À propos Djihade par persuasion ...

Qui est-ce qui le fait: celles qui veulent porter le niqab ou hijab avec djelbab ou d'autres costumes traditionnels? Ou ceux qui seraient d'accord avec un interdit en France, ce que provoquerait assurément des plaintes au bled, genre "quel horrible pays, on ne peut même pas porter le niqab ici!", qui entre les deux?

Et si on veut interdire le hijab dans l'école, pourquoi n'autorise-t-on pas écoles de filles --- d'ailleurs pour tous le monde qui le veut, pas juste pour les musulmanes?

A book and a site they might not want you to read ...

When a tenth grader, I lent out Richard Wurmbrandt's "Was Karl Marx a Satanist?". (No, I have not read the other Apocalypse related items on that Amazon page.) The author was revilified by US communists (who had themselves suffered McCarthyism recently), he showed them has back, which had been scourged in the prisons of the then Communist Roumania. I lent it out to a Lutheran priest who had the bad judgement to praise Karl Marx.

He claimed he had given it to my housemother, she claimed never to have received it, one or other of them suppressed the book for me. Paranoia? Well, why have I no more the book? Never existed in my possession? Why do I know parts of content by heart?

Like the beard style typical of a certain satanic lodge or coven in the Blavatsky tradition. Or the black tapers. Or the preternatural/diabolic plays or tale that Karl Marx wrote for his daughter. Or the hatred of God in the Revolutionary tradition that later became Communism as of East block and China ....

Then there is this:

Interview with Robert Spencer: Explaining the Islamist Threat (from "Tradition, Family, Property" - an organism or charity which in France is labelled as "sectarian" in recent legislation slightly reminding of Communism and of repression of Christians in Algeria).

If they have told you not to read my blog - look at what is said about non-armed varieties of jihad. With appropriate quotes from Islamic jurists.

Islam and Communism ... do they have something in common? Maybe the idea of "moral reform by (forced or much persuaded hard) work" - even for non-criminals who are simply undesirable or for criminals whose crime is not stealing.

Mise à jour, logarithmes

Le vieux message sur ce sujet, j'avais donné des valeurs trop bas pour les logarithmes de trois et de douze. Hier en faisant la série des potences de douze je me rendis compte que le valeur du logarithme pour trois était trop bas, ce matin, en faisant la série des potences de trois - je me trompai deux fois, mais la troisième, après un signe de croix je pus enfin arriver à faire les multiplications correctement.

3²¹ > 10¹⁰ et 3²³ < 10¹¹
3 > "10^11/23" et < "10^10/21"
log₁₀3 < - pied V pouces VIII lignes X points
log₁₀3 > - pied V pouces VIII lignes VI points


12¹³ < 10¹⁴ et 12¹⁴ > 10¹⁵
12 > "10^15/14" et < "10^14/13" et
log₁₀12 < I pied - pouces XI lignes - points
log₁₀12 > I pied - pouces X lignes III points

Ça donna des implications pour les logg de 2 et 5:

log₁₀2 > 512 points et < 519 points.
log₁₀5 > 1209 points et < 1216 points.

Chromosome numbers

series and tinyurl to this one --- see comments Why is this a problem for evolution? Genes mutate. In each population, sometimes the mutation, sometimes the unmutated gene and sometimes both prevail. If a population splits in two, they will mutate into different ways. If enough genes are different, at last the populations will be genetically too different for mating to occur with offspring viable and fertile. They are two different species. This link is to an article - in fulltext - dealing with an experiment where speciations is seen as having been directly observed. Read their definitions carefully. "Even though behaviorally isolated species ..." "behaviorally isolated" - well that would make different human cultures count as different species too. SO WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? CHROMOSOMES Genes bunch in chromosomes, and chromosomes are counted in whole numbers. And the number of chromosomes is fairly fixed, and yet mammals have different numbers of chromosomes. In most species, mammal or not, chromosomes are diploid (Greek for twofold, meaning all of the chromosomes) in the cells making up a single body, haploid (Greek for simple, meaning in all of the chromosomes) in sex cells. Triploid (Greek for threefold, meaning in all of the chromosomes) individuals occur in plants, fish, lizards, birds, they are infertile or selffertilising females, both ways are roads out of sexual reproduction and therefore evolution as usually understood. Diploid chromosome setups mean that chromosomes go in pairs that hang together at the centromere and branch off to telomeres. Centromeres (middle pieces) and Telomeres (end pieces) are like full stops in genetic information. It is DNA bundled too tight for readability. But they are essential for the RNA-readings of the arms - an arm is whatever part of a chromosome is between one Centromere and one Telomere. Chromosomes have one centromere and two telomeres, except (if I recall correctly) Y-chromosomes that have only two telomeres, one of which counts as centromere because bundling with such of the X-chromosome.
Less chromosomes	More chromosomes
Normally for diploid beings:
Sex cells forming halve the number of chromosomes into only one for each pair.	Sex cells meeting and forming new individuals double the number of the sex cell chromosomes, getting back to normal.
Not Normally for diploid beings:
Haplosomy (onefold in one single pair) going on to asomy (none in that pair)? Asomy means total lack of one chromosome and means non-viability of embryon. So haplosomy is a non-way. Unless, which is not very likely, all the vital information of a chromosome had been transferred to chromosomes of another pair. In mankind, Y-chromosome haplosomy is not viable, but X-chromosome haplosomy gives infertile or less fertile women. But they are same pair, XX a normal woman, XY a normal man. Robertsonian chromosome fusion, is this how it works? Have I proven too much? Mice go in different chromosome numbers, and they seem to be yet one species. Okapi may have one or two chromosome pairs or even a pair and a half, for same parts of genome.	Chromosome fission - as complex as fusion (study diagrams and handwritten text on image left), plus where does the new centromere or the new telomeres come from? (P Z Myers claims new centromere comes from locus duplication - but that does not explain new telomere on the intra-centromere side of each split) Trisomy (three chromsomes in one single pair) - means handicap, sometimes to fertility (in sex chromosomes) sometimes to other chromosomes. But a trisomy, even if extended after a generation to tetrasomy, does not mean two pairs where there was one, only four chromosomes to a pair, and that is handicap. Polyploidy: triploidy see above. Tetraploid and octoploid individuals occur in amphibians and plants - that are typically greater or stronger or twice as complex as diploid samples. Mammals are neither amphibians nor plants. Even if they could be polyploid, which seems not to be the case, that would not open the way for new pairs forming. Each four chromosomes are the four chromosomes of a pair, not the two by two chromosomes of two pairs.
Theories should in principle be falsifiable. If evolution is a theory, chromosome numbers - as well as other similar creationist arguments - are not theories, but falsifications of this theory. I think chromosome numbers is such a difficulty (if not downright disproof) that that is why Scientists are very shy about putting on the web articles for free about this subject. On my comments to Non-replies I have been looking for such using a scholar google. Time after time I have only got to the abstract of an article that is readable for paying subscribers only. See list at end of comments.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
en dépt^nt13 ou 84
30 May/11 June AD 2009

PS, A list of different chromosome numbers from a creationist site:

The Evolution of Species by Means of Increasing Number of Chromosomes
-or-
The Preservation of Complex Life Forms in the Struggle for Life

-By Dr. Kent Hovind-

Number of Chromosomes:

Fern 480 The ultimate goal. White Ash 138 Carp 100 Goldfish 94 Sweet Potato 90 Turkey 82 Chicken 78 Dog 78 Duck 78 Identical Triplets! Horse 64 Cow 60 Silkworm 56 Cotton 52 Amoeba 50 Chimp 48 Tobacco 48 Identical Twins! Human 46 Bat 44 Wheat 42 Soybean 40

Cat 38 Starfish 36 Apple 34 Alligator 32 Onion 32 Identical Twins! Frog 26 Opossum 22 Redwood 22 Kidney Bean 22 Identical Triplets! Corn 20 Marijuana 20 Carrot 20 Identical Triplets! Lettuce 18 Honeybee 16 Garden Pea 14 House Fly 12 Tomato 12 Identical Twins! Fruit Fly 8 Penicillium 2

Source: DrDino/Kent Hovind - after reading which I searched in Talkorigins.org and got this. Which is where my argument comes from.

Credits to user Jon for giving me the opportunity to refind it.

La rigolade du jour ...

Ce matin un lapin ... non, ce n'était pas un lapin. C'était moi, et je n'ai pas fusillé un chasseur non plus. ... Évidemment je suis fatigué.

Ce matin donc j'ai revu un champ des pêches, placé derrière une maison, j'ai sonné la porte, l'homme qui m'a ouvert, sur ma demande s'il voulait main d'oeuvre m'a repliqué qu'il ne savait même pas de qui les pêches étaient. LOL, comme l'écrivent les anglophones! Évidemment ce n'est pas le temps pour chercher travail.

I am not that papist...

Quote:

I believe totally in the teachings of the Catholic Church as proclamed by the Pope, His Holiness Benedict, through Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

End of quote.

What is wrong? Pope proclaims teaching, Scripture and Tradition are the means to that. Normally, Scripture and Tradition are what proclaims to us, what Christ proclaimed from the Father - and the Pope or any other bishop is only the means for that.