Posted by on Sep 18, 2009 in Philosophy

Revised Lecture given at the Euro parliament, Wednesday, September 23 2009

Philip Ney, Pioneer Publishing 10/9/09

Introduction The universe is flying apart. Entropy rules. One way or the other, humans on planet earth are doomed. To ignore the facts is ignorant. It only adds to the naturally occurring chaos that is destroying the universe. The expression of the universal chaos among humans is their persistent propensity for ignorance and murder. A few see this and dedicate their efforts toward finding truth and peace. Yet the majority of people choose to believe whatever makes them feel more comfortable and proud and that is seldom truth. As Einstein predicted and recent observation confirms, the universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate. Galaxies at the outer limits of space are speeding away and will disappear. Our universe was most highly organized and energetic at the Big Bang, about 13.7 billion years ago. In spite of some localized, energetic, highly organized creation events like the conception of a child, everything, including humanities most prized organizations is winding down.
By the natural order of the universe, civilizations will decay. Surely the hallmark of civilization is the care and concern that people provide for those deemed unworthy. By this definition, our present civilization is rapidly dying. What is most amazing is that the large majority of humans are adding to the growing chaos by refusing to recognize the truths that most deeply affect them. While shouting, “the truth will make us free”, thinking people, scientists, politicians, judges, physicians seem not to be able to see or accept harsh truth. Thereby they add to entropy instead of fighting it. Every, everyday choices are made in the context of either adding to entropy or fighting it, at least postponing the inevitable. European Parliamentarians and administrators cannot avoid entropy, but they can put their energies into maintaining and even advancing briefly, the civilization people of high principal have struggle to build. Here are some of the most important struggles we must face. Here are choices between ignorance and understanding, aiding or fighting entropy. Where do you stand?

1) Evolution or Entropy Evolution is still taught as given, almost fact. However, since the discovery of entropy in the 1880s, the basic tenets of evolution are preposterous. You cannot have devolution from the chaos of entropy and evolution to higher orders. Science supports entropy. As Clausius pointed out, “The net change in total entropy of the universe is always greater than zero.” Boltzmann had proved mathematically that entropy was a measure of disorganization. The universe was becoming more chaotic as well as more relaxed. (1) “It was clear that Clausius’ law of entropy, non conservation, meant that the universe preyed on life and life-like behaviour. It was inclined towards death and destruction.” To ignore this harsh fact creates an ignorance, which adds to the chaos of entropy. Even the great Einstein had difficulty facing the obvious implications of his equations. He inserted a factor to change the cosmological constant which clearly indicated a creation event and therefore a creator. “Friedman noticed Einstein had made a mistake in his alleged proof that the universe must necessarily be stable and unchangeable in time. “I was discussing cosmological problems with Einstein, he remarked that the introduction of the cosmological term was the biggest blunder he ever made in his life” p. 270 (2) To his credit he later admitted his deliberate mistake and began speaking reverently of the “ancient one”. ‘Quatum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me it is not yet the real thing. The theory says a lot but it does not bring us any closer to the secret of the Old One. I at any rate am convinced He does not throw dice”. (2, page 414)

2) Global warming (or cooling) is caused by CO2 atmospheric concentrations or by the degrading of the earth’s orbit around the sun,

This graph representing 420,000 years of atmospheric change as recorded in ice core samples (3) taken in the Antarctic, shows that there are large episodic increases and decreases in temperature that seem unrelated to concentrations of CO2. It has been known for a long time that fluctuations in the earth’s orbit create changes in the amount of “summer sunshine” due to changes in the earth’s proximity to the sun. Glacial periods, which happen every 21,000 years, have long been known to affect the coming and going of the ice ages. Observation and mathematics would tell anybody that the distance of any body from the source of heat is the most likely cause of changes in the object’s temperature. Since the earth cannot generate its own heat, the global warmth depends upon the height of its orbit around the sun much more than any other factor. If you look closely at the graph, you will note that CO2 concentrations increase following the global warming, not before it. The most popularly accepted scientists are struggling to explain this disconcerting evidence because they are committed to the idea that global warming is a function of CO2 concentrations rather than the earth’s degrading orbit. The earth’s orbit must decay because the earth is not flying through a perfect vacuum. It is affected by gravitational forces, solar wind and other frictions that create drag. The amount of drag is seen in the power of the trade winds. One must wonder what or who boosts the orbit episodically to produce the remarkable cooling. It is certainly no effort on man’s part. Most humans would like to think they create global warming, so that they can devise a way of resolving the problem. It is hard to believe the whole process is out of their hands. They would then have to face the possibility that if he or it or whatever that boosts the orbit became disgusted with human behaviour, maybe he or it would stop boosting the orbit. In which case the earth would become progressively warmer and there would be marked changes in gravity, producing shifts in tectonics, resulting in earthquakes, tidal waves and volcanoes. A scientist writes, “It is still unknown whether greenhouse trace gases precede and cause temperature increases or visa versa”(4). If the graph depicting the changes of both can be believed, it seems quite clear that the temperature increase precedes the CO2 increase by about 2000 years. From the same graph, it should also be noted that there is a rapid rise in global temperature of 10 to 13 degrees C and then C02 for about 10,000 yrs followed by a gradual reduction (adjustment) over 100,000 yrs. Nobody I have read has attempted to explain why there are these major changes, why it is so regular and what or who could push the earth back into a higher, cooler orbit.

Earth’s internal heat comes from the residual heat of planetary accretion (20%) and radioactive isotope decay (80%). Both sources of internal heat are gradually reducing. Thus there is no source of global warming other than the sun. The closer to the sun earth is (all other factors being equal) the greater the global warming. Although it was once thought that the dying sun in its red giant phase would destroy all forms of life, “a more recent simulation indicates that the earth’s orbit will decay due to tidal effects and drag, causing it to enter the sun’s atmosphere and be destroyed”. (5). The “drag” on the earth’s rotations is caused by solar wind, rotating the otherwise stationary (from the earth’s perspective) atmosphere. The strength of the trade winds is directly proportional to the amount of this drag. As the earth’s rotations slow, the days become longer, hence the need to adjust the atomic clocks. The energy loss to drag also slows the earth as it revolves around the sun and so the orbit decays. It is calculated that this is currently 20 meters per year. (6) It is small compared to the total distance from the sun, but enough to convince people that orbital decay is real.

Although common sense and science now supports orbital decay as the most plausible explanation for global warming, most of the world’s populations prefer to believe increased CO2 emissions caused by mankind is the best explanation. Why do they choose to be ignorant? It seems people prefer to believe they are in charge of human destiny. In spite of the good evidence to the contrary, most people prefer to think that if humans cause global warming, then humans can fix the problem by reducing emissions even if that means killing millions of humans “with a low quality of life”. This idea, although unpalatable to many, is much preferred to the proposition that God created and sustains the universe. For if God chose to not keep boosting the earth’s decaying orbit, the earth will more rapidly lose orbital altitude. Then with increasing speed, spiral down into the sun. Proud humans could do nothing to stop it.

3) Population Explosion or Implosion? The majority of humans still seem to believe that there is a “population explosion” which if unchecked will cause food shortage, environmental pollution and uncontrollable global warming. The hard evidence is that there is a world wide exponential decline in fertility rates. “The decreasing trends in fertility in many industrialized countries are now so dramatic, that they deserve much more scientific attention”(7). Because declining population is having such a devastating effect on their economy, some countries are attempting to induce higher rates of reproduction with minor success. It begins to appear the decline may be unstoppable but it seems from a survey of scientific literature that few are really trying to understand what is happening and why. After many decades of shouting “population explosion” the UN is now acknowledging “population implosion”. In 1994 at the UN conference on Population in Cairo, as an NGO I debated “implosion” in a scientific forum. Even then the evidence was so strong and not because I am a great debater, I handily won against my opponent who argued for explosion. Quite suddenly there is an economic recession, not caused by bad banking practices but because it is not possible to run a free market economy with a declining population. No amount of cash infusion can counter the lack of buying houses, cars, and holiday travel because there are fewer and fewer buyers, for very long. Although this appears to affect western countries with birth rates of 1.2 to 1.6 per couple, the same trends are having the same untoward effects in Asian and African countries. Arrogant humans have always thought that they could make populations increase or decrease at will. Now they are beginning to realize that the main determinant, abortion, has deep and far reaching effects that are not easily, if at all, reversed. His disciples seem to have forgotten the prediction of Jesus, “In fact, unless that time of calamity is shortened, the entire human race will be destroyed”(8). This may not be the time or the process, but the best evidence is that there is a population implosion and that humans are capable and in ignorance, willing to destroy themselves. So why do some many millions cling to the idea there is a global, unstoppable population explosion. Is this myth being foisted on naive people to support the mandate of those powerful politicians whose real intent is to reduce world population in order to make the world more comfortable for themselves?

4) Is freely available abortion helpful or harmful to children? Although for decades it was argued that abortion would: a) reduce maternal mortality, b) improve a family’s and a nation’s economy, c) allow women to obtain the education, status and freedom “they deserve” and thus reduce the incidence of female depression and suicide, d) improve marriages, e) prevent child abuse and neglect by ridding a woman of unwanted children etc. None of these predicted benefits have occurred. In fact, data on all these parameters show they have all worsened.

This graph taken from data in Canada (9) show that although childhood mortality from biomedical causes continued to decline from the early 60ies, the rate of mortality from social causes suddenly and rapidly increased from 1969 when abortion in Canada was made legal and easily available. To my great discomfort, I wrote articles (10,11) explaining why chosen induced abortions may have ensured that surviving children were “wanted” but they were not necessarily welcomed and why this is so damaging to children. We found that wanted children are more, not less, likely to be abused and neglected. They are also more likely to be severely mistreated. (12).

Previous Abortion and Child Abuse
Type of Abuse Correlation* Significance
Severity of verbal abuse by mother 0.308 P<=0.03
Severity of physical abuse by mother 0.308 P<= 0.03
Severity of emotional neglect by mother 0.265 P<=0.05
Severity of emotional neglect by father 0.405 P<=0.00
Severity of sexual abuse by father 0.345 P<=0.01
* Spearman Correlation Coefficient

There are 6 or 8 mechanisms that can explain why women who have abortions are statistically more likely to abuse and neglect their children,(13,14,15) There are 5 to 7 mechanisms that can explain why women who have been neglected or abused as children are statistically more likely to have an abortion. And though I have been roundly criticized for collecting, analyzing, and describing this data from a number of our studies, no one has seriously questioned the conclusions nor tried to replicate the findings. Therefore these assertions stand. These papers help explain why there has been an increase in the incidence of child abuse and neglect rather than the often-touted decrease which should follow unfettered access to abortions. There have also been increases in family violence, marital disruption, pregnancy complications, fetal anomalies and maternal mortality. Although every scientific study has faults and failings, it isn’t the primary responsibility to show damage. In medicine the burden of proof rests on those who perform or support a procedure or drug to show beyond reasonable doubt that it is: a) necessary b) effective treatment for some disorder c) relatively free of damaging effects. This has never been done by those who perform or advocate abortions. There is more than sufficient evidence to indicate abortion is hazardous and governments should cease to fund it, at least until there is proof of some benefit. If it were some drug, the data on harm would have impelled governments to withdraw it from the market long ago. Yet the majority of the population still either insists abortion is therapeutic, or a necessary evil.

5) Is abortion helpful or harmful to a women’s health? This study on maternal deaths (16) following either an abortion or a live birth in a relatively homogenous sample of 186,000+ Medicaid recipients in California, is the largest and most scientifically rigorous study to date. From the statistics in this table it is clear that abortion is not helpful but very harmful Compared to women who give birth, women who have and an abortion are over 300% more likely to kill themselves, more than 250% to contract AIDS, 200% to have a mental disease and 400% to have a stroke etc.. Parts of the reason for this is that post abortion women are more likely to use drugs and not look after their health, (17,18) Our study (19) of patients in average family practices show women who have an abortion are much more likely to have poor general health compared to women who have other types of pregnancy losses. Other studies showing similar results,( 20,21), have been published in some of the best medical journals and yet almost no one is taking them seriously. In spite of the huge expenditure of state funds for medical care, no government seems concerned that abortion damages women, families and children with no clear evidence of benefit to anyone.

Risk of death by specific causes in 8 subsequent years for women with only one known pregnancy, those with an abortion compared with those with a delivery
All causes Number of deaths (rate per 100,000) Number of deaths (rate per 100,000) Number of deaths (rate per 100,000) Age & psychiatric history adjusted relative risk
Cause of death 1 delivery only 1 delivery only Age-related relative risk Delivery of 1st pregnancy and no abortions Abortion of 1st pregnancy
All causes 614.7 974.6 1.62+ 507.4 807.0 1.61*
Violent 233.0 428.2 1.81+ 195.4 360.6 1.78*
Suicide 23.9 62.0 2.54+ 19.1 63.0 3.12+
Homicide 91.7 152.1 1.59 66.7 137.44 1.93+
Accident or undetermined 117.4 214.1 1.82* 109.6 169.3 1.4
Non-violent 378.0 535.2 1.44* 309.3 435.0 1.44+
AIDS 36.7 78.9 2.18+ 23.8 68.7 2.96+
Mental disease 21.6 43.9 2.05 11.3 45.8 3.21+
Circulatory disease 51.4 146.5 2.87* 42.9 85.9 2.00+
Cerebro-vascular 7.3 39.4 5.46++ 7.2 28.6 4.42+
Other heart 22.0 56.3 2.59+ 19.1 40.1 2.10

*P<.0001, +P<.005, ++P<.05

6) Abortion prevents or causes depression in women? The World Health Organization has recently warned, “Within 20 years, depression will be the largest health burden on society both economically and sociologically.” ( 22). The 2nd largest corporation in the world is not a car manufacturer but a pharmaceutical firm. The most frequently prescribed class of medication is antidepressants, now given to over 10,12% or 27 million people in the US (22a). Is this because of some new toxin in the water or air? Is it greater stress or some inexplicable change in women’s genes? These are not likely. What has changed is the number of abortions. In North America now, about 70% of all women by 45 years will have had a least one abortion. In Eastern Europe the figure is about 80% and in some parts of Asia, 90%+.

This table (23) shows that women who have abortions are statistically more likely to be hospitalized for psychiatric illness (primarily depression) compared to women who give birth to the preborn child. There are many good studies (24,25) that show similar results, but is any government or is the WHO interested. Abortion is seldom considered an important variable in any government-sponsored study. Why do the leaders and the majority of people choose ignorance over knowledge? Is it because they are so deeply implicated in the cause of these medical problems that they cannot face the truth in themselves?

7) ADHD and Autism from toxins or is there some other cause? There is growing concern regarding stimulants for ADHD which seems to be increasing for no apparent reason. There also appears to be an increase in Childhood Autism. What is going on? Many possibilities have been suggested but there is no hard evidence to support any hypothesis. What is different is that 60%+ of children are now living in a home where the parents have aborted one or more of his or her siblings. The affect is to make that child: a) feel guilty about being alive, b) have a persistent sense of impending doom, c) feel he/she doesn’t deserve to be alive, d) be unable to trust parents and any care giver, e) feel less inclined to have children. (26,27) Symptoms arising from these conflicts can easily be mistaken for hyperactivity or autism but very few clinicians attempt to inquire after them. Instead they use some questionnaire looking for the presumed diagnosis which usually confirms the investigator’s suspicions. Our studies have been presented at major medical meetings and briefly published in some journals, but the major findings are not acceptable to most journal editors. Even if the effect was minor, you would think someone would be interested enough to try to replicate our findings. Here I can better understand why people would rather be ignorant. The implications of the data shown in this table are devastating. (28)

Symptoms associated with “I feel I don’t deserve to be alive.” (PASS)
Symptoms Standardized coefficient t-score Significance
I am not glad to be alive. 0.360 7.117 0.000
I feel something terrible is going to happen to me. 0.229 4.772 0.000
I have tried to kill myself. 0.118 2.468 0.014
I fear I am losing my mind. 0.181 3.375 0.001
I have injured myself. 0.132 2.685 0.008
Step wise regression with cut-off P<=0.05

Hope and Healing. There are reasons to hope and with hope there is healing. When humans are hopeful, they have children. Children cause hope. Children make people mature like nothing else. With children it is necessary to conserve and build for the long term future of humankind. The universe is expanding so there will never be too little space for everybody no matter how quickly the population grows. We have the resources and technology to send pilgrims to other planets and beyond, if we diverted even a small portion now expended on armaments. He who created and sustains the universe gave as his first (timeless) command to humans, “Multiply and fill the earth” (29) and he expected to gather his children from the heavens (30) when he returned to settle them in a sparkling new universe. We, IHACAns (International Association of Hope Alive Counselors) have found that people suffering deeply from the combined affects of childhood mistreatment and abortion can heal but they must discard their ignorance and face some very difficult truths. They start with the gritty determination, “I must know”., everything I need to know, regardless of the ensuing discomfort. They must be prepared to know the truth, especially the truth about themselves. The results of Hope Alive (31,32) (shown below) are impressive. They give credit to the originated from whom all understanding flows.

Summary On these 7 critical issues which are now confronting society, it appears the majority of people prefer their ignorant beliefs to harsh evidence. The problem compounds itself because having once chosen to be ignorant, that tendency for subsequent choices is much increased. In all instances this is not just ignoring the data, but a deliberate pushing the truth away from themselves. Yet if you asked anyone of them, they would insist they are not afraid of truth. Truth has always been unpopular, unpalatable and disruptive. Though truth and gravity always win, most people prefer to support their pride with ignorance. Yes, the truth will set you free, but do you want to be free at the cost of examining yourself. If you can face the truth of yourself, you have no fear of other truth. Remember, the wise person always listens most carefully to what he/she doesn’t want to hear. Ignorance adds to chaos and these are truly chaotic times. Hopefully European Parliamentarians will eschew ignorance, accept harsh truth and fight entropy, particularly by encouraging children and families.

References 1) Five Equations that Changed the World. Michael Guillen, Hyperion, New York, 1995. 2) Einstein, The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, Avon Books, New York, 1971 3) Historical carbon dioxide record from the Vostok ice core, Barnola JM et al. France and Barkov, Artic and Antarctic Research Institute Beringa St. 38, 199397, St. Petersburg, Russia. 4) Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica, 1999, Petit JR, et al, Nature 399:429-436. 5) Distant future of the Sun and Earth revisited. Schroder KP, Smith, RC, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 3861365-2966, 2008. 6) Arhab,AI On the Planetary Acceleration and the Rotation of the Earth, Astophys Space Sci. 314: 35-39, 2008 7) Skakkebach, NE et al, Is human fecundity declining? Int J Androl 29: 2-11 2006 8) Jesus, Mathew, 24:22, New Living Bible. Tyndale House, Wheaton, 1996. 9) Tonkin R.Mortality in childhood, BC Med Assoc J. 21:212,1979. 10) Ney,PG A Relationship between abortion and child abuse. Can J Psychiatry 24:610-620 1979. 11) Ney PG, Wickett A. Mental health and abortion: review and analysis, Psychiatr J. Univ. Ottawa 14:506-516,1989. 12) Ney,PG Fung T.Wickett A., Relationship between induced abortion and child abuse and neglect: four studies. Pre and Perinatal Psychology Journal, 800:43-63,1993 13) Ney PG, Transgenerational child abuse, Child Psychiatry and Human Development 18:151-167,1988. 14) Ney PG, Fung T, Wickett A. Causes of child abuse and neglect. Can J Psychiatry, 37:401-405,1992. 15) Ney PG, et al Child abuse: a study of the child’s perspective, Child Abuse and Neglect. 10: 510-518, 1986.
16) Reardon DC et al Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low ncome women, Southern Medical Journal, 96:834-841,2000
17) Reardon DC, Ney PG Abortion and subsequent substance abuse. Am J Alcohol Abuse. 26:61-75, 2000. 18) Drower SJ, Nash ES , Therapeutic abortion on psychiatric grounds, Part I, A local study, S Afr Med J 54:604-608, 1978. 19) Ney PG, Fung T, Wickett AR, et al The effects of pregnancy loss on women’s health. Soc Sci Med 48:1193-1200, 1994. 20) Gissler M, Hemmindi E, Lonquist J, Suicides after pregnancy in Finland. BMJ 313:1431-1434, 1996. 21) Berkeley D, Humphreys PI, Davidson D, Demands made on general practice by women before and after and abortion. JR Coll Gen Pract 34:310-315 1984. 22) Mental Health Updates. Depression looms as global crisis: WHO, Sept.2,2009. 22a) Olfson M, Marcu SC. National patterns in antidepressant medication treatment. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 66:848. 23) Reardon DC et al Psychiatric admissions of low income women following abortion and childbirth. CMAJ 168:1253-1256,2003 24) Morgan CM et al, Mental health may deteriorate as a direct effect of induced abortion. BMJ 314:902,1997. 25) Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Ridder EM Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health. J Child Psychol Psychiat 47:16-24, 2006 26) Ney PG A consideration of abortion survivors. Child Psychiatry and Human Development 13:168-179, 1983 27) Ney PG Abortion and Family Psychology: A study in progress. Canadian J Diagnosis, January 1999, 113-119. 28) Ney PG, Sheils C, Gajowy MA Post abortion survivor syndrome (PASS): signs and symptoms. Southern Medical Journal 99:1405-1406, 2000 29) Genesis 1:28 30) 30 Matthew 24:31 31) Ney PG, Shiels C, Ball K. The results of intensive group psychotherapy, presented at the annual meeting of the American Group Psychotherapy Association, May 2000, Los Angeles. 32) Ney PG, Ball K, Shiels C. The results of Hope Alive group psychotherapy, presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Psychiatric Association, September, 2003, Vancouver.