Freedom Expanded: Book 1—The Old Biology
Part 4:12K Science became a farce
For a summary of just how devastatingly corrupted by the human condition we humans are now, and how farcically hopeless science has become in its efforts to do anything about it, we need look no further than the acclaimed 2010 documentary Secrets of the Tribe on the Yanomamö Indians of the Amazon—a relatively innocent, happy, soulful tribe who lived in total isolation from the outside world until cultural anthropologists descended upon them in the 1960s to study their behaviour. In addition to describing 30 or so years of sordid and appalling mistreatment by some of these anthropologists, including the sexual abuse of a whole generation or more of young Yanomami, the program also documented the ferocious conflict that emerged between the right-wing and left-wing anthropologists who were studying the tribe. Briefly, the right-wing tried to highlight the infighting and intertribal wars of the Yanomami, with a book that even described them (in the title no less) as ‘The Fierce People’, and a theory that the hostilities arose because they were competing for the chance to reproduce their genes—that war is a result of aggressive instincts in humans. The left-wing anthropologists attempted to counter the right-wing’s aggression-and-selfishness-is-only-natural argument with their own equally dishonest ‘cultural materialism’ argument that claimed the fighting was a cultural development that arose from fighting for strategic material resources, such as the steel tools the anthropologists were providing them with and high protein game. The right-wing sociobiologists blamed our supposed selfish genes, while the left-wing socialists blamed the development of a materialistic culture. As already mentioned, the human-condition-confronting-rather-than-human-condition-avoiding true explanation for the aggression apparent in the Yanomami is that while they are undoubtedly more innocent than the majority of humans in the world today, they are still nowhere near as innocent as humans were some two million years ago when the battle of the human condition first emerged. The Yanomami are a relatively innocent, happy, well-adjusted, peaceful race—as virtually all those outsiders who spent time with them felt very keenly.
For the scientific establishment to support the misrepresentation of these obviously relatively innocent people as ‘The Fierce People’, which is an outrageous reverse-of-the-truth-lie, and allow one of their own to sexually destroy the innocence of an entire generation of this pristine tribe, shows just how festered science had become by its practice of denial of the human condition—as Barbara Rose Johnston, one of the anthropologists who briefly appears in the documentary wrote, ‘Secrets of the Tribe exposes the secrets of my tribe, of anthropologists’ (Secrets of the Tribe, pub. in political newspaper Counterpunch, accessed 9 Jan. 2012 at <>). Basically, the Yanomami’s innocence was felt to be so confronting and exposing that it had to be annihilated with an atomic-bomb-sized attack that was sanctioned at the highest levels in our society! This behaviour is extremely revealing of where humanity has arrived at; it provides the starkest evidence of just how psychologically upset and insecure we humans have become—and, it should also be said, that pseudo idealists’ human-condition-avoiding, superficial focus on materialism was so pathetic and cowardly it was even more sickening than those attacking innocence/truth head on. It is all deeply, deeply shocking, but again, that is the end play state that the world has arrived at. The human-race-transforming, reconciling understanding of the human condition has come at the absolute eleventh hour for our species and our planet. (Much more will be said in Part 5:2 about science’s denial of the relative innocence of so-called ‘primitive’ races.)
The point should be made that in terms of the so-called ‘discipline of science’, it’s obvious that the left-wing and the right-wing explanations of human behaviour couldn’t both be correct—and in fact, neither of them are—and yet they both cited acres of research papers that allegedly supported what they were putting forward, which is simply more evidence of just how lacking in any objective impartiality science has been. The song played at the end of the Secrets of the Tribe documentary, with its lyrics, ‘Things have come to a pretty pass…It looks as if we two will never be one…You like potato and I like potahto…Let’s call the whole thing off’, perfectly captures the whole farcical, ‘no-one-cares-about-the-pursuit-of-understanding-anymore-only-about-imposing-their-own-twisted-philosophy-on-the-world’ joke that science has been reduced to. The truth is, while there has been much emphasis placed on scientific research, the real need was for some honest, penetrating scientific thought. It wasn’t a lack of research papers holding science back, but a lack of mental integrity. The answers were there to find, the problem was no one was prepared to think truthfully enough to find them. As has now been described, since Darwin presented his idea of natural selection in 1859 and revealed that instincts are only orientations not understandings, there has been sufficient base information to explain the human condition and all the other crucial biological questions facing the human race—the problem was that no one was prepared to think truthfully enough to arrive at those explanations. The need was not for the mental cleverness that all university entrance exams basically select for, but mental soundness. The impasse was alienation, not lack of information. The bottom line truth is that while ever scientists are committed to living in denial of the real psychological issue of the human condition they are going to be incapable of honesty—a point that was made in an amazingly frank comment that was posted on a Christian website in 2009: ‘if there really is hope beyond the human condition, then the Truth that leads to it has to have been established by someone beyond the human condition. Us [denial-complying] humans are way too good at rationalizing truth into any shape that pleases us’ (Jonathan Wise, The Emerging Church, 29 Mar. 2009, accessed 4 Jul. 2009 at: <>). It’s only now that understanding of the human condition has finally been found that we are going to see the emergence of a world of trustworthy science.
With regard to ‘humans’ being ‘way too good at rationalizing truth into any shape that pleases’, the great burden for denial-complying mechanistic scientists has been to somehow present or ‘rationaliz[e]’, and supposedly support with scientific research, lies. Lying—practicing denial—is hard work. The end result has been that scientific papers are now so incredibly intellectualised, especially in their wording and in the weight of supposed evidence in terms of the references that are supplied, that all scientists now complain of how taxing it is on their mental powers trying to actually decipher the flood of these sophisticated dissertations, even in their own field of work. While lying requires great intellectual dexterity because you essentially have to bluff, pretend to be in possession of the truth when you really are not, ‘truthing’ doesn’t. The paradigm that I operate in where the truth is confronted and not denied is a much simpler paradigm in which to operate. I don’t need to intellectualise, indulge in convoluted arguments and create acres of scientific citations. However, although my work is most rigorously grounded in logic and evidence, it is so different in its simplicity and content to the work coming from the intellectualised mechanistic world that the latter has never been able to cope with it. As will be described shortly in Part 4:14, I have never ceased trying to have my work considered, debated and published in the scientific community, but despite such efforts it has, in almost every instance, been rejected—even though I have truthfully explained the psychologically upset state of the human condition and, by so doing, made the truths that I am presenting safe to confront. The intellectualised world of denial is like a different universe to the one I operate in, which is why I had to create my own institution to fund, support and promote my work.
From these efforts, however, I have managed to extract some positive feedback—for instance, Scott Churchill, the Professor and Chair of the Psychology Department at the University of Dallas, has written the following about my analysis of the biological theories that have emerged since Darwin: ‘I have recommended his [Griffith’s] more recent work to my students precisely for his razor-sharp clarifications of positions of contemporary authors like Edward O. Wilson, Richard Dawkins, and Robert Wright. Griffith manages to summarise book-length expositions of these oftentimes obtuse and varying perspectives on human evolution with clarity and brilliance’ (Expert Report tendered in the 2007 NSW Supreme Court trial regarding the scientific standard of Griffith’s work—see the Persecution of the WTM section on our website <>). What is astonishing to me, however, is how all the ‘book-length expositions’ on all the theories of biology that have emerged since Darwin’s time that I ‘summarise’ have managed to complexify the core concept they were putting forward to the extent of creating what are often very large and intellectually imposing books. But that is the very point I am making—having to practice denial was a tricky business, you essentially had to bluff, pretend to be in possession of the truth when you really weren’t—and persuade others in the process. It was all about ‘smoke and mirrors’, ‘obtuse’ intellectualised deception and pretension. In the end, the artificiality of it all, and also the delusion and arrogance involved, was ridiculous and appalling. Yes, it really was a case of ‘Things have come to a pretty pass…It looks as if we two will never be one…You like potato and I like potahto…Let’s call the whole thing off’! Again, however, this development was only another indication of the end play state of terminal alienation that was happening everywhere in the world, no matter where we chose to look.