Comment on Prayer vs Science and the Sudden Emergence of Agriculture - Postmodernism's Dangerous History | Stephen Hicks and Stefan Molyneux

Editor's Note: Molyneux states that prayer won't do any good vs science when it comes to growing crops and that science has shown prayer isn't effective. First off, prayer has been scientifically validated in several ways...

Food for Thought: Group Meditation Reduces Terrorism - 50 different scientific studies have confirmed the Meditation Effect is real. 7000 people get together and meditate -- and global terrorism goes down by 72 percent. Similarly dramatic decreases were seen in war, fatalities and violent crime. Even if skeptics want to argue about whether or not this is "real," the fact is that all other variables have been ruled out -- including weekends, weather, holidays, et cetera. This effect has been documented in numerous peer-reviewed publications, including the Journal of Offender Rehabilitation. - https://911truthactivism.blogspot.com/2015/03/food-for-thought-group-meditation.html

Science Proves the Healing Power of Prayer:
https://www.newsmax.com/Health/Headline/prayer-health-faith-medicine/2015/03/31/id/635623/

PROVEN! Our Brains React to Intense Prayer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpxtPVwgCJo
https://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/10/22/this-is-how-your-brain-reacts-during-intense-prayer
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/how-does-prayer-meditation-affect-brain-activity_n_1974621.html

Now, as far as crops. I bet those people who hadn't yet mastered agriculture prayed about it, and wouldn't you know it, science answered their prayers... in an seemingly odd way...

The Dawn of the Genesis Race: Our Extraterrestrial DNA and the True Origins of the Species 

Excerpt: 

Archaeology has never even addressed all the questions raised by the sudden emergence of agriculture and highly advanced civilisations in Mesopotamia and Egypt in the 3rd millennium BCE, let alone answered the most critical ones...

Purebred dogs just suddenly appear in the archeological record as if by magic. This is also true of agriculture and our key cereal and legume crops. Wheat, corn, beans and rice pose a second set of genetic enigmas. 

Research into the dietary habits of Stone Age tribes around the globe show our ancient hunter-gatherer ancestors subsisted on leafy plants and lean muscle meats. This makes perfect sense because these foods were readily available, took little or no processing, and wild game could be cooked over an open fire. The problem with our grain crops, and they are the basis of civilisation, is wild grass seeds are so miniscule the cost/benefit of harvesting them was not in favour of it. They also require harvesting, threshing and cooking technology since they have to be boiled extensively. This was technology Stone Age Man lacked. 

The reason grains have to be cooked is that the human gut is not adapted to digest wild grains. This makes it very clear the use of wild grass seeds as a primary food source is of recent origin. Our Paleolithic ancestors did not subsist on them. Once again, this poses a set of formidable problems that need to be studied rigorously. If our ancestors did not harvest and eat wild grains, how could they have domesticated and bred the wild species so quickly? 

Without many generations of trial and error experimentation – culminating in a vast body of agronomic knowledge and agricultural practices that would have included genetics and breeding – it is all but impossible to understand how the agricultural revolution was brought about. Official science tries to explain the evolution of nomadic hunter-gatherers into sedentary, crop-growing farmers by claiming they discovered crops quite by accident. We are told it happened when a primitive villager tossed a seed bearing plant into the trash pile and noticed that it sprouted. 

But that trite tale can hardly explain how they selected the best wild species to use as the basis for the agricultural revolution. There are thousands and thousands of potential wild plants that could be turned into agricultural crops. How is it people with very little experience with wild grasses were able to pick the best varieties to breed? This represents a quantum leap. What we are asked to believe is that our ancestors, without much experience at the seminal stage of civilisation, were able to select and breed the very best varieties of wild grass species. 

How do we know this is true? Because we still grow the very crops they supposedly selected even after 5000 years of continuous technological and agricultural development. We are asked to suspend disbelief and accept they also constructed the largest precision-engineered stone building the world has ever seen – the Great Pyramid of Giza – using only primitive hand tools and backbreaking labor. Something is obviously wrong with this picture. 

Is it logical to assume our Earthly ancestors could (or would) have thrown together the agricultural revolution and then the entire civilisations of Sumer and Egypt out of whole cloth? No it is not; and neither do these suppositions represent sound science. 

For those of us in the alternative history camp, one of the most fundamental questions we must impress upon the public and upon ‘official science’ is to ask where are the antecedents and precedents? Show us the slow Darwinian stages of development that official history presupposes. How can you explain the sudden appearance of genetically altered food crops and advanced engineering techniques at the onset of human civilisation?

But yes, Postmodernism is awful though, carry on...



Postmodernism's Dangerous History | Stephen Hicks and Stefan Molyneux