Bare Bones Biology 326


“Less than a month away from the kick-off the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Hawaii, a team of scientists reports that three quarters of the world’s threatened species are imperiled because people are converting their habitat into agricultural lands and over-harvesting their populations.” August 10, 2016.   Sean L. Maxwell, Richard A. Fuller, Thomas M. Brooks, James E. M. Watson. Biodiversity: The ravages of guns, nets and bulldozers. Nature, 2016; 536 (7615): 143 DOI: 10.1038/536143a


160813-ChamaDays-asc_5618RLSs copy

What do you do when you are stuck solo on a mountainside with no electricity except a little battery juice left over from yesterday’s weak sunlight, and it is the middle of the night and you wake up, and you know there are bears and mountain lions out there in the dark.


Of course internet access is best in the middle of the night. Usually you can watch videos without those big time-gaps during which the trotting horse hangs suspended in air while the little video wheel tries to catch up with the action, and I got somewhat hooked on them last night, beginning with an elegant olympics video and working my way to the little equine puppy below.


But this has got to stop. It just makes me wish, and an odd feeling, in the moon-dark night, that I am not really here, but instead am living somewhere in history when horses were my friends and I was theirs. And because that time is long gone for me — and for everyone else on this earth — and I really am right here on this cold mountain, watching wishes go by and dreams collapse in the irresponsibility of our generations, therefore, it is not useful to spend time living in yesterdays.

Most people I know are still back there, in their heads. Evidently they believe they can save what no longer is by living it, rather than using it as a foundation for something that is actually save-able, and so they don’t want to hear about truth, facts or reality, but only about some fairy tale that has to do with human omnipotence and activist heroics.


So then what else can I do but sit here and watch those same fairy tales play out on UTube? Fiddle with the video while the Earth burns to a homo-toxic crisp? Join the farewell party?


And if the party were about the reality, we might actually be required to take some responsibility for our human survival and a vibrantly healthy Earth. So they don’t. Don’t want to hear about it, I mean.   Willful ignorance is a great copout, because when their uninformed opinions turn out badly, then they can blame George.


That was probably my mistake. I did do my homework, and as ignorance fades it is true, unfortunately for me, it is replaced by responsibility to the facts of God and nature.


Facts are not opinions to be believed or not as we choose; they are provably real, by definition – that is what the word means – and that means they can be studied, checked and evaluated for accuracy. They cannot be debated, except by the willfully ignorant; they have been well understood for centuries, and are better understood with every year that passes; and we have had the technologies to deal with our human factual medical, social and political relationship with reality for more than 50 years. Willful ignorance is inexcusable in a world where information, wisdom and knowledge are available at the touch of any finger on any computer. Let’s name it what it is — criminal ignorance. Crimes against humanity, even against Life itself.

So then, what might actually be a useful thing to do? For me, right now. I could always try one more thwack at explaining what I have learned in my long career – but the willfully ignorant will do almost anything to avoid learning that their own knowledge fails the omniscience test, even to compassionately trying to “help” me by teaching me the corposystem line of crap, as though I hadn’t heard it already ad nauseum, and fact- checked that line of crap time and again. They are experts at the compassionate put-down as a way of life; one wonders what they think I have been doing all their lives. Waiting for me I suppose. Anyway, they won’t hear it.


And now I think I’ve wasted about two decades on “survivors’ guilt,” when all the time I could have been enjoying fame, frolic and fairy tales alongside the doomed, instead of trying for compassionate survival of the whole. But I am not the guilty one.


I am not the guilty one. Nor am I the victim. And neither am I God or nature that I could change the laws of God AND nature, which are very simple and straightforward. They do not respond to whatever good thoughts you had in your mind; they have nothing to do with human thoughts or intentions or what you would have done “if you only knew,” but they do respond exquisitely to exactly WHAT YOU DID DO, or didn’t do, and whatever that is, YOU CAN NEVER TAKE IT BACK.


Even to save your own children.


And I’m tired of listening to the homocentric babble of the criminally ignorant.


So why don’t I just quit?160720-FullMoon-asc_4854_ copys copy

It’s dark out here on the mountainside, and cold, with no utilities, no water, and no supermarket. I am here because the air is clean and makes me feel good in a way that no human medication ever can replicate. Try it for yourself sometime. Try it in the wintertime in Colorado. Because in a very few more decades, human activism will have burned away the very nature that gave birth to humans and we will be lucky if even this cold mountainside remains as a future haven for human kind.





“Our massive tampering with the world’s interdependent web of life — coupled with the environmental damage inflicted by deforestation, species loss, and climate change — could trigger widespread adverse effects, including unpredictable collapses of critical biological systems whose interactions and dynamics we only imperfectly understand.

“Pressures resulting from unrestrained population growth put demands on the natural world that can overwhelm any efforts to achieve a sustainable future. If we are to halt the destruction of our environment, we must accept limits to that growth. Uncertainty over the extent of these effects cannot excuse complacency or delay in facing the threats.” Union of Concerned Scientists

In fact, there isn’t even any uncertainty, and there has not been any uncertainty in your lifetimes

regardless of the corposystem fairytale.


This is Bare Bones Biology 326, a publication of


A copy of the podcast can be downloaded at:






Bare Bones Biology 325 – Different Roads?


160806-Sackcloth-asc_4902RSs copy


We split ourselves in the Axial age, with the origin of the great religions, maybe that’s when the choices were made, the East and the West. Or perhaps much more recently with the false divide in the Western world between science and religion. Or maybe in my lifetime as we leave behind the basic science, the study of the works of God, in favor of human technologies that have raised up the power of man so high – “Western” man – that we believe ourselves to be looking down upon God, or at least we behave as though that is what we believe.


This week I visited with the spirit of Los Alamos. Twice. Or maybe three times in three days. One day to consult with a theoretical physicist about my understanding of energy. That is, energy as described by basic science/mathematics. The energy that the Earth receives from our sun that turns the pages of the Book of Life for all of us. It was very exciting for me as a scientist; that is, a student of basic biology, to update my understanding of the nature of Life. How Life works using energy and translating information, to stay alive.


The works of God.


The next day I attended the Sackcloth and Ashes nonviolence demonstration which is held every year at Ashley Pond in Los Alamos on Hiroshima day, August 6.


The work of man.


And then coming home, three miles into my wilderness canyon one-lane road, I joined my neighbor under the back end of my pickup as we worked with twigs and stiff stems to extract a threatened young horny toad from a crevice in the mud tire. The horny toad is threatened collectively by the power of mankind, and individually, this time, by my rear tire. While we worked, my neighbor explained the horny toad (“grandfather”) is a Navajo symbol of the power of God, the power of lightning shooting into the sky. Energy, I said. Yes, he said, the same energy.


If we disagree about natural law, it’s not because there are two different kinds of natural law – or energy — one for your God and one for mine. The horny toad is one of many different manifestations of the Law of Life, but there is only one Law of how Life functions to maintain all of Life. One horny toad; one lightning; one physics; one set of interconnected processes that maintain the whole of Life; even Los Alamos.


160806-Sackcloth-asc_5021RSs copyAt the Hiroshima Day Protest an example was cited of a man who believes not in one, but in two. Two ethics; two “rights.” This man believes there is no conflict between his anti-war social/political opinions and his war-related profession. He works for the National Laboratory that designs and produces nuclear weapons. He “couldn’t see” the connection between his work, which to him is “not a problem,” and our national/international war ethic.


And that reminded me of another time – another discussion – when I claimed that God made two books, more than two books. Books in many human languages, but only one set of natural laws that make Life possible on earth. Only one Book of Life. One record of the works of God that is not written in the languages of men, but is recorded in the very energy and information of nature that is “spread out before us,” that is studied by theoretical physicists and basic biologists. Not the human technologies that we can control, but God’s Natural Law, how it works . Our disconnect between the two realities cannot be repaired by ignoring the reality of either (or both, or all). God, God’s Natural Law, Man. Because it is one, and it is what it is.


160806-Sackcloth-asc_5118RLSs copyAnd I said: “If God created the world, then He meant for it to work the way it does work.”

There are not two roads or two ethics or two “rights” in the Laws of God, but only in the imagination of man that we can behave in one way and believe in another way.


And the first is destroying the second and the second is destroying the first, and neither will listen to the other, and they are both EQUALLY destroying the works of God by their behaviors.


It is the same disconnect — to proclaim that Life is the work of God and then behave as though the Laws of Life do not exist. In fact, God’s Laws of Life do exist, and we have been given the tools to see them and the means to obey them. We use those tools to proclaim war and to disclaim war, but not to PREVENT war by addressing the root cause of our wars. Thus we are one with the man who claims to be antiwar and yet works for the war machine.

And we also cannot see our disconnect.



This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of

A copy of the podcast can be downloaded at:


Bare Bones Biology 323 – Wrong Answers

If we ask the wrong questions, we will get the wrong answers,


My question is never — not ever — about how good a job anyone can do at anything –

Or has done,

Or how many facts they know.


NEVER! (I will yell a bit in this blog if you will pardon me.)


I don’t care how “good” you are; or how many things you know. Neither does yesterday. And tomorrow cares mostly about what harm you may have done, not how much good.


I am a lot more interested in today, because today is our power, our only power, and unless it is my dentist, I don’t care, because I think, outside of technical detail jobs, doing a good job is a boondoggle.


160628-sunrise-asc_4659RLSs Not a life of service, but a modern form of slavery – unpaid work for an abusive and controlling corposystem, and an excuse to not ask questions about why we are doing what, and what harm all that doing may be doing – because everything we do causes harm to someone/thing, and it’s our job to balance the harm we are doing – not to spend our days desperately working harder and harder — or worse, trying to prove that someone else is not as good as we are — without understanding what we are good at, what we are working for. Or why.


I believe everyone is ALREADY doing a good job of whatever she believes to be a good thing to do. I really do, and if they don’t agree of course that’s their problem not mine.


My question is NOT about doing a good job; my question is — who decides what is a good thing to do? And what is the basis for that decision?


For example, with the concept of a recently developing knee-jerk meme — educating women. What is that about? Where did it come from? Who does it serve? It sounds great doesn’t it – empower the victim – but when I was coming along we wanted to educate EVERYBODY. Now we are asked to lower our sights. Hmmmmm I wonder why?


The question is not whether education is good or bad or even if it reduces reproduction rate under some un-definable circumstances.
The question is who gets to teach what to whom. Of course we already know the answer. The corposystem gets to teach us how to be better consumers.

160720-FullMoon-asc_4865_ copys copy

And some minorities and some women are fiercely opposed to being taught, or to reducing their fertility, and I agree that is a valid point of view learned by real experience, but again it is the wrong question fighting the right battle, because we all change and grow no matter what anyone teaches us. Or at least we will if we don’t get hung up on our own history. The real question is, or should be, how you (we) want to change and grow. Do we want to grow in a way that will give us more of what we want – or do we have some other axe to grind?


Because, if you/we are clever enough to avoid being brainwashed by yesterday’s memes, learning can give us the tools to better understand and outwit the very corposystem that wants to teach us how to be losers.

We can run away from being taught, or we can suck it up and deal with it, or we can integrate our new learning into a new and more beautiful vision, but we can’t get free of what is — by refusing to learn about it.


In the end, by denying ourselves the best available lifestyle that can be obtained (in this example) via smaller family size and the best possible education, we sacrifice our own goals — not to the power we are trying to defy, but to FEAR of UNDERSTANDING that power, and that is a whole lot worse.


This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of


A copy of this blog can be downloaded at:






Bare Bones Biology 322 – Wrong Answers – Politics

What Pres. Obama has done for us (or we could say what we did for ourselves by electing him) is to give us eight more years in which to deal with our biological problem and — though he stated clearly and at the first fairly frequently that he could not do what the public wanted without the backing of the public – nevertheless, when he needed support – what he got was a bunch of navel-gazing, whining children sucking at the teat of the corposystem (our corpo-political economic social system).


Just as happened after the Green Revolution. Abdication of responsibility by the people and for the people – but not by the President, who succeeded in holding back the tide of Hitlerism that is coming our way.  Why do I say it is coming our way? Because we are asking for it — dancing around our personal “maypoles,” spewing our wastes into the atmosphere and chanting: “There is nothing we can do, find someone else to do it for us.” (“So we may as well do nothing but dance and play and blame someone else, and pout because we can’t all have everything we want”).


And hundreds of similar excuses to do nothing — all corposystem approved – probably corposystem generated — each taking us closer to the tipping point of our biological problem.


Corposystem approved because: a) the excuse serves our level one system, ourselves – the individual humans who would rather dance than tend to our responsibilities to the future – and, b) it serves level two, the corposystem, by preventing others from generating a solution to the biological problem that is at the root of the disarray.


And what is The Problem? The corposystem itself, of course, is not sustainable. That means, sooner or later it will crash – not because IT WANTS TO CRASH. Far from it – The CS would rather grow forever richer — but because the people are too busy dancing to support or demand the changes that could convert the corposystem into a sustainable social system – beginning with enforced removal from all corporate charters of the “growth” requirement and continuing with provision of free international access to birth control (or the other way round). A sustainable system does not destroy the Biosystem that feeds it.


And those are only two of the things that we can do.


What will NOT work is to hire a President, require her to “fix” our problems, and then get “upset and disillusioned” because she can’t change the corposystem into a sustainable system at the same time that we the people continue to support the corposystem ethic of growth by domination to give us whatever we want.


Neither can we grow a sustainable social system by hiring a President who will reinforce the corposystem ethic of growth by domination for gain that is the cause of our biological problem in the first place.

But, you tell me: “The Problem is hopeless,” enabling its hopelessness by proclaiming its hopelessness, we undermine everything the President tries to do and we abdicate our responsibility — and in so doing we serve the wants of Level One (individual people) by enabling the victim status we prefer, and we serve the desires of level Two (growth by domination for riches) by NOT forcing it to change itself into a social system that is sustainable.


With the added perk that we can then blame the rich people when the problems get bigger.


The more we proclaim the hopelessness of The Problem – the more hopeless we cause it to be. And we can sit back and enjoy “Aint It Awful.” (Games People Play, Berne, 1996)


The next step in this predictable slide from grace is physical war, as we continue to choose the failed corposystem ethic (growth by domination for winning) over common sense and common courtesy. While we dance the dance of pretty fairy tales and blame someone else for the result.


And heaven forbid anyone would do anything that would make themselves or anyone else “feel uncomfortable”.


This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of


A copy of the podcast can be downloaded at:





Berne, Eric. 1996. Games People Play



Bare Bones Biology 321 – Premesis Revised II

It is foolish to compete with people who are promoting the same goal as one’s self. For one thing, it’s impossible to win. My father used to say: “Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face.” That is not how successful systems function; and more importantly for us, it does not matter who is more important than whom; with the entire system is teetering on the edge of collapse, none of us will be important in the end — and that dominator ethic is a major cause of the failure of our corposystem in its modern environment. Growth by competitive domination for personal gain.


Successful systems, to the contrary, are supportive of their environments, which are the other half(s) of themselves.
160704-Canyon-asc_4752s copy
To be supportive of a different system requires complex modes of communication, so that the complexity of the information base is first increased, and then recombined by “discussion” from all viewpoints and then translated into a “language” that interprets the information for the “other.” After thorough discussion, the relevant information is then used to respond to and support the survival needs of both (all) of the involved system(s).


That is the natural process. It is what will happen. and is happening in any case. Humans donot control nature, but humans could be part of the discussion if we would change our attitude toward both our own importance and the nature of the other systems. The advantage of being human is  that we can do this process — discussion/recombination and then decision — by intent, rather than wait around for natural selection to decide. We have the tools. We lack the will.


However, if we all make the same small contribution, or if we all simply believe the world view in  which we were raised, without using our tools to communicate positively with the other essential systems, then we will end up with knee-jerk  radical activism that never learns more than it already  knows, but instead becomes more and more violently focused on its original viewpoint (ref. Huston Smith), which is fifty years out of date.


Knowledge is not advanced without the recombination process — in humans, that process would ideally arise from discussion, defined as both listening and talking toward the common goal — rather than war — defined as ranging from the “Powers of the Weak” (Janeway), through debate, through the increasingly more violent options.


Unfortunately, our corposystem (and the people who believe in it) requires the world to bow to it’s own imaginary “survival of the fittest” event. That is, the war option, rather than the partnership option as defined by Eisler). War — for the most part, is NOT the natural system, or not the mature natural system. Highly evolved systems evolve to generate more highly evolved systems that cooperate. But war is the predictable and predicted end of the corposystem, in part because of its “dominator” world view – the suicide event of the corposystem — when opinions that have solidified into a radical versions of their own original insights cause more harm than good because they cannot adapt to any environment other than that of their own origin, which has died 50 years ago.
160709-Canyon-ASC_4767s copy
If we genuinely want to grow a viable system for our Homo sapien future (I don’t believe that is what most of us want in our modern corposystem; what we want is to “win,” i.e., dominate other people and nature and God — and for the most part we don’t consider what we are losing in the process — but that is a different problem). If we want to intentionally grow a viable system to replace that corposystem – then we need to have a more rational understanding of nature’s Law of Life and how it functions to drive forward the three basic requirements of naturally evolved        (complex adaptive) systems:

1 – self perpetuation within the system’s other half, its environmental system                                                   (sustainability)

2 – communication between and among the systems

3 – natural selection of the emergent properties of the system by its                                                      environmental system(s).


Otherwise, the systems will choose for us, and because the corposystem is operating on a world view that is not sustainable in its present environmental conditions, the Biosystem will eliminate the greatest threat to itself, the corposystem. Or to be more accurate, the corposystem will eliminate itself by its own behaviors.

Therefore, and because I didn’t see anyone else concentrating on this approach when I began, my work involves elucidating a holistic viewpoint of how systems function in evolution, so that others may use this information as they discuss its ramifications and recombine its relevences within their own community of world views.


Because we must either choose or choose to not choose, and without the best information, the best choice is not possible.


The result of my search is given as a contribution to the community and for the love of the vision — what Homo sapiens could have been. Once I make the information available in a form that others can access — whether or not I succeed in communicating the relevance, ramifications, validity and/or implications of my alternative world view — then my obligation and my gift to the human community are fulfilled. I can’t make it happen.

Free at last!




Now what shall I do?




This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of


A copy of the podcast can be downloaded at:





Recommended References: Sorry my web provider cut me off so not complete:

Riane Eisler. 1987. The Chalice and the Blade.

Huston Smith. The Roots of Fundamentalism–A Conversation with Huston Smith and    Phil Cousineau. A DVD.

Elizabeth Janeway. Powers of the Weak. A classic that set me on this path decades ago

Perpetual Curse of the Warrior Mindset

Creative by Nature

“We shall require a substantially new manner of thinking if mankind is to survive.”  ~Albert Einstein

Gladiator Rome

For well over 2000 years a competitive “dog-eat-dog” mindset has dominated the world’s most powerful human civilizations. The goals of our leaders (as well as most members) have been to conquer, defeat or control whatever (and whomever) we can. Those who thought differently were quickly pushed to the side, silenced, enslaved, ignored or demonized.

Look closely at the challenges humanity has been struggling with. What is the root cause of the environmental destruction, the poverty and inequality, crime, racism, terrorism, economic instability, mindless consumerism, endless wars and skyrocketing military spending?

These problems exist (in my opinion) because the most powerful human cultures and civilizations have propagated a world view that presents life as a never-ending war between opposing forces- a struggle between good and evil, man and nature, friend and enemy, “us” vs. “them.” Such dualistic thinking can serve a useful purpose at times, but creates chaos, inequity, unhappiness and instability when allowed to…

View original post 550 more words

Bare Bones Biology 320 – Premises Updated I

1 – All of the Creation consists of naturally evolved, interconnected systems


a – therefore it follows that naturally evolved systems must have mechanisms to perpetuate themselves; otherwise all of the Creation would be a mish-mash of randomly interacting processes; it would fall apart.


That is why the primary function of a naturally evolved system is to perpetuate itself. Systems that cannot perpetuate themselves in a world of change are not a   permanent part of the picture. They are eliminated by natural selection. The Law of Life (Lamoreux, 2016. Part One) describes some of the many mechanisms that  systems use to perpetuate themselves.

160629-Colorado-ASC_4677s copy

b – the living earth consists of interacting systems based on the original system of    Life that arose on Earth, or was delivered to Earth about 3.2 billion years ago. The living cell then adaptively radiated into many subsystems and levels of organization to generate the Life of Earth itself. Life can be defined as the ability to respond to the environment and to replicate self. All complex adaptive systems, by definition, can respond to their environments, and that is presumably why systems exist. How they do it then becomes the question.


2 – Systems must be able to communicate with each other through time (genetics and evolution) and also through space (natural selection), and not in a random or slap-dash, variable fashion, or this universe could not have happened. Therefore we can assume:


a – Evolution is not random because natural selection is not random.


b – Evolution is not primarily survival of the fittest; it is the survival of those systems that can positively communicate with each other (among themselves) to help maintain both themselves and the other systems that are necessary for their survival.


The above two statements are responses to memes that have been used by the corposystem to justify (maintain) its unsustainable system of domination behaviors (Eisler. 1987).


3 – We individuals are components of two systems (I’m simplifying the reality to clarify our problem) that at the present time have conflicting needs for their survival. One is our evolved corposystem world view. The other is the previously evolved Biosystem reality.

160703-sunrise-asc_4728LRSs copy

a – I do not believe we will save ourselves by choosing how we want to evolve (change) our basic human nature. Certainly not until we can think about systems as they are and as they function.


b – I do believe that we have finally reached the time when we must choose between the evolved world view of the corposystem and the evolved reality of the Biosystem.


This is good, because choosing is very much easier and more likely to succeed.


c – However, before we choose, it would be best to understand how the systems function to maintain themselves.   Otherwise we will be flying blind in the nextfollowing step, which of course will be to decide what we can do to support our choice.


One person or small group of persons cannot accomplish this task by all saying and doing and writing the same mantra that describes the same vision within the group – and then trying to grow enough soft or hard power to beat up on others of different visions.


Furthermore, it is foolish to compete with people who are      promoting the same goal as one’s self. That is not how successful systems function; it is how the failed corposystem functions. Successful systems support the other half of themselves, their environmental system(s).


This is the first half of my updated premises; second half next week.


This is Bare Bones Biology, a production of


A copy of the podcast can be downloaded at:





Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 259 other followers