The following article’s author, sincere and caring as she may be, is just another example of the confused, superstitious state of those whose prophet is Darwin and whose savior/god is natural-selection (mixed with a multitude of other gods and esoteric wanderings):
Stop the Torturous Experimentation on Baby Monkeys
“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.” -Edmund Burke.
“He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.” -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
“Man is the cruelest animal.” -Friedrich Nietzsche.
Starting in June, the University of Wisconsin at Madison is to begin torturous and unfathomable experiments on baby monkeys bred for such evil purposes. These innocent and helpless beings will be put through torture and purposeful induction of fear only to be murdered after one year of enduring this hell so that their brains can be dissected and the results upon their physiology quantified. The purposes of such hideous experiments are not known other than the morally bankrupt excuse of researching “anxiety and depression” (as if there weren’t enough humans around to observe for such knowledge). But even if there were a benefit to science that could be gained, it would still not justify such crimes being committed against any kind of baby or being. Undoubtedly, there is no real benefit to these experiments save the sociopathic gain of earning grant money for such practices or of learning better torture methods that could be applied against other primates (i.e. humans) for military purposes.
These experiments were originally conducted in the 1970’s by a psychiatrist/psychopath named Harry Harlow but were then stopped. They have again been reintroduced by another psychiatrist/psychopath named Ned Kalin. I used the word “evil” above, for when supposed centers of academia allow such immoral and demonic action to be carried out in the name of “learning” there is no other explanation for such abhorrent practices other than EVIL having manifested itself in the face of light and love. It is a crime to these innocent babies and it is an attack upon the very Divine spirit that should be expressed by centers of humanity, especially schools. As one of our closest living relatives with whom we share a preponderance of DNA, these experiments are not only an utter atrocity against these monkeys, they are a denigration of us all. I am reminded of a dialogue from the movie “Orca” starring Richard Harris, in which Harris plays a whaler who has committed a horrible atrocity against a mother Killer Whale. Harris asks a priest, “Can you commit a sin against an animal, Father?” The priest rightfully replies, “You can commit a sin against a blade of grass, my son.”
Please pray that these experiments will not start and will be rescinded by the University of Wisconsin at Madison… (emphasis added)
Read More Here:
First, I am as appalled at this kind of inhumane activity, ‘in the name of science’, as this writer! I hate cruelty to animals, no matter the intent and ultimate ‘benefit to man’.
As we should all know by now, the end rarely justifies the means, when ‘scientific’ man’s sense of right and wrong (‘morality’) is involved. All we have to do is look at the disastrous monstrosities ‘scientists’ have concocted over the last century and a half: nuclear weapons, eugenics/genetics, advanced war machinery (killing machines), etc, etc. And for these particular ‘scientists’, ‘the inconvenient truth’ of being right or wrong, or of harming or not harming others, has never, nor will it ever, get in the way of playing with their chemistry/erector sets, their ‘theoretical’ fairy-tales, nor their ‘scientific’ awards.
These psychotic nerds in lab-coats, because of their Darwinian beliefs/educational-indoctrination, have been morphed into some thing less than human. And what these ‘scientific’ androids are planning to perpetrate on helpless baby monkeys, ‘in the name of science’, is as demented and dehumanized as a human being can get! Show me a person who, for whatever reason, can be extremely cruel to animals, and I’ll show you a person who can be cruel to human beings even more so.
Moving on, note that this writer uses the word evil, and then explains why, and at the end of the quote, she asks for prayer. And yet she firmly, and quite mistakenly, believes these baby monkeys are her distant relatives, in some asinine, distorted way. Boys and girls, can you say MASS CONFUSION?
She then quotes a priest in a movie, “You can commit a sin against a blade of grass, my son.” Really? And how does a human being sin against a blade of grass? Am I committing a ‘sin’ by mowing the grass? Does a blade of grass have a mind and soul, does IT know IT has been ‘sinned against’, or even what ‘sin’ is?
It seems to me that no human being has ever been fully capable of defining what ‘sin’ truly is: one man’s sexual activity is ‘sin’ to another man, one man considers cussing a normal part of communicating with others, while another man is offended by such speech, because, to him, it is ‘sin’. It seems to me that it’s not too far of a stretch to suggest that ‘sin’ is a relative notion at best: “Different strokes for different folks.” And yet, according to this priest, a blade of grass knows what ‘sin’ is, since it can be ‘sinned’ against by man. ‘Sin’ is in the eye of the beholder, I guess? And who decides what is and isn’t ‘sin’? Mere religious man, of course, claiming his particular god told him what is and isn’t ‘sin’. ‘Sin’ seems to be not much more than a ‘chasing after the wind’.
This writer seems to be confused by her mixed bag of religiosity, as do many others, and so much so that she has become rather retrograde inverted, from what I can tell. You’ve heard of mixing metaphors, well this writer seems to be mixing her religious beliefs, and it’s messing with her mind.
I have an x-wife who is the very definition of this kind of endless, esoteric wandering, mixed with ‘science’: she still believes her great, great-times-ten uncle was a puke eating chimp, while at the same time believing in Jesus and Paul the Apostle, as well as every new-age/consciousness movement that comes wandering down the pike.
This kind of endless-wandering, free-thinking mindset, in my estimation, plays right into the hands of the elite-few, who, by the way, live to confuse and control the masses.
Sound a little irritated, do I? Well I am irritated, but not just because this writer brings back memories of my insane marriage. I am irritated because this kind of esoteric/’scientific’ confusion is a large part of the reason for this world being so fucked up. We have too many esoteric-inclined ‘free-thinkers’ roaming around, here and there, while the difficult, frightening issues we are all facing continue to worsen and go completely unresolved. And many of these wandering-here-and-there free-thinkers, unfortunately, for the rest of us, make their living as ‘scientists’.
Nikola Tesla stated:
“The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly, One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.”
We have too many deep thinkers, especially in science, and most, if not all, are no longer capable of thinking clearly. And this isn’t some new phenomenon. I believe this inability of many ‘scientists’ to think clearly has been around for the last two centuries-plus, and perhaps, even longer. And in particular, Darwin and his half-cousin, Francis Galton (eugenics), were both incapable of clear thinking, they were both insane deep thinkers!
And then there is Nietzsche’s view of man:
“Man is the cruelest animal.” -Friedrich Nietzsche.
Perhaps man is cruel because he has been manipulated/indoctrinated (‘educated’) into believing he is an animal (‘mammal’/’primate’), instead of a human being? If man is merely another step on the evolutionary ladder, then beyond being at the top of the heap at the moment, what is so special about him? I mean if man evolved just like a slug or worm, then who decided he was any more special, any more sacred, than a slug or a worm? Isn’t man, according to this unsubstantiated hypothesis, just another branch on ‘the tree’, and thus not much different from any other ‘species’?
To me, this is why life, of any kind, continues to be devalued every single day. Since Darwin wrote his book, all life forms have taken a massive hit, just look around and observe: death and destruction is everywhere. So with this said, should it really be a surprise to this writer, or us, that the ‘species’ called man should be capable of extreme cruelty, and not only with animals but with his own kind as well?
We have been programmed, over the last century-plus, to believe we are animals, by a select, elite few who view us as animals. You see, it is easier to control and rule over animals than it is to control and rule over human beings:
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.
For them [Goyim] let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in view that we are constantly, by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals of the GOYIM will puff themselves up with their knowledges and without any logical verification of them will put into effect all the information available from science, which our AGENTUR specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want.
These Wisconsin ‘scientists’ are capable of this kind of inhumane cruelty, because their religious beliefs are such that life of any kind is of little value, and so it can be used in any manner they see fit.
The Darwinian religion is as convoluted as any other. In one breath, a Darwinian believer will tell us we all have a ‘common ancestor’, and that we are at the top of ‘the tree’, the top of ‘the food chain’; we are the ‘dominant species’ on earth at the moment. And in the next breath, the same Darwinian believer will tell us that evolution/natural-selection has ceased, or in other words, human beings are as far as natural-selection could go, we human beings, as we are today, are as good as we will ever get, we are ‘the pinnacle’ (Really? The Darwinian god sucks!). And if I were to ask the Darwinian believer how he or she knows this, they, of course, would have their newest multisyllabic version of religious doctrine/dogma ready to answer my question, even if their answer didn’t begin to answer my question in any way.
This kind of religious contact would be no different from having a conversation with a Christian fundamentalist, devout Jew or Muslim, each one will always have the exact answer to any questions asked by a doubter, no matter how unsatisfying and inane the answer might be. In other words, there is no way to reason with the doggedly religious, whether Christian, Jew, Muslim or Darwinian. I know, I was once as arrogant and deluded as those I am referring to now.
What is most likely going to happen to these little monkeys is nothing short of extreme cruelty, it is criminal. And I wish it could be stopped. But can we really expect ‘scientists’, today, to be compassionate about baby monkeys, when many or most of them have no compassion for their fellow human beings?
Unsubstantiated ‘theories’, like natural-selection and eugenics, whether we’re willing to admit it or not, have a desensitizing, dehumanizing effect on we human beings, and we and the rest of the world suffer for it. The horrible effects of this dehumanization can be witnessed all around us, if we’ll just open our eyes and minds to observe, reason and deduce.
I just want to make clear that I am not standing against free-thinking and reasoning: the ability to think and reason, clearly and effectively, outside the illusion, which has been created, by the psychopathic few, to control and program the many.
I am concerned about free-thinkers who first, appear to have issues with thinking and reasoning, clearly, and second, who never seem to be able to stop free-thinking and reasoning long enough to land, react and respond. Continuously wandering through thoughts and never landing anywhere, never coming to any deduction or conclusion, is a ‘chasing after the wind’, a waste of time and mental energy, in my estimation.
Free-thinking and reasoning should have a goal in mind, an end of some kind in sight, shouldn’t they? What good is free-thinking and reasoning, if they never lead to conclusions and positive, effective ideas or plans and actions?