Information News Blog.com

It Hasn't Even Begun

By

Do Animals Think and have Emotion?

Do Animals Think and have EmotionI watch television shows and documentaries on animals and they are just fascinating. Whether it be animals in the wild or domestic animals, there is the curious though of what goes on inside the mind of an animal. When you hear dogs around the neighborhood barks without end, you wonder what they could be communicating. This led me to a though on the subject.

Concepts are still possible and are what humans and their predecessors used before sophisticated and universal language developed. Plenty of animals exhibit simple forms of communication, they can be cries, motions and change colors. Now most animals do not ,require “new brains” and most animals have an old brains. The motivation to hunt, drink and reproduce is locate in the hypothalamus. The rest of their brain is dedicated to sensory perceptions. In most mammals this is the case. For example cats do have emotions along with other mammals, as long as they have an amygdala which is primarily responsible for pain and punishing stimuli, if you stimulate that area of the brain they become very agitated and violent. Furthermore, the dopamine and serotine have a function in emotions also. Animal emotions are much more primitive because most but not all lack empathy which takes a higher level of cognitive skills, and a highly developed a pre-frontal cortex. The only real difference between most animals and humans is the ability to speak. Animals do many things like learn, have individual behaviorism, feel pain and sadness and loss. The trouble with humans is thinking of something different from them as being legitimate. Animals still think, reason and remember. They are not like insects, which function just biological programs. Rabbits, deer, squirrels and other animals eat hallucinogenic mushrooms and plants to purposely to get a chemical high. This alone is evidence they experience a form of consciousness, the self awareness of it, and the intelligence to know how to change it. Even plants experience consciousness.

Now why do humans use words? We use words because they are a good communication tool, not just with others, but for our own minds. We use language in our own minds to reference things easily. Without language, we could just use pictures and focus more on visual communication. This is how some animals communicate through visual communication.

Do Animals Think and have Emotion  2

Animals will remember if you treat them nicely, also if you treat them wrongly. There is a documentary that ravens will remember who treated them nicely and who treated them badly even 10 years after not seeing them. Elephants also exhibit quite a good memory, fondness for each other and grief when one dies. The same as apes. There are some species of dolphins take for example the bottle nose have been known for brutally maiming smaller species for fun. Not just killing them, but brutally murdering them slowly like they would aim at their organs and hit them repeatedly in groups, or cracking their bones over hours. They do not even eat them. Cats and orcas attack things they eat. Now cats do it for many reasons, practice, playing, and acceptance of their patriarchal and matriarchal figure. There was an experiment with octopuses where scientists had a lever in the aquarium and they would give them food when they activated it. after a while the cephalopod had enough of it, broke the lever and spewed paint at the scientists. This could be an emotion of frustration and anger.

There are plenty of scientific studies that suggest that animals have show both emotion and thought. For each other, the surrounding and even humans. The question lies in what point do animals reach a state of concessions where they are able to communicate like humans do.

By

Aaron Swartz was killed by the Government?

Aaron Swartz was killed by the governmentI been hearing about the suicide of Aaron Swartz and how there have been multiple reports on why he committed suicide. Was a sentence of 6 months to 35 years in prison be to much for this talented young man who has fan support. He was a hacker and activist and I understand that but still a life was lost. I found this LA Times article regarding that the government apparently killed him. This made me put some thought on the subject.

When Aaron Swartz sneaked into the forbidden service closet, to setup a PC on the network switch to bypass the MIT IT team’s bans and then used it to deprive services to MIT shutting down JSTOR access and JSTOR  to upload 4.8 million articles online to financial detriment of the company for personal gain,publicity and social capital. That would all put this things as felonies. And Aaron Swartz himself was independently wealthy before Reddit’s sale, then it only increased his wealth when he received a nice sized kickback. Aaron Swartz has repeatedly discussed doing exactly what he did to release millions of documents of information online, which would harm JSTOR’s ability to operate. When Aaron Swartz also uses extralegal means by going into a forbidden networking area and places unauthorized equipment onto the infrastructure there to skip toe the multiple bans that JSTOR and MIT had placed on him. Sentencing guidelines for an offense like Aaron Swartz committed would max out at in about 7 years. He was offered six months and no fines in a plea deal. Up to 35 years is not even in the picture for the case, but journalists see this as “maximum sentence!” and leap on top of that. The estimated value of the already download files before MIT called in the appropriate authorities (around $1.5 million) came from JSTOR’s estimate which is a whole lot in my eyes and for the reason for going after him.

Now why would Aaron Swartz do what he did? He had plenty of social and political gain to profit from the downloading of these materials, not including the income he would make on speaking gigs about the events. Since this story is still ongoing, there will be more information to come.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-aaron-swartz-funeral-eulogy-father-20130115,0,648108.story

By

The Monarch System

The Monarch System I sometimes wonder what system of government works best. Whether it be the current two party capitalist system we are living under now or a monarchism system throughout history. Through human civilization countries were ruled under a monarchism system and countries prospered and faltered. You cannot deny however that the monarchism is no longer what it once was and has now been deem irrelevant or obsolete. This made me put some thought on this subject.

I would say more of just a natural development of society, taking the father being the head of the family to an end ruling over a tribe and then to a nation. No real benefits, besides tradition, I suppose. The same benefit could be attained if presidents or other heads of state were mostly distinguished generals instead of just career politicians. The Mannerheim of Finland comes to mind. Monarchy in the UK costs a pound a year to every citizen. The money they make from broadcast television rights from marriages and everyone of their events regarding royalty greatly outweighs the costs. Not only is it profitable, the fact that royalty have to “act decently” to avoid being overthrown and so their children have the right to be privileged as they are, makes them way more responsible than politicians who have nothing to fear. Hypothetically, monarchs might be more inclined to make long-term investments instead of short-sighted populist and useless decisions. Since monarchs won’t have to win an election every 4 years and since they are concerned with their legacies, their families will control the state in the future. The monarch has an incentive to not “overtax” so to speak, because he would be responsible for a revolution against him. But in a publicly owned government, that is not the case, because the costs of it are collectivized. In a monarchy, you can blame he king, but in democracy or any of its variants, you do not really know who to blame.  Think of it this way, monarchies always work better in the long term. A monarch takes care of his country because it is his. He was born to rule it and will rule it his entire life. It is the inheritance the monarch will pass to his children. The wealth and security of the nation is directly related to the wealth and security of the monarch. Now an elected leader has no permanent ties to his country. He serves for his term and then after his term is over. For him, it doesn’t matter whether the nation prospers or suffers. There are no consequences for failure.

Originally the first tribal leaders who would later become kings had some sort of advantage. They were either great warriors or leaders so they had physical or mental advantages. Thus it made sense that these advantages would pass down genetically. Heirs would be trained and groomed for leadership so they would also become great leaders. However of course this system also suffered problems. Occasionally you would have genetic failures or heirs who were awful. Many the people suffered from beliefs like divine kingship. For some it just stopped being a duty and become a right. Many of these heirs would become despots and tyrants. The problem was that these heirs became bratty privileged teens who believe they have lots of rights to things instead of working towards them. And when there is no decent figure to talk them down you have a terrible reign until the next good one.

The Monarch System 1

 In an ideal world, a monarchy would be the most effective system of government. A monarch should be one who embodies in the purest form possible the aggregate national spirit of the population. For example take Napoleon in the revolutionary and post-revolutionary France, before he was overcome by his arrogance following his glorious victories.  When immersed in a cabinet and parliament of representatives, the monarch gains insight into arguments from people of varying viewpoints, but the monarch s the one who makes the final decision.

Now don’t think about systems of government as better or worse. They’re only better or worse at different issues. Take a republic, for instance, would have been a weak construct in the cutthroat environment in which feudalism prospered. What you get with monarchy is a complete executive power and responsibility. In a sense this ties the fate of the monarch and his family to the success of the state, which is why they chose to play power off as some burden or right. The problem is this comes out of a violent and competitive time, in which the power structure was faced with existential threats. About the offspring issue, the problem isn’t bad offspring, the problem is when those with a vested interest in the system can afford to let bad offspring run the show. The advantage is that, unlike a republic, the people with a force monopoly cannot have a vested interest in the failure of the state, as they are the state themselves.

By

News of the Day 1/15/13

Leave a comment below in any good article and we can discuss them.

Dept. of Homeland Security Forced to Release List of Keywords Used to Monitor Social Networking Sites
http://www.forbes.com/sites/reuvencohen/2012/05/26/department-of-homeland-security-forced-to-release-list-of-keywords-used-to-monitor-social-networking-sites/2/

New York Nears Gun Limits http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324595704578242253004271978.html

End Near? Doomsday Clock Holds at 5 ‘Til Midnight http://news.yahoo.com/end-near-doomsday-clock-holds-5-til-midnight-232147095.html

Satanists planning rally for Florida Gov. Rick Scott http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/satanists-planning-rally-florida-gov-rick-scott-231148312.html

White House: Texas must remain part of the US http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-texas-must-remain-part-us-212720777.html

University of Toronto student group hosts “epic sex club adventure”  http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1315033–university-of-toronto-student-group-hosts-epic-sex-club-adventure

By

NEET

NEETWhen I left high school, my idea was to see the next coming year as a long summer. Little that I know that a time after high school is a time where you have to get the ball rolling in what will be your life. It is hard for people to realize that they will have to look out for themselves moving forward but most people do it. For others, they become a NEET which stands for not in education, employment or training. I want to put a thought on this subject that almost anyone can easily fall into being by choice or by force i.e. (lost your job).

They don’t just give people businesses for free. You have to save money to afford things. Young people today see that savings are not secure, and that work is barely rewarded. I have no doubt that most young people would be happy to work if it got them something out of it, but information about how the outcome is, the prospects really are discouraging. Maybe you are happy to work your youthful years away on the chance of being a success. Young people today see people working all the time, and by the time most of them let’s say their mid-thirties, they have exactly as much to show for their work as the guy who did almost nothing. And why would a NEET bother when? The society offered is very sterile, discourages risk or success and treats its subjects like children. A NEET can’t be asses with that so a NEET to work as little as possible, put in as little as possible, consume very little and try and be self sufficient as best they can while acting like a perpetual child. The point is to live a life that is satisfying upon reflection. And not to produce the most dollar value per hour worked. A young person can waste their youth working for a chance at success, something that seems ever more unlikely, or they can waste it on hobbies or relationships. If it were the case that they could reasonably plan for their future, that their work would be more likely than not to pay off in some way and that would then, make a big difference.

Looking at a situation of a NEET, is not that difficult to understand their situation. Because their time on earth is limited and they would rather not waste an hour doing some menial task like lifting boxes or taking a store’s inventory only to receive enough money for a burger from Mc’Donalds. If you are receiving minimum wage for a job, it just isn’t worth it anymore compared to getting on welfare or disability payments. The funny thing is that there’s nothing wrong with these people excluding the disabled, which I feel should get some help other than their mindset. They have a (to me) attitude. Everything happens to me! The government wont help me, my family is poor, there’s no jobs, no one will help me! These people are convinced that their lives are out of their hands. And that’s why they’re usually hostile, mean, and generally arrogant.

NEET 1

There are many reasons outside the control of a person such as economy, political climate, stagnation, feminism, nuclear family degeneration and most more. The post-WWII baby boom, are definitely the root cause of most of the world’s financial problems right now. We’re living in an age where people over 45 make up the majority of society. Let that sink in for a bit. Our society has become one of preservation rather than progress. In the end, people should not judge NEET’s because the world seems to stack up on everyone right out of high school. There has to be something there for you to just finding it in you to make the best of what you can get.

 

By

News of the Day 1/11/13

Leave a comment below and we can discuss any article you all find interesting.

“Toddler” is 20 Years Old, and Forever Young, Due to Baffling Medical Condition http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/toddler-20-years-old-forever-young-due-baffling-175300753.html

$100 to Message Mark Zuckerberg? http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/facebook-charging-100-message-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-230014501–abc-news-tech.html

Woman Vows to Only Eat at Starbucks http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/seattle-woman-vows-eat-drink-only-starbucks-items-173538004–abc-news-savings-and-investment.html

Official: Abducted Ind. boy’s mother lived in car http://news.yahoo.com/official-abducted-ind-boys-mother-lived-car-175359604.html

‘Trillion dollar coin’ idea is worthless http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Trillion-dollar-coin-idea-is-worthless-4187798.php

Obama, Karzai accelerate end of U.S. combat role in Afghanistan http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/12/us-obama-afghanistan-idUSBRE90A0ZT20130112

By

News of the Day 1/10/13

This are some articles I would write about if I had enough time but I find interesting.

Obama signs law giving himself, bush lifetime secret service guard. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-signs-law-giving-himself-bush-lifetime-secret-184305122–politics.html

Us publicly voices concerns over Britain leaving EU. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/9791484/US-publicly-voices-concerns-over-Britain-leaving-EU.html

Student shot at Calif.school by classmate: subject talked in surrendering by teacher. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57563309/student-shot-at-calif-high-school-by-classmate-suspect-talked-into-surrendering-by-teacher/

Diet soda linked to depression in NIH study. http://www.blacklistednews.com/Diet_Soda_Linked_to_Depression_in_NIH_Study/23529/0/0/0/Y/M.html

Bombing kills 103 people in Pakistan. http://news.yahoo.com/bombings-kill-103-people-pakistan-185413160.html

Alex Jones, creator of ‘Deport Piers Morgan’ petition, blows up on CNN. http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/01/the-deport-piers-morgan-creator-blows-up-on-cnn-153577.html

Florida professor won’t back down from Newtown massacre conspiracy theory when confronted by news cameras. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260325/James-Tracy-Florida-professor-won-t-Newtown-massacre-conspiracy-theory.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

Black teenager punches woman after she calls him a ‘smelly Nigerian’ in latest shocking racist footage filmed on the Tube. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2260124/Black-teen-punches-woman-calls-smelly-Nigerian-shocking-racist-video-filmed-Tube.html

NRA rips Biden task force for ‘attack’ on 2nd Amendment, as details of plan emerge. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/10/biden-meets-with-nra-faces-pushback-on-hill-over-executive-order-gun-control/

By

Rich and Poor Gap

Rich and Poor Gap

You been hearing for years about the economy since 2008 about this or that. Recently the Fiscal Cliff fiasco and they literally ram your head in the wall over and over with this information. It is depressing in my opinion and leads to me to a though on the poor, the middle class and the rich.

Poor people are fine with taxes on the rich and the rich already do pay the most of the taxes. Just because the rich have gained something from society doesn’t mean that they owe society the majority of their income. The rich should accept regulations necessary for the protection of public good and stable markets without abrupt correction, along with higher taxes to help fund the government that enforces law to order society. The poor should accept that massive social programs are unsustainable and must be cutback along with higher taxes on them as well to prevent financial ruin and payback the debt of past excesses. If both sides would commit to some middle ground like was done to fund the war effort during World War II we could avoid the violent clashes of austerity-imposition that are plaguing Europe and Greece right now. A argument I have to the middle class and the rich is in welfare. You can either pay for people to have food and shelter or you can pay for crime waves. The 1/3 of the population receives some benefits, but do they want these people at home or do you want them robbing to get food? Look at it this way, if the government were to tell the rich we’re going to have no compulsory taxes. You pay us as much as you want however, just know that if we don’t get enough taxes from you for the basic functions, this government will collapse and will give way to a government that will have no problem taxing you a significantly larger portion than what you would have to give now. A country for example that would do this is France with their recent proposal of taxing the rich up to 75% of their income or net worth. And what are this basic functions a government needs? They are police, education, defense, courts, immigration control, the CDC, FBI, CIA Department of Defense, Social Security, Medicare, WIC, prisons, the marshal service and roads. Now I am all for very limited government, but donations don’t work. It was tried under the Articles of Confederation. What happened was that It failed miserably, which is why the power to tax and spend was written into Art I sec 8.

This is where the rich and poor differ in views of the world. Public school in certain areas are terrible, but it’s in large part because families are terrible. Poor people with poor educations actually think differently and how can they not? How can you see the same world when you are totally different, don’t have a father, when the only doctors you see are on television where you also see nothing but sports and ads for food? You have to believe to achieve. It’s so hard learning from someone you cannot define yourself through. Tie this to a capitalist system where your advancement revolves around taking advantage of what others do not know, and this leaves most poor people at a great disadvantage. Every attempt at wealth redistribution and state or worker ownership of the means of production in an attempt to eliminate classes has not been good through out history. It has resulted in mass poverty, stagnation of economic progress, famines and starvation due to economic inactivity and lack of productivity, oppression to maintain the peoples from revolting, and massive death on a scale that the world has never seen before during peace time. In more free economies, the economy has granted people unprecedented wealth in the history of the world. As well as unprecedented financial, social and political freedom, a dignified life and a productive, growing, progressing, innovating economy. So history tells us that you can try to change with a fundamental way of government like socialism and others but they have not worked yet.

Now I have no problem with helping people that are honestly trying to help themselves and being smart about it. However when it comes to couples that can barely support each other and then decide to have children to give their dismal life meaning and expect society to feed that child while screaming “don’t punish my baby for my mistakes.” Yes, its sad, a child is starving but it is their fault, don’t thread on me by trying to appeal to my sense of guilt.

Now the problem with the rich is they want to pump out whatever sells, release out their crappy electronics, pump out crappy music, pump out crappy short term solutions to expansive long term problems. You will always hear rich people saying the poor need to do this or that however the rich will never show how to do this though.They will never say, see this product we are putting out? Well, to be successful yourself you need to stop buying it and focus here, on school. You need to understand that this will be a very hard road and it will make no sense. Instead the rich want to talk in theory, yeah the poor should just try harder, they could be where I’m at. This is actually both true and false and in another time yes. If things go perfectly well, the children’s children of the current poor could be where you are at but that requires so much.

By

Fluoride in the Water

Fluoride in the waterI always feel uneasy whenever I have to drink from my tap water. Usually I prefer to go thirsty before I grab a glass and drink tap water. It is because of I wonder what kinds of chemicals are in the water. With all the things that get expose to water, is it possible to truly have clean water?

.8 PPM fluoride in the water system? It’s strange how they use PPM to make it sound minuscule when PPM really means milligrams per liter. So if I drank two liters of water I would get almost 2mg of fluoride. One of the many conspiracy theories regarding chemicals in the water revolve around hexafluorosilicic acid, not sodium fluoride or calcium fluoride. In solution, it does not matter what the source was; a fluoride ion from calcium fluoride is indistinguishable from a fluoride ion and from hexafluorosilicic acid. Fluoride is toxic in high enough doses like in Vitamin C, red food coloring, aspirin and others. The point is, fluoride like many other substances which we all use, begins with certain dosages and toxins outside of those dosages. The key dough that everything in large doses is bad for you. For example I know that the LD50 for calcium fluoride is 4250 mg/kg, so you’d have to be literally inhaling calcium fluoride for you to have a 50/50 chance of dying.

I read the Choi meta study is an analysis of various studies that have been done on the effects of high fluoride exposure and it was interesting. Almost all of the papers reviewed in the study were published in China and deal with the many health issues caused by very high fluoride contamination in rural water supplies. Concentrations levels  many times those in American tap water. Now where the use of fluoride is good is around 50% of the fluoride we ingest is stored in hard tissue bones and teeth where it calcifies these structures almost all and of the excess are flushed out. This along with exposure in the mouth, serves as fluorides beneficial mechanism.

The genuine point am making is where fluoride is used in a early age. For most of a fetus’ development, it uses the systems of the mother to filter intake and output via the placenta. High volumes of fluoride in the early stage of life can cause health problems later on their lives. It would not be recommended that young children use toothpaste with high fluoride concentration as it can lead to dental fluorosis which in most cases is exhibited as a discoloration of the teeth, especially if the child is swallows toothpaste. More severe cases of overexposure to NaF are typically the result of children eating large quantities of fluoride-enriched toothpaste or being given supplements by uninformed parents.

Fluoride in the water may not be avoidable as it can be in the tap water of your state. You use this water for cooking, washing and bathing if you do not drink tap water.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi.html

By

Nihilism

Nihilism

I came about the subject of nihilism the other day and I felt like it either in twine or contradicts itself with atheism. Am sure like many of you and myself you question a deity or you question the meaning of things. I did and here is my though on this.

There is no “cosmic” purpose, but humans are intelligent. We make our own purpose and law, man-made, sometimes imperfect law keeps us in line. The State, kings, and commoners are all answerable to the justice of the law. There’s also a evolutionary benefit to a level of altruism and cooperation. Personal beliefs vary from person to person with religion going along with that. There are often recurring points; but, not everyone believes, fully the same things. Secular nations don’t have objective morality; they have the appearance of objectivity however, it can be  barred completely by lack of evidence of the deity or deities which they follow. In that moment, it’s purely human-invented morality. Things like empathy, and some other moral tenants, aren’t unique to humanity, despite the endless romanticism of the species. The thing with atheism is that it isn’t a belief, but instead a lack thereof belief. What someone chooses to believe if you choose not to believe in it. Perhaps we will see the rise of different sects within atheism, as with what happened with Christianity. Nihilism is an answer to a mind that’s only ever known an objective view of things, eventually you’ll realize that that objective view you held so firmly was relative too, so the lack of tangible meaning doesn’t matter. Now nihilism would be what a robot would arrive at and at least atheists still believe in humanity I think. Life is inherently pointless, we give it meaning by assigning it purpose that is worth something to humans. With the ideas of nihilism and atheism, morality is established by society and culture, not the individual. An individual can find they can’t live by the standards of the culture, they can remove themselves from that culture, or the culture will remove that individual from society.

A issue I have with atheism is that belief in Not-God requires just as much faith as belief in God. No atheist can prove that the universe created itself or was created by a almighty NEENFC (Non-Eternal Entity No First Cause) or is cyclical and sustained by an immense being that creates and obliterates the energy needed for such a thing to be possible. Take The Seventh Seal for instance, or Andrei Tarkovsky films. As man might try, religion remains something intractable in his mind. Chaos does not come with atheism as man does not lose his morality along with his religion. What’s more, the loss of morality is a reflection of a deliberate pursuit into the minds of people. Media for example teaches obedience through fear, leading to citizens who see fear as powerful. So in thus, when dealing with things, immorality thrives as that was how they were taught. In a state that teaches its citizens to revere and love order by exemplary laws and national pride morality thrives. Thus spirituality is a personal satisfaction, morality is grouped  satisfaction.

Now I have met a few atheist both young and old and a true atheist doesn’t simply deny the existence of god. A true atheist denies the very possibility of holding any sort of religious belief whatsoever, positive, negative, or agnostic.
It is impossible to even have an coherent opinion on the question and ask a true atheist if he believes in god and the only response he can give is a snort and condescending smile. Where does this put science in this matter? It presupposes that the world is ordered and structured in an intelligible way. Science presupposes that everything operates in accordance with cause-and-effect. Science presupposes that these causes are constant and time-invariant in the way they operate, otherwise you couldn’t depend on your observation to confirm or falsify a hypothesis or use it to make future predictions. Science also  presupposes mathematics can accurately depict reality, in the construction of its models and measuring instruments.

Now I have come to a conclusion regarding the universe which is there are three possibilities for the the existence of the universe. It is un-caused, self-caused and  caused. The universe cannot be un-caused since it exists. It cannot be self-caused since it would have to first “not exist” in order to need causing. Yet, it would still have to exist in order to have the ability to cause. It is absurd to conclude that the universe was in a state of existence and non-existence in order to cause it’s own existence. A friend of mine once told me that he believed the universe was un-caused, and has always existed. My question is that is if it’s acceptable to have an un-caused universe, why would it not be acceptable to have a creator that is un-caused? So now imagine a member of the scientific community argues for the eternal existence of the universe, don’t they commit the same fallacy as the theologian who argues for the eternal existence of God?

Through all this philosophy has provided something. Science has all sorts of philosophical presuppositions for example absurdism and is itself based on the philosophy of empiricism. Science is itself ethically neutral; we require philosophy to tell us when to use a nuclear weapon and when not to do so. For example the doctor who saves a life does so because he operates on the philosophy that lives should be saved and science should be trusted.  In the end I think that philosophy is the basis of science.