[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Miscellaneous]

[Home]>[Miscellaneous]>[9. The stupidity of scientists]>[ 3. Der Standard (2) 27.12.2017]

Previous webpage:           2. Scientific American (1) July 2018
To the end of this webpage: End
Next webpage:               4. Der Standard (3) 29.08.2018

 

3. Der Standard (2) 27.12.2017

 

Frank L. Preuss

 

An article follows from derStandard.at dated 27.12.2917. The interview is provided with commentaries.

 

Nobel prizewinner Walker: "No space for counter arguments to evolution"

Interview

Tanja Traxler

27. December 2017, 07:23

Nobel laureate John E. Walker gets annoyed in times of fake news about the idea "theory of evolution"

STANDARD: Mr Walker, 1997 you have received the Nobel Chemistry Prize for your works to adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the energy carrier in cells. Which role plays ATP with the energy production in the cell?

Walker: I am often asked, where does the energy in the cell come from. The whole energy in biology is produced by the sun. Through photosynthesis the sun energy is received by the green plants and transformed. Oxygen is released in the process. When we burn a piece of wood, we put it in flames. Almost all oxygen, which we breathe, is consumed in such a process: We therefore have nothing but molecular machines, which are driven by a turbine. Without these complex machines there would be no life. We need ATP for everything – to build up and to reproduce muscles, for the cell division and replacement. People call ATP for that reason the universal currency for energy in biology: It is the same for all species on earth – from men to the lowest bacteria, even viruses need ATP to be able to live.

31Walker John E. Walker

 

Here I interrupt the interview.

Our topic is the stupidity of scientists. The above image is an illustration from the Interview.

The whole misery of biology Mr Walker has demonstrated here. Life comes from matter; spirit does not exist, and therefore it is proven that there is also no God, and that it is what it is all about with him in his fight against God, and everything that does not agree with this, that makes Mr Walker angry. And for that reason something has to be done about it, it is not allowed that there is space for counter arguments to evolution. With this struggle it is not about science; it is about spreading fake news.

Counter arguments are not allowed to exist with a genuine religionist; something like that is heresy and can only lead to excommunication and that means, to take bread and butter from someone, or according to old Occidental custom burning at the stake.

"Western thought never recovered from the dead hand of the organized church although it had aided and abetted the monopoly of that church by never challenging its right. Any hint that the organized church did not contain the esoteric content one might have hoped for was met with the stake." Pir Doub.

The organized church, the church of the believers with the belief in evolution, is well organized in the so-called sciences, and the high point in life is then to receive an invitation from the pope, and he is a Scandinavian king and the date is the 10th of December.

And the esoteric content of this so-called science is then something like their theory of evolution.

Now we carry on with the interview.

 

STANDARD: What was the difficulty finding out how this process works?

Walker: In the late 1970th I worked with Frederick Sanger, who at that time had won already a Nobel Prize and later got another one. At that time he just developed his method to the sequencing of DNA. His method was used to sequence human DNA, but he tested it at that time still with the sequencing of small DNA molecules and for that purpose brought in the mitochondrion DNA. Almost all our DNA is in the cell nucleus; only a small part is in the mitochondrion. Through my cooperation with Sanger I learned more about the mitochondrion and recognized that not much was known about the process of energy production in the cell. I was very lucky; since we were encouraged at our institution to attack difficult long term projects – for that reason my idea fitted in very well. But many of my colleagues were quiet skeptical. At the beginning it took quiet a long time until we progressed – so little was known about the process. With the sequencing of the proteins I came finally across of all three ATP bases. Then I wanted to understand how it works and that meant to establish how that looks like on the atomic level. The people said that is impossible to find out. Some even thought that I destroy my career with this work

STANDARD: You have then finally proved the opposite to these skeptics...

Walker: Yes, but it took about 15 years until I could culture the crystals adequately. We soon could produce crystals, but they were not very good. 1993 we were very fast with that, once we had the crystal to solve the structure. And then the question remained open, how all this works. Important information came from Paul Delos Boyer, with whom I finally got the Nobel Prize: He suggested that the enzyme worked with mechanical rotation. When one just has a look at the structure it seems as if it rotates. But there was no direct proof for rotation. I suggested that in a paper in "Nature", but many people were very skeptically. They came to me and said that I was wrong. They said things like: "Enzymes simply do not work like this; you do not understand the enzymes, John." But then other people started to check the rotation thesis. Finally a Chinese group succeeded with an experiment, where one saw under the microscope that the object looked like a propeller. Through this most of the people were convinced that my rotation thesis was correct. I was lucky, because I got the Nobel Prize quite soon. I was after that appointed to the director of an institution and could so research the mitochondrion with a greater team.

STANDARD: Which questions are today still open?

Walker: There are still aspects of how the enzyme works, which still have not been correctly understood. I work on it to clarify many of these questions. We for example do not know how the energy is produced on a very detailed level – but we come closer and closer to that. It will possibly still take four or five years of research work to have an answer to that. In which we are further active is to make our research work usable for mankind and for medicine. My financing comes from Medical Research Council of Great Britain and I work on that we can show that this is not just a fundamental discovery, but that is also has practical use.

STANDARD: What could this use be exactly?

Walker: I had the idea that we could find a check material of the bacterial enzyme, which would not attack the human enzyme and could possibly become an antibiotic. Finally it could be shown that that is really correct. A pharm researcher tested medicines against tuberculosis and found out that the new medication kills the tuberculosis bacteria very well. It is now used clinically – the first medicine which is used clinically against tuberculosis. With that it had been proven that there was an important difference between bacterial enzymes and a human enzyme. That has now become the fundamental theme in my research. We now also try to develop a medicine against malaria.

STANDARD: In the year 2017, above all also through the assumption of office of the US President Donald Trump, the talk has often been of a post real society: How does the responsibility of scientists change in a time in which facts and also scientific discoveries for example in the political discourse no longer weigh so seriously, as it had been case in the decades before?

Walker: As scientists we must persist in truth. And there is only one truth; there are no alternative facts. The chemist Max Perutz, coming from Vienna, was once director at my institute in Cambridge. He received the Nobel Prize for his work on haemoglobin. At the end of his scientific career he said: "In science, truth always wins". We have a memorial table at the wall on which that is written. Of course: Sometimes scientists make suggestions, which are indeed seriously meant, but which are not correct. But as scientist one can check ideas. We sometimes find out that something is wrong – then we must put it aside to get ahead in science. There is no room for something like alternative facts in science; there is only one truth.

STANDARD: Why are there more and more people, also politicians, who are skeptical to scientific discoveries?

Walker: The area, where that is most evident, is climate change. Only extremely few scientists doubt that the human made climate change takes place – there are simply too many evidences for that. We therefore have to ask ourselves, why so many people refuse to accept that. They must have some motive. This has often something to do with the wish to earn money. They are basic motives like this that many people hold on to, that we still mine coal and burn oil; although it is completely clear that we should stop that. In order to increasingly change over to green energies, national commitments are needed, above all by such great industrial nations like the USA. Organizations stand in the way, which pursue specific lobbying. One must learn to live with that, and to demonstrate as good as possible that that what they claim is nonsense. Another area is the evolution teaching. Only this year the evolution teaching has been removed from school books in Turkey. The problem already begins with, that people do not speak about evolution, but about the evolution theory. But it is no theory; evolution takes place as can be proved. There is no room here for counter arguments. Above all these two areas are those, where some people want to replace science to replace it with something completely irrational. (Tanja Traxler, 27. 12. 2017)

John Ernest Walker, born 7. January 1941 in Halifax, Great Britain, was 1997, together with Paul Delos Boyer und Jens Christian Skou, honoured for his works at the adenosine triphosphate with the Nobel Prize for Chemistry. He is emeritus director of the Dunn Human Nutrition Unit of the Medical Research Council, Great Britain.

 

"Only this year the evolution teaching has been removed from school books in Turkey. The problem already begins with, that people do not speak about evolution, but about the evolution theory. But it is no theory; evolution takes place as can be proved. There is no room here for counter arguments."

So speaks the true religionist. For a true religionist there are no counter arguments. That makes him angry. To just take something like that into consideration, mention it as possibility, is not allowed.

That is the whole basis of the evolution theory, that the evolution theory is substantiated with the evolution theory. One reason for the evolution theory, which is wrong, is proven with another reason for the evolution theory, which is also wrong. There is no space for counter arguments.

Purest religious fanatism.

And now still another quote, but not from a so-called scientist, but from Rob Butts, see http://www.countdown4us2.com/en022012/en022012018.htm:

 

Even so, as I worked on this appendix I wondered again and again why I was investing so much time in it. The answer proved to be simple once I understood then I ended up shocked to discover how little real evidence there is to back up the idea of evolution, and fascinated by the limits of scientific thinking.

But some time passed before I realized that our ruling intellectual establishments were advancing notions about evolution that were not proven in scientific terms – then teaching these “facts” to succeeding generations. Finally, the humor of the whole situation got through to me: As some have very clearly noted, in the biological and earth sciences especially, circular reasoning often predominates: The theory of evolution is used to prove the theory of evolution.

 

So truth is therefore very simple. Since the theory of evolution is true, all its arguments are true.

At the very top you have a picture of a comedian.

When one reads this article, then one can of course be really impressed, what this man has acquired of merits having led the fight against illness in the rows at the very front. But in reality it is so that he, through his fight for evolution, and consequently for atheism, and consequently against God, he is indeed one of the leading causators of sicknesses, because without his religious hynotisation of mankind, a fight against sicknesses would not be necessary, because there simply would be none.

Here on this website a mass of material has been accumulated that schows the willing person that he can live, in a quite simple way, without sicknesses.

So when this man is here depicted as a fool, then that is actually a playing down of the situation, because the reality is that he is an evildoer in a big way.

 

 

This is the end of "3. Der Standard (2) 27.12.2017".
To the German version of this chapter: 3. Der Standard (2) 27.12.2017

 

 

Previous webpage:                 2. Scientific American (1) July 2018    
To the beginning of this webpage: Beginning
Next webpage:                     4. Der Standard (3) 29.08.2018

[Home]>[Miscellaneous]>[9. The stupidity of scientists]>[3. Der Standard (2) 27.12.2017]

[Home] [How to Measure Your Beliefs] [The Man-Made Church] [Miscellaneous]

The address of this webpage is:
http://www.fpreuss.com/en3/en04/en0403.htm