Sunday, 3 November 2013

Daily Express Petition: No to New EU Immigration

Crusade to Defend Young British People from Betrayal
The Daily Express has initiated a crusade to prevent mass immigration of Romanians and Bulgarians to Britain. The Government has planned to open the doors to a mass rush of people from Romania and Bulgaria, to take effect as of 1st of January 2014. From that date, the floodgates of Romania and Bulgaria will be opened, and millions of desperate people could start migrating from these two EU countries, fleeing their land and coming over to Britain to take jobs, accommodation and benefits, and to access all our social services for free.

Accustomed to a minimum wage of 154 to 170 euro a month for 40 hours a week work, or to unemployment, millions of people in Romania and Bulgaria see Britain, known to them as “the UK”, as a haven to flock to in mass. They want to get to the employment market, where the minimum wage is over six pounds an hour, and where housing benefits and job-seekers allowance, child benefits and free social services are to be offered them on a golden platter.

We in Britain do not want them to flock over, we have our own people who are entitled to employment, housing and social services. We believe that Romanians and Bulgarians can fare well in their own country, where they have plenty of fertile land and the chance to promote agriculture and industry. Unlike many arid countries in Africa, where people live in semi-desert countryside, where rain is scarce, where the soil is not so fertile or indeed is barren, Eastern Europe is fertile.

One Million Unemployed Young People in Britain
There are one million unemployed youth in Britain, aged between 16 and 24, and the Government is intent on betraying these people so as to give away their rights and chances to millions of people from Romania and Bulgaria.

The Wording of the Express Petition:
"We petition the Prime Minister to defy the EU and keep in place labour market controls on people from Romania and Bulgaria indefinitely and not to let these controls expire on December 31 2013 as he currently plans."

On 27 November 2013, the Daily Express delivered 150,000 signatures to 10 Downing Street, the official residence of the British Prime Minister. As the petition exceeds 100,000 signatures, the Prime Minister is obliged to officially respond to the petition with a statement. Technically, this may require a discussion in Parliament and a vote.

Currently, Parliament asserts that there is nothing the British Government, or the House of Commons, can do to prevent anyone from Romania and Bulgaria moving to Britain and settling here, as the EU laws override British Law. Strictly speaking, this is Treason, as per British Constitution no foreign Parliament may exercise authority over Britain. But royal consent has been given to all EU treaties to which Britain is signatory, and consequently the monarch has signed away British Sovereignty to foreign governments and peoples.

As a result, millions of Romanians and Bulgarians could become immigrants in Britain, they could even be given money by foreign powers to come and settle here in order to support themselves, from a free ticket to the UK to the sum necessary to buy a house here. 
However, many would be looking at receiving free accommodation paid for by the British State, plus job-seekers allowance and children's allowance. 

The governments of Romania and Bulgaria will be eager to transfer 1 million Roma to the UK, many of whom will claim asylum as refugees, similar as to Roma from the Czech Republic and Slovakia who claim asylum in the UK and Canada on the grounds of ethnic persecution. 
And yet, anyone fleeing Romania and Bulgaria to head to Britain for the easy way out is in effect a refugee, someone fleeing a minimum wage of 170 euro a month - or indeed unemployment - in order to work for the British minimum £6+ an hour, or to get free housing and all attached benefits, with trimmings and dressings, that go with "living in the UK as an immigrant from Eastern Europe".

Our last farms may be bulldozed over and our last woods uprooted to build housing estates for the mad rush to "the UK" from every failed economy in Eastern Europe. They come over with the knowledge that "there is nothing the British can do about it", as our Sovereignty has been handed over with royal consent to foreign powers, indeed to half the world and their dog. 

Written by D. Alexander

The Evolution Theory Is Scientifically Impossible

Explaining how evolution of individual cells into complex species is contrary to scientific laws.

Brief Introduction to the Theory of Evolution
Following the evolutionary theory, all living species derive from one common ancestor in the form of an independent single cell. This in turn descended from amino acids which had evolved from hydrogen atoms, whereas the hydrogen atoms had developed from photons.

There were various consecutive passages between each phase, one being the big bang, another the transformation of some atoms into others previously inexistent, for example hydrogen into helium. As a result, human beings would be descended from single hydrogen atoms and ultimately from null-mass photons.

The theory is presented on the basis that random evolution came from nothing, or from something that was before the universe, and that any given period of time – preferably expressed in billions of years – made it possible.

The result is: null-mass matter evolved into the universe, and into planet Earth, into mountains, oceans, the air we breathe, into animals and human beings.
The theory asserts that there was no Creation.

We would need to ask whether science can originate from non-intelligent and random evolution; and also, whether science could evolve into different laws following the same idea of random evolution starting from nothing.

The Evolution Theory Examined in the Light of Science

1. Cell Reproduction
How cells divided … and remained cells.

A single cell is the smallest unit of organic life. Likewise, a single atom is the smallest unit of non-organic material, be it solid, fluid or gas.
Iron is non-organic and is listed in the periodic table of elements. Wood is not, as it is organic, being a cellular organism. Although organic materials are not listed on the periodic table of elements, they are each composed of many atoms. All cells consist of atoms, but being organic they have a genetic code and reproduce. Atoms cannot evolve into living cells, but they are part of the cell structure.

Some forms of life consist of one independent single cell. These are microscopic organisms such as bacteria. In order to multiply, a single cell replicates its genetic code to bring about a division into two identical cells, a process known as mitosis. There is no form of mating between single cells, no masculine and no feminine.
Other forms of life are made up of numerous different kinds of cells all forming one complete organism, for example a person.

The many cells that form a complex cellular organism interact as part of the one entity. They multiply following the same rule that there is no masculine or feminine and no reproductive involvement between cells, except where particular cells match their genetic code to create a complete new multicellular organism by way of an embryo, a process known as meiosis. In this case, however, it is not for the reproduction of a single cell, or of two cells, but of a multicellular entity, such as a person.

Every form of organic life has a genetic code, also called DNA, and this is true as much for a single cell as for a complex organic entity, be it a tree, an animal or a person.
Human beings, like all complex multicellular organisms, have a comprehensive genetic code which is used to procreate offspring. This will be made up of the same kind of cells, and will have the same kind of form and characteristics, as the parents, both male and female, and will be either male or female.

The sexual reproduction cells within the male and the female, for example of humans, do not follow mitosis to duplicate into identical copies in the reproduction process, because these cells are not procreating themselves, but the human being. To do this they follow the process of meiosis, whereby the parental DNA is reduced to half, and the two halves of the father and the mother match to form one embryo that inherits a combination of paternal and maternal DNA.

As we can see, reproduction of single cells is one thing, reproduction of complex multicellular organisms such as humans is something else, hence the difference between mitosis and meiosis.

As procreation through meiosis is only possible between members of the same species, in the case of humans the child will have genes originating from each parent. Genes from some form of preexisting ape species are not present in humans, which however would have been the case if humans descended from apes.

2. One Single Cell Transforming into a New Species
Give a microscopic cell a billion years, and you may have one hundred billion microscopic cells, but not one horse.

A single-cell organism, one that divides into identical cells in order to multiply, could not have evolved into a complex organism comprising numerous different kinds of cells, such as a horse.
Cells can adapt within limits, remaining single entities, but they would not evolve into a horse, as this would be a single-cell horse that multiplies itself through binary division into two identical horses. Being a multicellular creature, a horse quite evidently did not evolve from a single cell, no matter now many millions of years or imaginary proto-species were to be thrown into the calculation.

A passage of evolution from a single-cell organism that divides into two identical cells, to the state of mating between a male and female belonging to a complex multicellular species, is impossible. Once a cell ceased to multiply through identical replication, without further reproduction it would eventually die, as its genetic code, or DNA, could not develop a male and female reproductive system.

Cells – with the exception of meiosis – continue to form exact copies of their DNA in order to multiply, even when part of complex organic life. Once the process of DNA replication and consequent cell division ends, they die out.
The idea that life evolved from the mitosis division of singular cells into complex organisms that procreate through meiosis, contradicts the laws of science.

It would make more sense to explain cell mutation as an instantaneous process, perhaps expressed in seconds, minutes or days. A virus can infect a cell and cause a mutation within it, rapidly spreading to other cells. It may take days, weeks, months or several years for a contagious virus to infect large numbers of members of a species.

This form of cell mutation contradicts the idea of natural selection, as it tends to deteriorate, not improve, the condition of a species, be it plant, animal or mankind. The idea that cell mutation takes place over millions of years, indeed billions, is not a scientific observation, but the contrary to scientific research.

3. Different Single Cells Combining into a New Species
Put together in a laboratory any combination of differing cells, and they will remain distinct.

The lifespan of a cell is relatively short. It is not long enough for diverse kinds of cell to combine and form a complex species that develops a pair of eyes, a nose, a mouth, a brain and reproduces through mating. Not even by throwing millions of years into the equation. Cells would die out once they ceased to replicate their DNA to form identical cells.

Body cells can only exist as part of a multi-cell body, such as, for example, the blood cells. As they have no function outside the body and could not have previously existed in any state or condition, they could not have combined with other cells to from the first body before it came into being. There were no blood cells prior to the first form of life that required blood and tissue in order to live.

It is also impossible for a species to come into existence and then develop its various cells at a later stage according to their required function, in the same way as a house did not stand before the bricks that were used to build it were placed together.

Science can only accept that individual forms of cell constituting the body of an animal or a person came to organic life for the first time when the body first came into being, not having had any possibility to exist otherwise.

The idea that differing singular cells at any time in the past randomly combined into a new organic proto-species that developed a distinct metabolism, and also eyes, nose, mouth, ears and brain, while the original cells maintained their own former identity, is equally unviable as the idea that such cells transformed into a new species and lost their original identity.
Neither theory has scientific credibility. However, the evolution theory would appear to present both these options as credible.

All the cells that were united into each new species were placed there by design, for they could not have formed a union through any unintelligent scientific process, nor could they have been developed by the multi-cell organism after it came into existence, as without these cells it would never have existed in the first place.

Conclusion: Evolution or Creation
1. An evolutionary process from identical division (mitosis) to mating (meiosis) as a form of procreation is scientifically impossible:
a single cell copies its genetic code that then multiplies into identical cells, whereas multicellular species procreate through the matching of parental DNA.

2. No cells have ever combined in order to form a species:
cells serving specific functions within the body of a person, an animal or a plant, could not have existed individually outside of a complex organic body. As they could not have been developed after the body first came into existence (a body with no cells?), they must have been created at the same time as the species within which they perform their functions.

3. Cell mutation is more or less an instantaneous event:
it usually leads to degenerating consequences that negatively affect a species, and is caused by viruses. It has nothing to do with natural selection. Cell mutation is not expressed in very long periods of time, as in millions and billions of years, but in short periods, as in seconds, hours and days.

4. Cell adaption does not bring about the end of a cell, but preserves it:
no cell has ever adapted by developing into a multicellular species, or by bringing its own identity to an end in any other way. Cells preserve their identity. Consequently, so too does a multicellular species.

5. Cell regulation governs the preservation of the body's health:
cells that do not respond to regulation signals can cause cancer, which is a form of cell mutation leading to the body's deterioration.

6. Cell timespan will determine the length of time a cell may live:
cells are subject to time as an aging process, but time does not bring about cell mutation. A member of any species will eventually die, hence, beyond the stage of biological development, time has, ultimately, a deteriorating effect on any living body.
Cells do not transmute over periods of time, but age and die.

7. Cell interaction is essential for maintaining a species:
the interaction of cells within a member of a complex multicellular species is vital in assuring its biological existence. Were cells to act randomly, as is proposed in the evolutionary theory, the whole organic interaction would fall apart. Plants, animals, persons would die, all species would come to an end.
Random evolution and scientifically researched life on Earth are two opposite things. The first does not exist, the second does.

8. Cell evolution is unknown to science:
cells are not known to change their functional mode in a way that improves life within a species. If they function incorrectly, as in cancer, or are negatively affected, for example by a virus, the body degenerates to whichever extent; if they function correctly, the body maintains its ideal performance. Sufficient sleep, exercise, diet, clean fresh air and the absence of stress have important beneficial effects on cells.

The idea that the body can pass from a status of maintaining its ideal condition – within the limits of health and age – to actually improving and changing its condition, somewhere along the lines of natural selection, is conjectural.

For example, an ape will not “improve” its condition by “developing” into a human. A fish will not develop legs to walk on land, or wings to fly.
The cells within a species maintain life at an ideal standard – as intended for each particular species – dependent on their correct functionality, which is in correlation with transformation of energy.

Written by D. Alexander