Pi Man, you seem to have contracted a mild case of HUb'itis. You may want to stay away from that keyboard for a day or so. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

cout >> "I hope it's not catching.n";

This is the first time I've stepped into one of these creationist threads. The thing that boggles my mind the most is the amount of emphasis that these fundamentalists place on the whole issue. Their priorities seem to really be out of whack in terms of which "attacks" on their beliefs being made in secular culture are the most serious.

For example, I would think that if the fundamentalists had a better perspective on these issues, they would be more concerned about the many threads of psychology than evolution. Many of these threads I think present a much more direct attack on religious beliefs than anything taught in a biology class. These threads include behaviorism (man is nothing more than a computer) and many strands of existentialist psychology (there is no objective reality, etc.).

It seems to me that little Johnny's religious beliefs could be much more damaged if he were taught that he had no free will, than if taught that he was descended from monkeys.

Furthermore, the potential for criticism would be much higher than has been in their attacks on evolution. When fighting evolution, they are fighting a mountain of empirical data, with the prinicpal line of attack being "since the theory of evolution is not complete in every one of its details, it is obviously wrong." In contrast, many psychological theories lack serious empirical evidence and in fact many of the theories contradict one another.* In contrast to work of the Bell Labs charlatan, Freud's works are as hotly disputed today than they were 100+ years ago (maybe even more so).

So why don't fundamentalists pay more attention to these issues instead of trying to win a hopeless battle against evolution? I know this topic is somewhat off the spirit of the board, but this is a question that has been bothering me for some time.

* An excellent discussion of this issue is contained in John Horgan's book The Undiscovered Mind.

Zathras,
From my understanding they do mostly go against evolution because it is easily understood by the layperson with only a small amount of science. Again as i said earlier, the fundamentalists go more for popular periodicals and for the public then serious scientific or peer reviewed journals. It is much harder to describe psychology and other sciences of the human nature to a layperson than saying that a slug over time turned into a person.

To get to the point, would you rather spend half of your article explaining the theory then go onto your rebuttal, or go strait to the rebuttal?

P.S. welcome to the topic, great question.

__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002

ROFL!

Good point. Of course, we'd really have to revamp our entire education system. But that's a long discussion and very off-topic from this Board. Well, maybe if someone set-up a psychology-based bulletin board - ugh! no! I don't even want to think about it. [Where's the "sick face" smily?]

__________________
"As I lay beneath the Southern Cross, the stars tell more than I could" . . . David Meece

My initial thought is that evolution is a "root" theory while most of psychology these days are "branch" theories (if indeed the theories are supported at all). By that, I mean that the theory of evolution is very fundamental, underlies a great deal of biology, and undercuts basic creationist beliefs. Meanwhile, behaviorism just sort of hangs out there with neither a lot being built on it nor a lot to support it. There are plenty of people out there to argue with behaviorism and other psychological theories while few mainstream scientists have an argument with evolution.

P.S. Which Zathras are you? Zathras, Zathras, Zathras, Zathras, or Zathras (note differences in pronunciation). Or are you the quiet one? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Well here's a board the psychologically inclined may want to visit:

http://www.indiana.edu/~iuepsyc/forms/P103BB.html

I didn't check it out because I haven't found the source for a sick-face smiley either. This is the closest [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img] but it looks too happy and not pale enough. Maybe when Pi Man gets better he could modify it.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: DaveC on 2002-10-04 11:00 ]</font>

No. Not the quiet one. I am Zathras. This one, he is the quiet one. The one behind you is Zathras. Now, next to you is Zathras.

The one next to him is Bob.

Mind if we call you Bruce?

DECLARE SUB MODIFYSMILEY(SMILEYPIC())
DECLARE SUB LOADSMILEY(SMILEYPIC())
DECLARE SUB SHOWPIC(SMILEYPIC())
DIM SMILEYPIC(100,100) AS INTEGER
CLS
CALL LOADSMILEY(SMILEYPIC())
CALL MODIFYSMILEY(SMILEYPIC())
CALL SHOWPIC(SMILEYPIC())
PRINT "<font color="#ff0000">It's alive!!! It's alive!</font>"
PRINT "<font color="#ff0000">There! is that modified enough for you???</font>"
PRINT "<font color="#ff0000">It isn't quite a smiley, but... well... Just click the link.</font>"
PRINT "<font color="#ff0000">HUB'!!! IS THERE AN ANTIDOTE FOR HUB'ITIS??????</font>"
SLEEP
END


_________________
*****∞
π=∑(4/(4n+1)-4/(4n+3))
****n=0 (Yes folks, it really works)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Pi Man on 2002-10-04 14:17 ]</font>

Pi Man, the worst thing you can do when you get HUb'itis is to get back on your keyboard - that's why I suggested you leave this smiley modification project until you're feeling better.

You've obviously aggravated your condition - which, by the way you can monitor by comparing your posts to HUb''s. When they start to look just like HUb''s, you've become incurable. You aren't there yet, but it looks like you are sinking fast.

I'm Batman!!!!

__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002

Pi Man,

Gross pic! Cool, but gross.

My entry for caption contest:
"Who fed Punky the Primordial Soup again?"

__________________
"All you need to know for life can be learned in kindergarten: Admit nothing, deny everything, make counter accusations, and, above all, don't put your tongue on it! " - various cynics

I would agree with you ToSeek that the question of orgins is a "root" theory. However, the importance of the creation vs. evolution depate is much deeper than that. Creationism is absolutely foundational to Christianity. Why? If you replace special creation with evolution (especially human evolution) you lose Adam, the Garden of Eden, and original sin. Without orginal sin, man is not in a fallen state and has no need for a Saviour (see Romans 5:12-21). Therefore, there is no need for Jesus to come (as the "Second Adam") and die for sins. As a result, Christians should be very reluctant to turn their backs on creationism.

So Zathars, I don't think that creationist have a misguided emphasis. I think that most creationist do have a problem with various aspects of secular culture, but they see these as just symptoms of the problem, and not the "root" cause.

__________________
Old laser physicists never die, they just become incoherent.
These days, every Tom, Dick, and Harry thinks he knows what a photon is, but he is wrong. - Albert Einstein

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Yul on 2002-10-07 17:38 ]</font>

Is there any confirmation of this from the latest thoth Newsletter, or is it a hoax?

MICROBES IN GEOLOGY (continued from THOTH VI-5)
By Earl Staelin

Part 2: How do microbes concentrate minerals to levels vastly
exceeding the surrounding medium? The theory of biological
transmutations.

The next question, is HOW DO microbes concentrate minerals to
levels much higher than the medium in which they live? Do they
make limestone out of sandstone or mud containing mostly silica
and little calcium? How do they concentrate gold up to 100
million times the surrounding medium? How do they concentrate
manganese, iron, magnesium, etc.? Where do the elements that
dominate the crust of the earth come from, since they were
apparently not present during the pre-Cambrian era? Actually,
most prominent scientists often admit that they do not yet
understand how microbes concentrate minerals and elements to such
a high degree. In this uncertainty I believe that it is wise to
keep an open mind, and to be willing to investigate new theories
that may explain such puzzling phenomena.

One expert who devoted a great deal of attention to the question
of how microbes or living organisms concentrate elements was a
French biologist named Louis Kervran, whose exceptional work I
believe is worth careful examination. After many years of
investigation he published a theory in 1960 which he called
biological transmutations. His theory contends that living
organisms are actually able to transmute one element to another.
He concluded that they do this through a catalytic effect caused
by enzymes and hormones, and by several routes -- such as by
combining two elements, by splitting an element, or by the
movement of a proton and neutron from one atom to another atom
within a molecule. He published meticulous experiments that
supported his position. In 1975 he was nominated for and nearly
won the Nobel Prize for his work. However, he died in 1983 at
the age of 82, and therefore under the rules for the Nobel, could no
longer receive it. A number of his findings and one of his books
dealt primarily with geology.

Let's see how he proved his theory as applied to the problem of
the formation of limestone, and the problem of the "concentration"
of minerals. Kervran performed studies that showed an unsuspected
formation of limestone in the sandstone monuments in Ankhor,
Cambodia, including Ankhor Wat. Kervran, as a high government
official in France, had access to a multidisciplinary team of
experts. The original pink sandstone at Ankhor Wat contains
substantial quantities of silica in the form of quartz and
feldspar, but little calcium. However, some portions were found
to be infected with bacteria. The infected sandstone appeared to
be turning into limestone. Here are some of their research
findings based upon 120 samples:

SiO2 CaO
Normal stone 63.0% 1.40%
Deteriorated stone 35.8 17.34
(Angkor Wat, external facing; Kervran, Beekman Pub, pp. 48-49)

Thus, as silica disappears, calcium appears, the decrease in
silica from 63 to 36 being equivalent to the increase in calcium
from 1.4 to 17.34. As Kervran shows, if silica can combine with
carbon at the level of the nucleus, then calcium could be formed.
In other words: Si28 + C12 = Ca40.
Kervran's group analyzed the rainwater on the monument to test
whether this increase in calcium had come from rainwater, which
trickled down the lower west face of the monument, and found that
it did not because the calcium ions in rainwater and in the water
dripping from the lower west face were the same. Thus, the rain in
washing over the facade had not taken away any calcium.

Kervran also analyzed the magnesium and potassium in the stone,
which could also be transmuted into calcium based upon his
previous studies. However, he found that MgO in normal stone was
2.50%, and in deteriorated stone was 2.64%, and the K2O was 1.2%
in both normal and deteriorated stone, so the calcium "could not
have come from these two minerals", and only the silica had
significantly decreased.

"An investigation was made of the micro-organisms present on
the monument. Out of 120 samples taken, 83 contained
actinomycetes, all of which were in the deteriorated stone,
whereas there was none in the samples from the healthy stone.
The authors reported identification of seven species of
actinomycetes, all belonging to the genus Streptomyces (from
one of which streptomycin is produced). 'We have observed
these actinomycetes to be much more abundant in the stones
which showed most deterioration ... The almost constant
presence of these micro-organisms in lesions of the stones
permits the view that they have an important role in the
process of deterioration.'

"In a paper, published by the (French) Academy of Sciences, it
is established that there is a marked increase in calcium
(varying at 1158% [i.e. increased nearly 12-fold] without any
detectable amount of the element being supplied externally by
water. On the other hand, the silica alone decreases in
considerable proportion. This change in the siliceous stone
and the accompanying increase of lime is linked to the
presence of micro-organisms. If instead of giving relative
values for SiO2 and CaO we only consider absolute weight
variations of Si and Ca, we find they are almost in
equilibrium at 9.8 ± 1.5 (the variation is because there is no
Si = Ca, but Si + C = Ca)." This occurs because Si (28) + C
(12) = Ca (40). (Complete details may be found in _Proceedings
of the French Academy of Sciences_ (Book 258, Section 13, pp.
6573-75, 6/29/64), and in the 1965 French edition of Kervran’s
_Biological Transmutations_.)

Limestone has variable amounts of magnesium in it, which may be
explained by Kervran's discovery that microbes can transmute
calcium into magnesium by taking oxygen from it (Ca - O = Mg).

The theory of biological transmutations appears to contradict a
basic theory in chemistry proposed 200 years ago by Lavoisier that
atoms or elements cannot be combined or split to make other
elements. Later it was shown that such changes could occur at
very high energies, although none of those experiments involved
living organisms. Because Kervran's theory is based upon many
reproducible experiments, we should heed the advice of the great
French physician, Claude Bernard, who said:

"When one is confronted with a fact which is in opposition
with a prevalent theory, one must accept this fact and abandon
the theory, even though the latter, supported by great men,
may be generally subscribed to." (Kervran, Swan House Pub.
Co., p. 154)

Louie de Broglie, Nobel Prize laureate in physics said:

"It is premature to reduce the vital (i.e. living) processes
to the quite insufficiently developed conceptions of 19th and
even 20th century physics and chemistry." (Kervran, supra, p.
1).

Kervran first published his theory and the evidence in 1960. The
response in France by medical doctors and scientists was highly
favorable. For example, M. Camberfort, Professor of Geotechnics,
in 1974 said:

"I have spoken of your work in my most recent book, because I
consider that your hypotheses, largely confirmed in certain
cases, are the only ones susceptible of explaining a number of
facts noted by geologists, and so far explained (in geological
circles) by fairy tales and old wives’ tales."

Debra S. Stakes, a geochemist at the Monterey Bay Aquarium
Research Institute in Moss Landing, California, said:

"Most geological processes at their more fundamental stages
could be biologically mediated, which challenges our models
for inorganic thermodynamics, for driving reactions." (Broad,
ibid.)

General relativity and quantum mechanics are two systems that are
to some extent mutually inconsistent, and each of them has
difficulty explaining certain phenomena, implying that both may be
inadequate in some key respects. Kervran believes that
transmutations fall in the class of forces in physics called "weak
nuclear reactions". Some scientists suspect that the dipole
character of the electrical force or electromagnetic force may
play a significant role in the explanation. The weak nuclear force
(electro-weak force) of the atom was related to the
electromagnetic force in the 1960's by 1979 Nobel Laureates in
physics, Steven Weinberg, Sheldon Lee Glashow and Abdus Salam.
Kervran was convinced that a better understanding of the electro-
weak force would probably explain biological transmutations. If a
successful electrical explanation can be found for biological
transmutations it would move science closer to the grand unified
theory that scientists seek, and would better satisfy the Occam's
razor principle: "simpler is better".

Most scientists do not have an informed opinion about biological
transmutations because they either have not heard of it, or have
not investigated it, despite significant published literature
proving that biological transmutations occur. In fact, I one
well-known biologist told me he had never heard of biological
transmutations. Usually scientists try to explain their
unexpected and anomalous results by saying that the microbes
"concentrate", or "preferentially fix" minerals, or that the
minerals "migrate". However, as Kervran has said:

"(T)hose who employ (such) terms have never measured the total
content of the element in question—neither in the experimental
jar nor in the soil -- before or after cultivation." (Kervran,
Swan House, pp. 4-5). Often these scientists admit that they
don't understand how microbes concentrate minerals.

As shown, Kervran provides strong empirical evidence that
limestone may be formed from sandstone or silica through the
action of several species of streptomyces (order of
actinomycetes), which transmute silica into calcium. (Si + C =
Ca). Biological transmutations might also explain the creation of
geological formations of limestone from large deposits of fossils
which often appear to have been buried originally in sand, gravel
and clay, each of which contains a large amount of silica.
Transmutations appear to require the presence of sufficient water
in liquid form to sustain the bacteria.

Biological organisms appear to be involved in the formation of
chalk, such as the white cliffs of Dover in England, which like
limestone, also consist of calcium carbonate. (Broad, ibid.)

Many other anomalies consistent with transmutation occur in the
biochemistry of calcium:

1. Americans consume more calcium and milk products than just
about any country in the world, yet we have one of the highest
rates of osteoporosis. (The Harvard study of 77,761 nurses found
that persons with a high dietary calcium intake actually had 45%
more hip fractures over 12 years than those with the lowest
intake. (Diane Feskanich, Sc.D., et al. "Milk, Dietary Calcium,
and Bone Fractures in Women: A 12-Year Prospective Study", _Am. J.
Pub. Health_, 87:6; 992-997, June 1997). A 1994 study of elderly
men and women in Sidney, Australia found that those with the
highest milk product consumption had approximately double the risk
of hip fracture compared to those with the lowest consumption,
Cumming RG, Klineberg RJ, "Case-control study of risk factors for
hip fractures in the elderly", _Am. J. Epidemiol_., 1994; 139:493-
50.

2. Rural Chinese do not consume milk products or take calcium
supplements, and their average calcium intake was 544 mg. per day
(approximately half that of the RDA in the U.S.). Among these
Chinese women over age 50, the rate of bone fractures is about one
fifth as high as in Western nations. (T. Colin Campbell, Hunshi
Chen, _Diet in Rural China_, Lippincott/Williams & Wilkins, 1999;
Hu, J-F, Zhao, X-H, Hia, J-B, Parpi, B., Campbell, T.C., "Dietary
calcium and bone density among middle-aged and elderly women in
China,", Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1993; 58: 219-217).

3. Milking cows experience a daily "deficit" of calcium (and
phosphorus) at such a great rate that in one year's time, its
bones would be seriously depleted if it got its calcium from
calcium. (Kervran, Swan House Pub., pp. 57, 67-68; A. Demolon and
A. Marquet, _Le Phosphore et la Vie_, P.U.F. Pub., Paris 1949).
However, if silica and magnesium (Mg + O = Ca) in the grass are
considered as sources of calcium through transmutation, as shown
by Kervran, there is no mystery and no deficit because grass
contains large amounts of silica and magnesium.

4. Broken bones have been shown to heal much more quickly when a
source of organic silica such as the herb horsetail is provided.
(Kervran has excellent photos of x-rays showing rapid healing with
horsetail, (Kervran, Swan House Pub., p. 137)

5. Broken bones have been shown to heal much more quickly when
foods high in calcium such as milk products are withheld. (E.
Plisnier, Sauvez votre sante, Edit. P.I.C. Bruxelles, 1966;
Kervran, Swan House Pub., pp. 145-146)

6. The oak tree "grows best in soils rich in silica, where lime
may be totally absent, but the tree can have large amounts of
calcium in its wood and bark (up to 60% lime in the ash)"
(Kervran, _Biological Transmutations_, Beekman Press [hereinafter
"BP"], 1972, p. 26).

7. Grass grows best on soil high in calcium, yet its ash contains
large quantities of silica and magnesium but little calcium.
However, it is not necessary to add magnesium to the soil, despite
removal of much greater quantities of magnesium year after year
than the soil could possibly have contained. Yet, when the soil
becomes depleted in calcium, daisies spring up in the lawn, and
daisies have an ash that is high in calcium, thus restoring the
soil (Ehrenfried Pfeiffer, _Fecondite de la Terre_, Edit. Les
Triades. Paris, 1949 (reedit. 1960, avec preface de A. Louis).
"When lime is lacking, silicon loving plants grow, and their ash
is rich in lime" (Kervran, BP, p. 25).

8. The skeleton of a chicken just hatched has four times more
calcium in it than was in the egg. The calcium did not come from
the shell because on the 10th day the outer leaf separates from
the shell enlarging the air chamber, and the calcium only
increases from the 10th day to the 20th day. The outer leaf of
the membrane inside the shell contains about .5% silica, however,
and the inner leaf contains less (Kervran, Swan House Pub., pp.
46-47).

9. Kervran once tested a crab that was molting, and was a soft
mass without a shell. It was placed in a container with a little
seawater and by the second day its shell was fully formed, which
weighs about 350 g. Seawater has only .042% calcium in it, so
that the shell's calcium could not have come from the water.
However, seawater has 5% magnesium salts, which could have
produced the calcium: Mg + O Ca. (Kervran, Swan House Pub., p. 58)
Dr. Charruyer, Chairman of the Department of Physics at the
Medical School of Limoges, France mentioned to Kervran:

"that he had found in primitive grounds geodes of calcite in
slaty rocks which were very hard, compact, and absolutely
impermeable. These rhomboidal forms of calcium carbonate can
be very big and weight many kilos, but due to their
impermeability, there is no possibility that they could have
come by migration. They could only have had an endogenous
origin in one of the components of the schists. In my opinion
they could only have come from the reaction (Si + C = Ca)
since C also comes from the schists in the reaction Si = C +
O." (Kervran, Beekman, p. 73)


Despite these anomalies, chemists generally have never tested for
the source of all the calcium. Instead they ASSUMED it was
"concentrated" or "precipitated" from calcium already in the
vicinity, despite general indications weighing against such
assumption, and despite published evidence by Kervran and others
proving that there was no adequate source of calcium and that
other elements were the probable source.

Let's look at the experiments that led Kervran to publish his
theory of biological transmutations in 1960. The experiments
arose from numerous unexplained carbon monoxide poisonings in
acetylene torch welders going back 25 years (See Kervran, Beekman,
pp. 17-23).

In 1935 Kervran investigated for the French government the carbon
monoxide poisoning death of an acetylene torch welder welding
steel for the French government. After careful investigation of
the air breathed by the welder no source of carbon monoxide could
be found. In subsequent years Kervran investigated numerous other
deaths of welders from C-O poisoning and no source of C-O was ever
found. Finally, in 1955 Kervran again was called upon to
investigate the deaths of three more welders by C-O poisoning.
This time an extremely thorough investigation was performed
involving numerous specialists from different fields over a period
of four years. Again no source of carbon monoxide could be found.
This finding is not surprising since the great heat of red-hot
iron (or steel) should cause complete combustion of all carbon.
Numerous tests were performed to consider all conventional
explanations.

Such C-O poisonings of welders and failure to find the a source of
C-O were by no means confined to France. In England and
especially Germany detailed studies were done to determine the
cause of the C-O poisonings. Careful measurements of the air near
red-hot welding operations were unable to find a trace of C-O
(Kervran, BP, p. 20). Not long ago I talked with a retired former
director of maintenance at the Gates Tire Co. in Denver, Colorado
and he told me that they also had a problem with C-O poisoning
among welders but had never been able to discover the source of
C-O. He said the problem was solved once they supplied air to the
welders through tubes from a source away from the welding itself.

Based upon all the evidence Kervran finally concluded that
nitrogen in the air when heated by red hot iron or steel had been
transmuted in the body to carbon monoxide. Thus, N2 = CO, which
involves the movement of one proton and one neutron from the
nucleus of one nitrogen atom to the other, thereby changing one
atom to carbon, and the other to oxygen. After over four years of
painstaking research into the welders’ C-O poisoning, Kervran
published his results and theory of biological transmutations in
1960. The findings that led him to this conclusion were as
follows:

1. No source of carbon monoxide was ever found.

2. Every surviving welder in the workplace was tested, and the
blood of all tested high in carbon monoxide, some approaching a
fatal level.

3. The helpers who worked nearby the welders but not in the
immediate vicinity of the red hot steel were also tested. None of
the helpers had elevated levels of carbon monoxide in their blood.

4. When helium was tested in place of nitrogen, the welders no
longer got carbon monoxide poisoning. (Kervran, BP p. 21)

5. When the welders' air supply was provided through tubes from
nearby air that was not exposed to the red hot metal, carbon-
monoxide poisoning no longer occurred.

6. It was later determined that the iron must be heated to a deep
red or hotter, or to a temperature of more than 400 C (752 F)
(experiments on rabbits and humans; Kervran, 1964, BP, pp. 20-21;
Swan House Pub., pp. 18-19). When the iron is bright red
(considerably hotter) the effect is quick (Kervran, Swan House
Pub., p. 19).

7. An argument that the carbon monoxide could have been produced
as a result of increased oxygen pressure was disproved in 1963,
showing that the production of C-O occurs independently of oxygen
pressure. (Desoille, H. and Truffert, "Absence de correlation
entre la pression de l'oxygene et l'oxyde de Carbone dans le
sang," _Arch. Mal. Prof._, July, 1963.)

Kervran reasoned from these facts as follows: The nitrogen
molecule in air has two nitrogen atoms which are 1.12 Angstroms
apart. The electrons circulate in a common orbit around both.
The carbon monoxide molecule's nuclei are 1.09 Angstroms apart.
One proton and one neutron move from one nitrogen atom over to the
other nitrogen atom, changing one N atom into carbon and the other
into oxygen. The electrons stay in the same orbit as the nuclei
move slightly closer together. Kervran states that the first five
protons in an atom (as in boron) are in an inner orbit (Kervran,
BP, p. 102), while elements with more protons, such as carbon and
nitrogen have additional protons in a larger orbit. Kervran
states that it appears that the protons in this second orbit are
not as tightly bound, requiring less energy to dislodge them.
Kervran believes that a proton and neutron in the second orbit of
one of the nitrogen atoms in a nitrogen molecule are energized and
resonate with the nitrogen activated by the infrared wavelengths
generated by the red hot iron and under the influence of an (as
yet) unidentified catalyst, probably present in the lungs or
blood, the proton and neutron move from one nitrogen atom to the
other, changing nitrogen into carbon monoxide (whose spectral
pattern has two peaks at 8 and 9 microns in the infrared) instead.
The energy from iron at 1100 C to 1300 C resonates in the infrared
at 6 to 8 microns. (Kervran, Beekman, p. 40). Thus, red hot iron
and C-O have a common resonance at 8 microns in the infrared.
Further evidence that a transmutation occurred is afforded by the
fact that the C-O poisonings stopped completely once the welders
were provided with air to breathe through tubes from a location
away from the red hot iron.

This revolutionary theory is supported by the fact that there is
now sound evidence that numerous other biological transmutations
take place in nature, many of which were verified by Kervran and
other scientists.

In urging you to keep an open mind, I will quote Alexis Carrel,
eminent French surgeon and 1912 Nobel Prize winner, who wrote:

"The mind has a natural tendency to reject what does not come
within the framework of the scientific expectations of our
epoch. Scientists are men after all. They are impregnated
with the prejudice of their class and times. They readily
believe that what is not explainable in current theory does
not exist."

MANGANESE AND IRON. Another geological process investigated by
Kervran involved a "black disease" on the cave walls and temples
of Banteay Srei in Cambodia. The surface of the rocks becomes
black and this black layer consists of 5% manganese (Mn), which
causes the black color. But there is only .05% manganese in the
stone (100X less). There is more Mn in the black surface layer
than in the entire rock, so the Mn could not have come from the
rock. However, an analysis of the pink sandstone r