The wonderful world that we have lost. Part 2

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Every day, every hour, every moment on Earth there is a battle, which is not noticeable to a common man in the street, between the Biosphere, which remained from the previous biogenic Civilization that created it, and the Technosphere, which is being created by modern blind and stupid humanity under the leadership of new masters, whom some of us have accepted as “gods and swore allegiance to them, betraying the rest of the Human race.

But in order to see and realize this opposition, it is necessary to understand those basic, fundamental principles of interaction with matter, which are the basis of these two approaches.

The main source of energy for the Biogenic Civilization is the light of the nearest star. And while this star will give light, the biosphere created by its Creators will live and develop. A biogenic civilization is a civilization of long-term development. Moreover, all processes in it are highly optimized in terms of energy efficiency. For the same reason, many of these processes proceed slowly, often for years, decades, or even centuries. It takes a whopping 9 months to develop from a fertilized egg to a newborn baby. But even this will not be a fully formed adult organism, which will take about 20 more years for its final development.

In the living nature that surrounds us, there is no such concept as waste that cannot be recycled, which is already beginning to come to the fore in the list of problems of modern technogenic civilization. There are no debris islands that cover a huge area in the ocean.

After the death of any of the organisms, the substance and energy that remained in his body will be completely utilized and used in the endless cycle of Life. Some tissues will initially serve as food for large organisms, and everything that will not be used by them will eventually be decomposed and prepared for subsequent use by miniature living nanorobots, which we call bacteria and microbes. At the same time, this process is very thoughtful and energy efficient, since most of the energy that was received from the Sun in the process of synthesis of organic molecules will be used in one form or another, either as food for other organisms, or in the form of the very compounds for the synthesis of which this energy was used. The decomposition of organic tissues to the initial initial elements in living nature, even in the process of utilization, occurs very rarely.

The slowness of many processes in living Nature stems from the properties of the main source of Energy, which ensures its functioning - the light of the Sun. The problem is that the amount of energy that we can receive per unit of time per unit of area is within certain limits, which cannot be exceeded. If this amount of energy is not enough, it will be difficult to maintain vital processes, or they will go very, very slowly, as in today's tundra. If too much energy comes from the Sun, then it will destroy everything, turning the surface of the Planet into a scorched desert.

Technogenic civilization is based on completely different principles, most of which require a very large amount of energy. Metals are one of the key materials of the technogenic civilization. All modern technical progress became possible only after mankind, at the prompting of the "gods", mastered the art of metallurgy. It is due to the crystal structure that metals receive their unique strength and other properties, which are used by the technogenic civilization in their primitive machines, mechanisms and tools for influencing matter.

But everything that is associated with the production and processing of metals requires huge energy costs, since during the production and processing of products you need to constantly destroy or rebuild very strong bonds of the crystal lattice, which is formed by the metal atoms. For this reason, you will not find pure metals anywhere in living nature. In nature, metal atoms are found either in the form of salts, or in the form of oxides, or as part of complex organic molecules. In this form, metal atoms are much easier to manipulate; a large amount of energy is not required to overcome the bonds between atoms in the crystal lattice. Unlike the technogenic model, which consumes energy mercilessly, the biogenic one simply cannot afford such a luxury.

On average, the production of 1 ton of metal requires about 3 tons (depending on the iron content) of ore, 1, 1 ton of coke, 20 tons of water, plus different amounts of flux. At the same time, in order to obtain coke, as well as to obtain and bring the necessary raw materials, you still have to expend additional energy. And further, at all stages of metal processing and making something useful from it, you will have to constantly expend and expend energy in one form or another. Finally, you got what you needed. One of the parts for a particular mechanism. But in fact, the life cycle of a substance does not end there. To recycle those metal parts that are no longer needed, you will again have to expend energy to reuse that metal. And at every step of the technogenic technological cycle, a huge amount of energy is simply dissipated into the surrounding space in the form of heat, thereby increasing the entropy (chaos) in the Universe. Unlike the living environment, where the energy of the Sun, stored in the bonds of organic molecules, can be used repeatedly, the technogenic environment practically does not know how to reuse the released energy.

If you just throw away this or that metal thing that has become unnecessary, then some of the metals in nature will be recycled over time, turning under the influence of water, wind and sunlight into oxides or salts, and some metals and alloys will remain for many millennia. turning into garbage, poisoning the living environment.

Where does the technogenic civilization get the huge amount of energy it needs? Most of the energy is obtained in one way or another due to destruction, for example, when organic compounds are burned, which in one form or another are withdrawn from the living environment. It does not matter whether these compounds are produced by plants in the process of biosynthesis on the surface of the Planet, or are synthesized in the bowels of the planet in some abiogenic way, as some of the modern theories of the origin of coal and oil products claim. A critical issue is the balance between the rate of synthesis of energy resources and the rate of their consumption. If the synthesis rate is higher than the consumption rate, then such a system can develop for a long time, otherwise your resources will be exhausted. And even if the current level of consumption is lower than the rate of reproduction, such a civilization will be limited in its growth, since the growth of the size of the civilization and the increase in the number of its inhabitants will inevitably lead us to the moment when the balance of production and consumption of resources becomes negative. The effect of the formation of a long-term supply of energy in the bonds of organic molecules and its reuse, which exists in the biosphere and provides it with the possibility of long-term sustainable development and expansion, is absent in the technosphere.

In addition, the planet is also a organosilicon living organism in which its life processes take place. And if in the course of these processes coal is formed or liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons are synthesized, then this means that they have their own purpose in the general life cycle of the Planet and the Biosphere. I have great doubts that their purpose is precisely for the technogenic civilization to burn them in an internal combustion engine or in furnaces of metallurgical plants and thermal power plants. Most likely, those creatures who created all these complex organisms and ecosystems had completely different plans in this regard. A similar situation arises with the ore from which the technogenic civilization extracts metals. The source of ore is the crystalline body of the Planet, and in order to extract these metals, the planet's body must be destroyed.

Technogenic civilization is a parasite civilization in relation to the living environment. Just look around you. Until recently, humanity, having embarked on the path of technogenic development, did not even think about what would happen to our planet in the future. Only in the last 50 years have they started talking about the need to preserve and protect the natural environment, and develop plans for long-term sustainable development. The problem of any technogenic civilization is that it cannot develop for a long time within one planet.

Relying on other basic principles of matter manipulation, based on the use of the energy of destruction, a technogenic civilization is able to grow much faster than a biogenic one, in which the growth process directly depends on the power of the light flux that its Planet receives from its Star. But this speed is not given to the technogenic civilization for free, it has to pay for it with a huge expenditure of energy and materials. Due to its energy wastefulness, sooner or later it will exhaust the energy resources available on the planet and bring the planet's body to such a state, after which it will no longer be able to fully function. And then, either the technogenic civilization will have to stop in its development and enter a state of stagnation, for example, due to a very strict limitation of the population size, having come up with the idea of a "golden billion", or it will need to start expanding beyond its planet, start capturing new alien worlds, to satisfy their irrepressible needs for energy and substance. Having devoured your own planet, start devouring aliens.

When you start to study living organisms and wildlife in general as a system, and not from the point of view of a biologist, but from the point of view of an engineer, you very quickly begin to understand that this system is many times more perfect than anything that a modern technogenic civilization has been able to create so far. We admire so much the machines and mechanisms that we create, without even realizing how in fact they are primitive in comparison with any living being.

Imagine that you are driving your car and suddenly it turns out that you have forgotten to fill up the gasoline tank and drive another twenty kilometers to the nearest gas station. But your car engine doesn't stall. To get to the nearest gas station, your car begins to process into fuel those plastic parts that are not critical for the safe movement of the car. Plastic trim, plastic wheel caps, and other secondary parts are starting to get thinner. And when you finally reach a gas station and fill the tank with gas, your car begins the reverse process, restoring the original thickness of all parts. Imagine that minor scratches and damage to the surface of the car will disappear over time, overgrown with new fresh paint. The tread on the tires of your car never wears out, as it grows back, and small punctures heal by themselves, after which the car restores the tire pressure on its own. At the same time, the car always knows that it has punctured the wheel or received some damage, which it immediately lets you know about. Moreover, every spring your car itself changes the tread pattern and rubber hardness for summer, and every fall back for winter. And if you suddenly fell asleep while driving, then there is no disaster, because the car either stops and pulls to the side of the road to wait until you wake up, or just slowly drives home and parks in the yard.

Fantasy?

But in living nature, we consider such opportunities in most animals to be quite familiar and natural! Almost all living organisms are able to starve, providing themselves with energy at the expense of cells of their own body that are less important for survival. And when the diet returns to normal, these cells will be restored again. Almost all living organisms are capable of self-healing within certain limits, including regenerating the tissues of the outer cover. Many animals living in areas with a sharp change in climatic conditions have the ability to adapt to these changes, depending on the season, growing thick wool in winter and less warm wool in summer, and often also changing its color for better camouflage during the spring and autumn molting. …

And there are a huge number of cases when a horse brought its wounded, drunk or simply asleep on a cart home owner, thereby often saving him from death. And I’m not even talking about the fact that for the reproduction of the same horses it is not necessary to build any metallurgical, chemical and machine-building industries, to provide them with a mass of energy and raw materials, while forcing tens of thousands of people to work for them. In order to get a new horse, you just need to have a horse and a mare, who will do the rest themselves.

Why don't such possibilities in wildlife seem fantastic and incredible to us? Just because they are and how they would have always been?

Where did all these fantastic, but at the same time, such familiar to all properties and abilities in living organisms come from? Where did the biosphere come from on Earth with many connections between living organisms, which mutually complement each other, functioning as a single system?

Some, who are usually called idealists, say that they were created by a certain "God". Moreover, this "God" created the entire Universe at once, in one moment, in just seven days. And since, as we are assured, this "God" is great and omnipotent, He created the whole world and all living beings at once perfect.

Others, materialists, argue that no “God” exists, and in general, for the development of the Universe and the most complex biosphere, chances and laws of Nature are enough that govern everything. And then matter develops by itself without any participation of the "great and omnipotent". Everything happens only by chance. And when people who are a little familiar with the mathematical theory of probability began to point out the fact that it takes a lot of time to randomly form the whole variety of connections in wildlife, they were told: “No question! Is four and a half billion years enough? Well, it means that this is the age of the planet and we will write it down! " And in general we will draw 15 billion of the Universe.

In the comments to the previous part, they even wrote the phrase: "Poor Darwin!" Like, what about Darwin's theory of evolution, which supposedly from a scientific point of view explains how all this variety of living organisms arose on Earth? After all, she relies on a lot of facts and research that support her conclusions. If you open "Wikipedia" on the page about Darwinism

then there, in the section "Anti-Darwinism" there is even such a phrase: "The arguments of creationists stem from a superficial knowledge of the basics of chemistry, physics, geology and biology, in addition, the proposed counter-theories most often do not pass any test for scientificity."

I agree that today the evolutionary theory is quite well developed, but it describes only the set of processes that is responsible for the adaptability and survival of organisms, allowing them to adapt to changes in the living environment. According to the theory of Darwinism, random mutations and natural selection are the key drivers of evolution. For various reasons, the offspring have certain random changes, and the harsh conditions of the environment and the struggle between living organisms for resources take away those who are better adapted and more efficient.

All this evidence looks very convincing, but exactly as long as you consider this or that organism as a separate entity that is forced to fight a hostile environment. The inconsistency of Darwinism becomes obvious as soon as you understand that living organisms in Nature do not exist by themselves. All of them interact with each other, and not always at enmity with each other. Rather, on the contrary, most of the connections between living organisms are not at all opposing or hostile. In fact, most of the interactions between organisms in living nature are mutually beneficial, due to which a single ecological system, in which certain organisms perform certain functions that are necessary not so much for this organism as for the entire system as a whole. Special attention should be paid to the fact that in fact there is no constant irreconcilable struggle for survival in nature, as modern highly politicized "science" tries to convince us. The struggle, of course, takes place, but only when, for some reason, there is a shortage of certain resources. But when resources are in abundance, then each of the organisms takes exactly as much as it needs to exist. No predator will kill if it is full. It is only a modern defective person who kills for the sake of entertainment. If there is enough grass on the pasture, then there will be no struggle for it between herbivores, they will calmly graze nearby. But the most important thing is that almost all animals have one or another function, which is necessary not so much for this animal as for the entire ecosystem as a whole. Moreover, this function often requires from this animal a rather complex behavior, the occurrence of which cannot be explained using Darwin's theory.

Consider, for example, beavers, which lead a fairly complex lifestyle. In order to breed offspring, they build huts, the entrance to which is located under water. But simply to build a hut in this way on the banks of an existing river or lake does not suit beavers. In addition to building a very intricate dwelling, they also build dams on forest rivers, often of very decent sizes, slowing down the flow of water and creating backwaters. And already in these creeks, they build their amazing huts with an underwater entrance. In itself, this behavior is quite complex. How it could arise in beavers only due to natural selection and mutations is a separate question, which has not yet been answered by any supporter of Darwin's theory. After all, it is obvious that from the point of view of a specific living organism, one can somehow pull by the ears the emergence of the ability to build dwellings with an underwater entrance, but how do beavers acquire the ability to build dams on rivers? What mutation is responsible for this complex behavior?

How did it come to the beavers that in order for the water level in the rivers not to go down in summer, when there is no rain for a long time, they must spend a lot of time and effort to build a dam across the river, which, by the way, is not a simple structure from an engineering point of view. It seems only at first glance that it is very easy to make a solid dam on the river. Especially when you consider that beavers manage to build just gigantic structures!

Here's what you can read about at the following link.

“A giant dam was built by beavers in Alberta, Canada. The dam is 850 m long. It is the largest dam in the world. It can be seen even from space. Previously, the record for building dams was also held by Canadian beavers. The dam they built on the Jefferson River was 700 meters long.

Even the 380-meter Hoover Dam on the Colorado River can envy the dam. According to experts, beavers have been building a dam in Buffalo's Wood National Park for a long time - since 1975, according to the Daily Mail.

But the most important thing is that the dams that beavers build on river streams and rivers are very important for the entire ecosystem as a whole! By the way, this is mentioned in the article about Canadian beavers. This is also confirmed by our local ecologists, who note that now in many places beavers have begun to return, they began to rebuild their dams, which immediately changed the water balance of rivers and streams, since the water stopped rapidly flowing down after the spring flood and rains. This also led to an increase in the level of groundwater, which almost immediately affected the condition of nearby forests and other vegetation. And if earlier the forests in these places died, now they are actively growing, even in spite of the droughts that occur regularly in the Urals.

In other words, the function that beavers perform when building their dams is very important not so much for the beavers themselves, but for the entire forest ecosystem as a whole. And this can no longer be explained by any random mutations and natural selection. Random mutation and natural selection can affect the properties and qualities of an individual organism, which knows nothing about the rest of the ecosystem and its needs. Moreover, natural selection implies that an animal should try to become as best and efficient as possible other competitors, only in this case, according to Darwin's theory, it has a chance of survival and passing on its genes to its offspring. And any unnecessary activity and functionality, which is directed not at the organism itself, but outside, will by definition reduce its effectiveness, since this means an additional expenditure of energy and time.

Only either the system itself or the person who designs this system can know what additional functions should be performed by the elements of the system, which are aimed at ensuring the functioning of the system itself, and not this particular element. This means that either Nature itself is an intelligent entity that created beavers and laid in them the additional functionality it needs, or for this ecosystem there is still some intelligent entity that can be called its Creator, or, more precisely, Creators, since most of those living organisms and ecosystems that we observe on our Earth today were created by our ancestors. After all, additional functionality, which is aimed at maintaining the functioning of the ecosystem as a whole, is observed in the vast majority of living organisms. That is, beavers are not a unique case, although this example is very revealing. Upon closer inspection, we will quickly find out that many living organisms are specifically designed to complement each other. They fit together like a key fits its lock. Flowers that can only be pollinated by a certain type of insect, and which they reward with nectar for this, plants that produce substances useful for certain animals, worms that provide normal nutrition for the root system of plants, mushrooms, on the one hand, receive the necessary substances from the roots of trees, and on the other hand, helping the same trees to collect trace elements from the soil, etc., etc.

In fact, in a normal healthy ecosystem, in most cases, we will observe between living organisms not a struggle for survival, but mutually beneficial interaction. And it is precisely this behavior that is the original Natural, if anything, the Divine model of behavior.

Moreover, all this variety of living beings was not created at once, in one moment. The Creator, together with people, gradually developed and improved their joint creation. Animals and plants were improved, new, more efficient structures and interaction models were invented, metabolic processes were optimized. And it is precisely this process of gradual development and improvement of the Biosphere that the supporters of Darwinism are trying to pass off as the action of blind chance and natural selection. Although it is enough to turn on the brains a little to see that exactly the same process of improvement and development took place in living nature, which today is taking place in the technosphere thanks to the creative potential of people. Try to apply the postulates of Darwin's theory, for example, to the history of the development of a car, and you can easily see there both "random" mutations, in the form of a variety of technical solutions and ideas, and "natural selection" from many of these options, which we really call in this in the case of market competition, but the essence is the same for them - to highlight the best and most effective solutions, filtering out the unsuccessful ones.

The most complex biological environment that we observe on Earth, and of which we ourselves are an integral part, did not arise by itself. And the point is not even that the number of living beings, their properties and qualities are too many for a random occurrence. All these living organisms are linked in unified system interaction, functionally complementing each other. Moreover, many of these organisms have very complex programs of behavior, the analysis of which indicates that the author of these programs very well understood the functioning of the entire system as a whole. And in most cases, this understanding of him is much superior to our today's knowledge of living nature and understanding of the processes taking place in it. We are only now beginning to vaguely understand what functions in the ecosystem are actually performed by certain living organisms.