One of the most fascinating books I have ever read was Charles Darwin’s “Voyage of the Beagle”. The part of greatest interest was his observations of South American geology, including fossils, primarily in Argentina, and evidence of earthquakes in Chile. He had so much time to explore. Today scientists are specialists in a field – he was a generalist who knew flora, fauna, and then current geology. I think that is why Darwin, Einstein, and Wegener were so influential – general knowledge that they unified across disciiplines.

Another example of this treachury is the book Mein Kampf ghost written for Adolph Hitler–another mindless jesuit robot stooge from history–Father Bernhardt Stempfle is the author of the great socialist Fuhrer’s book. Nazi-Fascism, socialism, marxism, communism, evolutionism, fake christianity, are all traced to the vaticans front Porch, with the footprints of the jesuits all over them. Will I prove it here, NO, because I am not going to type 500 years of historical documents here, documents not of the mainstream, books from those centuries the jesuits wish would go away.

So reading the bibliography of Einstein it is without question this man supported socialist communism theology. Historically this process which starts democratically has a 100% failure rate. Einstein was a jesuit prop.

Who invented communism, socialism, marxism…well the vatican stooges did, via Jesuit Adam Weishavpt, 1778-1811. Marx refined Weishavpts works, where did Marx do his work, He was privately tutored by jesuits in the huge reading room of the british museum while writing the Communist Manifesto based upon the Ten maxims or “Planks” the Order had perfected on its Paraguayan Reductions (1600-1750) and its maryland Reductions (1650-1838). His writings were financed by he societys wealthy, white gentile cartel capitalists, such as John D. Rockefeller, Jr., And J.P. Morgan.

Who swirls around evolution, these crooks do, believe them if you will, I know better. Not only is the evidence alarming, it is irrefutable, thus the lies of known liars still prevail today…unless your willing to go to extreme document collecting, antique book collecting, it is difficult to connect the dots.

Evolution is just another jesuit created false religion.

In freedom can I turn to You.
In freedom can I leave.
In freedom You have given me
the Life in which I breathe.
So often do I run from You.
So often do I leave.
So spacious is Your heart of grace.
So precious is Your Love.
How wonderful You are to me,
so that I might be free.

Main Entry:
idol·a·try
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural idol·a·tries
Etymology:
Middle English ydolatrie, from Anglo-French, from Medieval Latin idolatria, alteration of Late Latin idololatria, from Greek eidōlolatreia, from eidōlon idol + -latreia -latry
Date:
13th century

1 : the worship of a physical object as a god 2 : immoderate attachment or devotion to something

Idolatry

Idolatry is the universal human tendency to value something or someone in a way that hinders the love and trust we owe to God. It is an act of theft from God whereby we use some part of creation in a way that steals from honor due to God.

Idolatry conflicts with our putting God alone first in our lives, in what we love and trust (see Exodus 20:3-5; Deut. 5:7-9; Romans 1:21-23).

In idolatry we put something or someone, usually a gift from God, in a place of value that detracts from the first place owed to God alone, the gift Giver.

The way out of idolatry is always to love and to trust the gift Giver without interference from any gift or any thing other than God. We will then be able to love and to appreciate gifts appropriately, neither giving them too much power nor failing to be thankful for them.

We will then be free indeed, and not in bondage or addiction to anything that cannot fulfill us or give us peace

Greg says “I provided 3000+ scientific facts earlier in this thread, you ignored it, and bad mouthed it”. It was not ignored and that which follows is primarily the result of following your leads. By the way the Tesla tower led me to an interesting discussion of the Tunguska event in Russia. Interesting read , I have been interested in an explaination of this event for many years. I don’t have a link since that was several days ago but I am sure that if you tie them together you can find it (Tessla Tunguska). Perry is there also.

Another on got me to this site: an interesting article regarding the Grand Canyon by creationist Steven Austin and geologist Wilfred Elders.
I could not get it at the following address;

http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol19/8417_trivializing_creationist_schol_12_30_1899.asp.

I had to use the cached function. I put in “basalt base grand canyon strata lava spilled” and googled it. It is the 6th entry “NCSE resource”. I used “basalt base grand canyon strata lava spilled” because I had been reading one of your creation sources that stated that lava which spilled over the rim and went to the canyon bottom had been dated by scientists as being older than the lava residing under many layers of rock low in the canyon. ONE of THOSE events which if true would prove geologic time and, therefore, evolution false. Not so.

Following are quotes from Elders, the first of which expresses why I did not occupy myself with reading all the literature you have suggested but that I do look at it to get the general drift.

“On the count of not having read all that creationist literature, I plead guilty as charged. However, I believe that I have read sufficient of it to conclude that this corpus of work falls far short of proving Austin´s assertion that Noah´s flood formed all Phanerozoic rocks and that the Grand Canyon formed in the aftermath of that deluge.”

“There is a major irony here in using the work of my friend and mentor “Doc” Bretz in support of biblical literalism. It was in discussions with him that I first became interested in the neocreationist movement, shortly after the publication of Whitcomb and Morris (1964). Although the controversy over his work on the Channeled Scabland was protracted, Bretz regarded it as a good example of the self-correcting nature of mainstream science. Creationists subscribing to the views of the President Emeritus of the ICR (Morris 1970) cannot correct the Genesis story, no matter what scientific evidence is produced. Had “Doc” survived to see the publication of Austin (1994) I am sure that his comments would have been pithy and devastating to the creationists´ misuse of his work.”

Regarding three basalts in the Grand Canyon located in the strata sequences: I have inserted 1,2,3 to identify these basalts and added the average corresponding dates.

“Austin pays great attention to radioactive dating because it is the Achilles heel of young earth creationists. Although he emphasizes any perceived discrepancies in radiometric ages published by different workers, he provides no satisfactory explanation of his willful misuse of radioactive dating in the Grand Canyon. Although he had earlier admitted that the Rb/Sr isotopic data from the Pleistocene basalts yield a false isochron (Austin 1988), he later used the same approach to publish what he knew to be geologically impossible results (Austin 194: 124-5) and posed the rhetorical question (Austin 1994: 129), “Has any Grand Canyon rock been successfully dated?” 1. Ilg and others (1996) used U/Pb ratios to date the oldest rocks of the Grand Canyon and found that different units had ages ranging from 1750 to 1660 million years. ( about 1.7 billion years) 2.Larson and others (1994) used Rb/Sr data from the Cardenas Basalt to determine an age of 1103 million years. (1.1 bilion years) 3. Dalrymple and Hamblin (1998) measured K/Ar ratios to obtain ages in the range 0.684 to 0.443 million years for the Pleistocene basalts (about 500 thousand years). If Dr Austin has credible data which refute the order in which these rocks were formed, or which even change these numbers significantly, I urge him to publish them in full in a major scientific journal. I would be happy to assist him by reviewing the manuscript.”

This quote from creationists. “However, volcanoes of much more recent origin exist on Grand Canyon’s north rim. Geologists agree that these volcanoes erupted only thousands of years ago, spilling lava into an already eroded Grand Canyon, even temporarily damming the Colorado River. Rocks from these lava flows have been dated by the same rubidium-strontium isochron method used to date the Cardenas Basalt, giving an “age” of 1.34 billion years.4 This result indicates that the top of the canyon is actually older than the bottom! Such an obviously incorrect and ridiculous “age” speaks eloquently of the great problems inherent in radioisotope dating.”

There certainly does seem to be a problem here:
“Dalrymple and Hamblin (1998) measured K/Ar ratios to obtain ages in the range 0.684 to 0.443 million years for the Pleistocene basalts” vs “Rocks from these lava flows have been dated by the same rubidium-strontium isochron method giving an “age” of 1.34 billion years.” Who to believe? I figure Greg won’t see this as any problem since Earth is < 10,000 years!!?? Discard any evidence to the contrary.

About Einstein and the STR by a physicist , not quite so heavy into the math that leaves most in the dust, including me, source that you listed:

http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm

Another: Your interview on November 15 about Einstein, Hilbert and relativity suggested Hilbert was guilty of plagiarism, a strong and loaded word.
David Hilbert’s contributions were great and he had no need to steal from anyone, even Einstein.

Relativity did not arise, fresh born, from the mind of Einstein. Even 10 years before 1915, Minkowski and others developed the mathematics of space time geometry, and Einstein was Minkowski’s student.

Quoting the biography “Hilbert” by Constance Reid, Springer-Verlag, 1970, Hilbert was forthright and generous with credit to Einstein: And “stated frequently in lectures that the great idea was Einsteins”, and “Einstein did the work, not the mathematicians.” Hilbert recommended that a major prize in 1916 go to Einstein “for the high mathematical spirit behind all of his achievements.” Doesn’t sound like an idea thief to me. C.F. Kent Quirks and Quarks
http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/archives/97-98/feedback9798.htm#hilbert