Topics worth thinking about
By John J. Moelaert
Friendship is a fascinating
phenomenon. It costs nothing and yet you can't buy it at any
price. It usually starts simply: with a smile, a helping hand,
a good laugh--sometimes with a tear or two. Friendship is not
something that can be forced nor even be earned. It doesn't have
to be spelled out. Friendship is something you sense. It permeates
one's being and shapes one's behavior. It rejects envy and overcomes
adversity. Friendship recognizes that life without love is a
bird without wings and that happiness is multiplied by being
shared. Real friends care about each other and show it. The poorest
person in the world is not a pauper, but a friendless one. JM
GLOBAL WARMING MUCH
MORE THAN INCONVENIENCE
Al Gore's presentation
on climate change creates the illusion that with some minor inconveniences
we can prevent the catastrophic consequences of global warming.
We can not!
Climate change is not merely an inconvenience: it is a matter
of life and death for the human race and countless animal species.
The environmental abuse inflicted on our plundered planet has
created its own momentum which will take many decades and drastic
measures to reverse.
There is an illusion afloat that suggests that we can avoid global
disaster by making some minor adjustments and that life will
go on pretty much as usual. This cavalier attitude is even reflected
in our language with terms such as "sustainable development"
which ignores the fact that our destructive environmental activities
can not be sustained.
Scientific warnings about the negative effects of pollutants
on global climates date back to the 80s and what has been the
response? Bigger cars, larger houses, over-fishing, deforestation
and most destructive of all: overpopulation. The much trumpeted
pollution reduction proposal of 20 per cent will be nullified
by population growth and increased consumerism. World-renowned
explorer Jacques-Yves Cousteau called the world's population
explosion the greatest threat to human survival and described
"sustainable development" as an illusion.
A Cornell University study predicts "an apocalyptic worldwide
scene of absolute misery, poverty, disease and starvation"
if current population trends continue. While scientists disagree
on how close we are to global disaster (estimates vary from 20
to 100 years), there is general agreement total social and environmental
collapse is inevitable if drastic changes in our reproductive
rates and economic policies are not made very soon. There is
no evidence that this is about to happen. On the contrary, unlimited
human reproduction is not only allowed, but even encouraged by
business and religious interests. Population growth means economic
growth and increased profits. It also means an increase in pollution,
global warming, resource depletion, poverty, crime and starvation.
It is crucial to understand that none of these environmental
and social problems can be solved unless population growth is
reversed. To fully comprehend the astronomical rate of human
reproduction consider this: it took about one million years for
the world population to reach the 2.5 billion mark in 1950. The
next 2.5 billion people took only 37 years to produce.
The basic dilemma is the contest between economic interests and
environmental priorities. US Vice President Dick Cheney recently
stated categorically that he would oppose any environmental legislation
that would have a negative impact on the US economy. What has
escaped Cheney and other Neanderthal thinkers in government and
big business is that the costs of multiplying natural disasters
will far exceed corporate losses due to any progressive environmental
The world economy is not a philanthropic institution, but is
based on waste and driven by greed. Economic policies are formulated
on the basis of whatever is financially profitable with little
or no regard for the public interest and the environment. The
irony is we understand the problems and we know the solutions,
but most politicians and business executives lack the foresight
and the compassion to implement the necessary remedial actions.
The real bottom line is not consumerism at any price, but a quality-of-life
achieved in harmony with the natural laws of this fragile planet.
The human race right now is accelerating in the opposite direction.
It will take a lot more than lip service, tokenism and mere inconvenience
to reverse that process.
Muslim traditions we can
I am a Canadian by choicenot
by chance. As an immigrant I strongly believe that it is incumbent
on all immigrants to adapt to the customs, culture
and laws of Canadanot the other way around. Anyone who
prefers the customs, culture and laws of their country of birth
should stay there. Not a single person has ever been forced to
immigrate to Canada.
It was wrong for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to
allow some of its members to wear turbans instead of the standard
headgear. If it is that important for recruits to wear turbans
they should not join the RCMP. Now some immigrants refuse to
wear hard hats on construction sites for religious reasons.
Breaking safety rules invites serious injury, possibly death,
so anyone refusing to wear a hard hat should not be allowed where
such gear is required. Another growing controversy in the Western
world is Muslim women wishing to hide themselves by wearing burkas
in public to cover their entire bodies, except for a narrow slit
for their eyes. Such garments make them impossible to identify
and renders integration in Western society all but impossible.
It is amazing how much importance millions
of religious people attach to their headgear.
Sikhs wear turbans, Jews skull caps, Muslim women cover their
heads with kerchiefs or burkas, Catholic
and Anglican bishops wear miters. Interestingly, Jesus and Buddha
never wore any headgear. Many believe headgear shows
respect for God, but surely how you use your head is far more
important than what you put on it.
There are many Muslim traditions that are unacceptable in democratic
societies, for example, denying women education and the right
to vote, let alone run for political office. Millions of girls
are mutilated in the Muslim world every year by having their
clitoris cut off to keep them pure.. Women have been
sentenced by Muslim courts to be gang-raped to "restore
the honour" of families. Muslim women--unlike Muslim men--are
sometimes stoned to death for having sex outside or even before
marriage. Such barbaric practices and gross injustices cannot
be tolerated in any free and democratic society.
See also Islam and terrorism
Since time immemorial people
have wondered how we got here: through evolution or through creation.
Both belief systems require a generous dose of gullibility.
EVOLUTION: is based on the premise that life is the result
of random chaos. In other words given enough time and external
factors it was inevitable that amoebas would eventually develop
into other life forms and those new species into yet newer life
forms and so on until the present fauna had evolved, including
oysters, canaries and giraffes. This evolutionary process is
called natural selection. It is based on the principle that life
forms which best adapt to a changing environment will survive--perhaps
even flourish-- through life-altering reproduction. For example,
if butterflies mate in a dark-colored environment, the dark offspring
will less likely fall prey to predatory species than the lighter-colored
ones which are more visible. Hence the dark butterflies survive
in larger numbers than the light ones and thus are much more
numerous in such an environment. Failure to adapt to changing
environmental conditions can lead to extinction, e.g. the dinosaurs.
The main weakness of the evolution theory is the so-called missing
links. E.g. while there appears to be a genetic link between
birds and reptiles (both have scale tissue), there are no reptiles
with partially developed wings.
CREATIONISM: Christian fundamentalists believe the earth
is only 6000 years old and that God created all creatures in
six days and rested on the seventh. According to this theory
dinosaurs and human beings coexisted at one time, despite the
fossil record and carbon dating which suggests the earth is 4
1/2 billion years old and human beings and dinosaurs lived millions
of years apart.
THE THIRD OPTION: The main difference between these
two theories is the so-called "causal factor." In other
words who or what caused the countless forms of life on planet
Earth. The WHO supporters vary widely in their beliefs, ranging
from a belief in a supreme deity being solely responsible for
the existence of all life to alien visitors bringing life from
Liberal creationists accept some of the evolutionary claims,
while rejecting other more simplistic beliefs held by fundamentalist
creationists. They subscribe to the theory of Intelligent Design.
As one Anglican bishop put it: "it takes a much bigger act
of faith to believe that life in all its forms is the result
of a cosmic accident than to recognize life as the result of
divine creative intelligence."
For example, who would believe a Boeing 747, the Mona Lisa or
say, the Eiffel Tower just happened?! Probably no one. Instead
we recognize the "intelligent design" in all three
examples. Why then should anyone reject the "intelligent
design" of far more complex things such as hummingbirds
which migrate from Central America to as far north as Canada
and back or salmon swimming many hundreds of miles to spawn where
they were born or dogs that guide blind people to walk, shop
and circumvent obstructions?
Regardless whether we believe life is an accident or divinely
created, no one can deny that nature is a highly sophisticated
complex system. For example, as we learned in Physics 101, the
lower the temperature of water, the heavier it becomes.
So when we heat a kettle of water, the warm water will rise while
the cooler water will go down. This phenomenon makes it possible
to boil water efficiently. The weight or specific gravity of
all solids and liquids increases as temperatures decrease. However,
there is a critical exception to this rule: when the temperature
of water goes below 4°C it reverses the rule and the water
becomes lighter instead of heavier. If this were not so, ice
would form on the bottom of lakes and rivers instead of on the
surface, surely a remarkable occurrence..
The Oxford dictionary defines the word miracle as "any remarkable
occurrence." By that definition life is full of miracles.
Indeed life itself is a miracle. Despite millions of miles of
outer space exploration life has not been found anywhere else
which of course does not mean it will never be found. Indeed
our world is an oasis in a seemingly lifeless solar system of
rocks, gases and vast space. In sharp contrast Planet Earth is
brimming with life in incredible diversity and with amazing interdependence.
How does one look at a flower, an eagle, a shark or a cheetah
as an accident? When you see a swarm of hundreds of birds swooping
through the sky have you ever wondered why some do not crash
and plunge to the ground? Some form of intelligence must be involved
in the design of these birds.
Another remarkable occurrence is the release of endorphins (opiates)
by the brain when pain becomes extreme and unbearable. Since
this phenomenon has no survival value how did it evolve? Darwin
postulated that only those things that have survival value attain
permanency, but where is the survival value of a natural built-in
painkiller or the song of a nightingale or the beauty of an orchid?
Then there is the mystery of migration. How in the world do migrating
birds find their way to their winter and summer destinations?
Are these navigational skills learned from their parents or passed
on genetically? Scientific studies have shown that when eggs
are hatched by migratory birds belonging to a different species,
the young birds will follow the migratory routes of their biological
parents--which they have never seen--instead of the flight patterns
of their adoptive parents! Scientists refer to this phenomenon
as "instinct," a word often resorted to in the absence
of a plausible explanation. This migratory fact, however, proves
that navigational skills and patterns are genetically transferred
-- not acquired from parental example. Somehow this complex information
is stored accessibly in the bird's brain which in the case of
a hummingbird is about the size of a pea -- perhaps not a miracle,
but definitely remarkable. So
who are right? The creationists or the evolutionists? Quite possibly
neither and yet both--at least in part.
When it comes to mass demonstrations
Muslims take second place to no one else. For example, all it
took were a few insensitive cartoons to get hundreds of thousands
of Muslims demonstrating all over the world, often accompanied
by violence and even killings -- all the while proclaiming that
Islam is a just and peaceful religion. So why are there never
Muslim demonstrations protesting beheadings, stoning of women,
kidnapping and murder of innocent people, clitoridectomies of
THE CANCER WAR HOAX
By John J. Moelaert
No matter how many people
shave their heads or run for the cure or cycle all over the place,
cancer will continue to spread in our midst and claim more and
more lives so long as carcinogens are allowed to enter our food,
water, air, soil and yes, even some cancer drugs, treatments
and diagnostic procedures, while innovative research is blocked
instead of encouraged and prevention is largely ignored.
Year after year, decade after decade, the public is made to believe
that the battle against cancer is being won when in fact more
people get and die of cancer today than ever before--far beyond
population growth. The latest statistics show that an average
of 187 Canadians die of cancer every day, an increase of 38 per
cent in 17 years. SOURCE: Canadian Cancer Society (CCS). The
incidence of cancer in Canada and the US doubled in 12 years
from one in five in 1988 (The Cancer Industry, PP 33) to one
in 2.5 in 2000 (Canadian Cancer Statistics PP 48).
In 1971 then US President Richard Nixon officially declared "war
on cancer" and a cure was predicted within five to ten years.
Now --decades later-- we have a cancer epidemic instead of a
cancer cure. At least forty per cent of Canadians get cancer
(excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) and of those victims 64
per cent die of the disease (Statistics Canada). But cancer is
not only a terrible disease, it is also a multi-billion dollar
industry. As Dr. Deepak Chopra has pointed out more people make
a living of cancer than die of it. Hence a cancer cure (especially
an inexpensive one) would be about as welcome among cancer profiteers
as a shark in a swimming pool. When a cancer drug has proven
effective in treatment trials, but is considered not sufficiently
profitable, production is stopped (Cancer: Taming the Beast CNN
August 28, 2005).
The CCS raises about $110 million a year through various fundraising
campaigns. There is a widely-held illusion that all this money
goes to research to find a cancer cure. The facts are quite different.
Only about 40 per cent of the money raised goes towards research
and then only to research projects that are potentially profitable
to the pharmaceutical industry. The rest goes to "salaries
and benefits," (27 per cent), financing fundraising campaigns
(12 per cent), with the balance covering miscellaneous expenditures
According to the World Health Organization at least 80 per cent
of all cancer is environmentally caused and can therefore be
prevented, but having read the descriptions of dozens of cancer
research projects the word PREVENTION was not in any of them.
Moreover, the cancer establishment blocks any innovative research
that has little or no potential fiscal benefit for pharmaceutical
interests no matter how promising such research may be. It is
interesting to note that while it is public knowledge how much
politicians make, the incomes of CCS executives and researchers
who also get paid out of public funds are confidential and are
not disclosed. Obviously they should be.
Curiously, claims of medical breakthroughs in cancer research
often coincide with fundraising campaigns, never to be heard
of again. For example, the National Post in its April 1, 2000,
edition devoted two full pages with a front-page intro on anti-angiogenesis
treatment that was to be available by Christmas of that year
and --gushed the Post-- "Painful chemotherapy may be a thing
of the past." Simply put the treatment is based on cutting
off the blood supply to tumours. Like interferon that was supposed
to have saved Terry Foxs life and interleukin-2 that was
trumpeted as the summit of cancer research, anti-angiogenesis
has also failed to live up to expectations, but like all so-called
cancer breakthroughs it proved to be a great fundraising tool.
To understand the cancer industrys dismal failure to reduce
the overall incidence and mortality of cancer consider this:
If the billions of dollars
spent on cancer research ($32 billion during the past 25 years
in the US alone) had been effective and if all the so-called
cancer-breakthroughs had been true, then obviously fewer and
fewer people would get and die of cancer instead of more and
more (far beyond population growth). Clearly the public is being
misled by the cancer establishment. The future looks even worse.
If present trends continue, new cancers are expected to increase
70 per cent by 2010 according to an April 1999 CCS news release.
For the past half century
conventional cancer treatment has remained limited to surgery,
radiation and chemotherapy (also known as slash, burn and poison).
The CCS's own statistics show that in most cases such conventional
treatments fail. In fact, the consequences of cancer treatment
are often worse than the disease itself and frequently hasten
death rather than prevent it. A 33-year study by the late Dr.
Hardin Jones, Professor of Medical Physics University of California,
found that "untreated cancer victims live up to four times
longer than treated individuals." (The Betrayal of Health
by Dr. Joseph Beasley) The prestigious British medical journal
The Lancet in its summer 1998 issue reported that studies have
shown that lung cancer patients who undergo radiation therapy
have a 20 per cent higher mortality rate than non-radiated ones.
A McGill survey revealed that most doctors in Ontario would not
accept chemotherapy for themselves or their family if THEY had
lung cancer.....Cancer patients subjected to both chemotherapy
and radiation get secondary tumours 25 times the normal rate
(The Cancer Industry by Ralph Moss, Ph.D.) Misleading information
is not limited to cancer treatment: it also applies to diagnosis.
For example, mammography is widely believed to reduce the breast
cancer mortality rate when in fact it increases the risk of inducing
cancer. According to a study published in The Lancet (January
8, 2000) "for every 1000 women screened biennially throughout
12 years, one breast cancer death is avoided whereas the total
number of deaths is increased by six.". Mammography subjects
a patient to a radiation dose equivalent to 100 chest x-rays
or 5000 milli-REM (Roentgen Equivalent Man), but according to
a pamphlet produced by the BC Government the exposure is next
to nothing, i.e. the same as received during a flight across
Canada (5 milli-REM). In the meantime breast cancer mortality
has remained virtually unchanged at around 30 per cent during
the past 50 years while breast cancer incidence during the same
period has nearly tripled from one in 20 to one in eight today.
Public ignorance about the politics of cancer is the result of
widespread distortion and suppression of relevant facts by the
cancer industry, most mainstream news media and government. As
two-time Nobel Prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling put it "the
war on cancer is largely a fraud." The veracity of that
statement is widely substantiated by books such as: The Politics
of Cancer Revisited by Dr. Samuel Epstein. The Betrayal of our
Health by Dr. Joseph Beasley. The Cancer Industry by Ralph Moss
Ph.D. The Cancer Wars by Prof. Robert Proctor. Cancer: Why Were
Still Dying to Know the Truth by Phillip Day. Patient no more
- The Politics of Breast Cancer by Sharon Batt. See also: http://cancertruth.org
John Moelaert is a Victoria
writer who has researched, spoken and written on the causes,
prevention and politics of cancer since 1980. He is the author
of The Cancer Conspiracy
For previous Thought Capsules click ARCHIVE
For more pictures click
For essays and humour go
Turn your speakers on and watch the world's greatest juggling
Bull & Bully
video. Click here
Funny felines. Click here
To enlarge click
on the pictures below
It's a topsy-turvy world
Feline ping pong
Mad Magazine Bush
Moon and sun at North
Indoor ski hill (Bahrein)
Quantity discount funeral
Traffic violation - no helmet!
Cat on grass
Mexican restroom for tourists
Another way to the moon
Don't cross this line, buster!
The real Da Vinci Code?
The art of relaxation
What's for dinner?
For magic trick click here