happened"?