President Obama said we’re going to restore science to its rightful place and transform our schools and universities to meet the demands of a new age. Scientists have been hard at work on that for 40 years. It doesn’t mean longer school days and more homework; it means a whole new approach to science and education. Find out how to get that education yourself with high school level books that are available at mainstream bookstores. This is an introduction to every other book on this site. Available in booklet and audio CD.


Evolutionary psychology is a biological approach to psychology that starts with human evolution. It’s the study of universal traits of humanity and of the origins of differences among groups. This is the most direct route to Peace on Earth. By discouraging people from learning about evolution, Christian fundamentalists are preventing Peace on Earth from happening. Available in book and two audio CD set.


The anti-globalization revolution is a struggle against the globalization of Capitalism. No matter what name it goes by, the concentration of resources among a small group of people results in a concentration of decision-making power. People are inherently self-interested, which means centralized decision making power can never be trusted. These and all the other main points of the anti-Capitalist revolution have been proven scientifically, while the idea that Capitalism can ever lead to a just or sustainable society is founded on lies and superstitions. Available in book and free audio download, and in condensed form in booklet and audio CD.


In the evolution versus intelligent design debate, the Christian fundamentalists had an advantage in that the Bible is a story of the world and a reference book to life, while the scientists don’t have anything similar. So this three-volume set is a scientific story of the world and reference book to life. Volume 1 is a philosophical approach to evolution and human psychology, which brings together major discoveries scientists have made into the origins of religion, the history of world civilization, the origins of emotions, social organization, learning, child development, and male/female relations. That scientific foundation creates a solid foundation for a humanistic philosophy of life, death, metaphysics, and choices we have for the future. Available in book and free audio book.


The philosophical foundation of Volume 1 is so solid that by changing a few words I switch to a scientific approach in Volume 2. That’s an easier foundation to use to build up to complicated forms of human behavior, like political, economic, and environmental systems. Available in book and free audio download.


Now that I’ve shown how the psychology of individual people turns into political, economic, and environmental systems, in Volume 3 I use that as a common ground to fit together the goals of progressive movements and ideologies. That includes the anti-Capitalist, anti-corporate, anti-border, anti-nuclear, peace, environmental, animal rights, and feminist movements, Atheism, progressive religion, Indigenous Decolonization, Socialism, Communism, and Anarchism. Available in book and free audio download.


The content of Planetary Biology and the Anti-Capitalist Revolution has been established so thoroughly that you can learn how the global environment and evolutionary psychology work with cycles you can see happening in a garden. That means all the third-world farmers who are being driven off their land by globalization can learn planetary biology as easily as anyone else. And that means they can prove that college educated politicians have no excuse for not knowing that Capitalism isn’t environmentally sustainable and will lead to people fighting over resources. The global educational feudal system ends here. Available in book and free audio download, and the text is posted in its entirety on this site.


This is a rigorous academic version of the connections between evolutionary psychology and the theatrical directing style developed by Constatin Stanislavski, and how I have used them to draw connections among the observations about life different groups of people have made. That is followed by a working class activist perspective on science and the education system in America. Beware, because this is college level evolutionary psychology, followed by my first hand account of what it’s like to have been condemned by the education system to live in a neighborhood where racial hate crimes are a fact of life. Available in book only.


This is an expanded version of Planetary Biology and the Anti-Capitalist Revolution, with 10 additional chapters on topics specific to the Anarchist movement. That includes classist attitudes by the middle class majority, and the misguided rejection of science. This is written for Anarchists specifically, so if you don’t have any experience in the Anarchist movement, you won’t be able to keep up with the terminology and obscure references. If you are an Anarchist, beware, because I grew up in Down East Maine, and I wrote this in my native dialect. If you middle class radicals can’t wrap your brains around the fact that the speaking habits of sailors and lumberjacks aren’t part of the system of oppression like you accuse them of being, you don’t have a global working class revolution. Available in book only until I can find time to finish the audio recording.

White People’s Disclaimer

If you’re yet another member of the White middle class majority of the progressive movement in the U.S. who wants to tell me that if working class people learn too much about science they’ll lose their magical powers, I would just like to say:

I grew up in a farming town.  Farmers being driven off their land affects me directly.  If your political success depends on discouraging people who grew up in farming towns from trading information with other people who live in farming towns, I suggest you devote some serious thought to whose side of the struggle you’re really on.

Contents

Prologue:  First Declaration from the Lacandon Jungle
Chapter 1:  The World-Farm  ………………………………………………………………………………………………   1
Chapter 2:  The History of Planetary Biology  ………………………………………………………………………   5
Chapter 3:  How Science Works  …………………………………………………………………………………………   8
Chapter 4:  Science versus Politics  ……………………………………………………………………………………   12
Chapter 5:  Science and Religion  ………………………………………………………………………………………   18
Chapter 6:  Science and the World-Farm  …………………………………………………………………………… 24
Chapter 7:  The Science of Life  …………………………………………………………………………………………   31
Chapter 8:  Genes  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………  36
Chapter 9:  Genes and Reproduction  …………………………………………………………………………………  41
Chapter 10: Genes and the Beginning of Life  ……………………………………………………………………… 45
Chapter 11:  Genes and the History of People  ……………………………………………………………………    49
Chapter 12:  The History of Farming  …………………………………………………………………………………  56
Chapter 13:  The Chemistry of Genes  …………………………………………………………………………………  79
Chapter 14:  The Chemistry of the Global Environment  ………………………………………………………  84
Chapter 15:  The Laws of Thermodynamics  ………………………………………………………………………    95
Chapter 16:  Thermodynamics and Economics  …………………………………………………………………  108
Chapter 17:  Thermodynamics and the Future of Economics  ………………………………………………  113
Chapter 18:  The Limits to Growth  …………………………………………………………………………………    116
Chapter 19:  Beyond the Limits to Growth  ………………………………………………………………………    125
Chapter 20:  An Environmental Government  …………………………………………………………………… 130
Chapter 21:  Evolutionary Psychology  ………………………………………………………………………………  135
Chapter 22:  Consciousness and Subconsciousness  …………………………………………………………    142
Chapter 23:  Childhood Development  ………………………………………………………………………………  147
Chapter 24:  Information and Anti-Information Packages  …………………………………………………  150
Chapter 25:  Evolutionary Psychology and Capitalist Psychological Warfare  ………………………   155
Chapter 26:  Evolutionary Psychology and the Global Environmental Crisis  ………………………   159
Chapter 27:  Gender Differences  ……………………………………………………………………………………… 161
Chapter 28:  The Myth about Rape  …………………………………………………………………………………   167
Chapter 29:  Sexuality  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………   169
Chapter 30:  Evolution and Reproduction  ………………………………………………………………………    171
Chapter 31:  Science and Statistics  …………………………………………………………………………………… 175
Chapter 32:  The Web of Human Behavior  ………………………………………………………………………   180
Chapter 33:  The Theory of Evolutionary Relativity  …………………………………………………………    193
Chapter 34:  The Functional Outline of a Chemical Formula for the Entire World  ………………  207
Chapter 35:  Science and the Death of Capitalism  ……………………………………………………………… 211
Chapter 36:  An Autopsy for our Governments  …………………………………………………………………  217
Chapter 37:  The Environmental Crisis and the Political Future of the World  ……………………… 221
Chapter 38:  Planetary Biology and a Redefinition of Scientific Political Neutrality  ……………    228
Chapter 39:  An Education Revolution  ……………………………………………………………………………   233
Chapter 40:  Neo-Anarchism  …………………………………………………………………………………………   238

The Planetary Biology Library  ………………………………………………………………………………………… 243

Prologue: First Declaration from the Lacandon Jungle

By the EZLN General Command

TO THE PEOPLE OF MEXICO:
MEXICAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS:

We are a product of 500 years of struggle: first against slavery, then during the War of Independence against Spain led by insurgents, then to avoid being absorbed by North American imperialism, then to promulgate our constitution and expel the French empire from our soil, and later the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz denied us the just application of the Reform laws and the people rebelled and leaders like Villa and Zapata emerged, poor men just like us. We have been denied the most elemental preparation so they can use us as cannon fodder and pillage the wealth of our country. They don’t care that we have nothing, absolutely nothing, not even a roof over our heads, no land, no work, no health care, no food nor education. Nor are we able to freely and democratically elect our political representatives, nor is there independence from foreigners, nor is there peace nor justice for ourselves and our children.

But today, we say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

We are the inheritors of the true builders of our nation. The dispossessed, we are millions and we thereby call upon our brothers and sisters to join this struggle as the only path, so that we will not die of hunger due to the insatiable ambition of a 70 year dictatorship led by a clique of traitors that represent the most conservative and sell-out groups. They are the same ones that opposed Hidalgo and Morelos, the same ones that betrayed Vicente Guerrero, the same ones that sold half our country to the foreign invader, the same ones that imported a European prince to rule our country, the same ones that formed the “scientific” Porfirsta dictatorship, the same ones that opposed the Petroleum Expropriation, the same ones that massacred the railroad workers in 1958 and the students in 1968, the same ones the today take everything from us, absolutely everything.

To prevent the continuation of the above and as our last hope, after having tried to utilize all legal means based on our Constitution, we go to our Constitution, to apply Article 39 which says:

“National Sovereignty essentially and originally resides in the people. All political power emanates from the people and its purpose is to help the people. The people have, at all times, the inalienable right to alter or modify their form of government.”

Therefore, according to our constitution, we declare the following to the Mexican federal army, the pillar of the Mexican dictatorship that we suffer from, monopolized by a one-party system and led by Carlos Salinas de Gortari, the maximum and illegitimate federal executive that today holds power.

According to this Declaration of War, we ask that other powers of the nation advocate to restore the legitimacy and the stability of the nation by overthrowing the dictator.

We also ask that international organizations and the International Red Cross watch over and regulate our battles, so that our efforts are carried out while still protecting our civilian population. We declare now and always that we are subject to the Geneva Accord, forming the EZLN as our fighting arm of our liberation struggle. We have the Mexican people on our side, we have the beloved tri-colored flag highly respected by our insurgent fighters. We use black and red in our uniform as our symbol of our working people on strike. Our flag carries the following letters, “EZLN,” Zapatista National Liberation Army, and we always carry our flag into combat.

Beforehand, we refuse any effort to disgrace our just cause by accusing us of being drug traffickers, drug guerrillas, thieves, or other names that might by used by our enemies. Our struggle follows the constitution which is held high by its call for justice and equality.

Therefore, according to this declaration of war, we give our military forces, the EZLN, the following orders:

First: Advance to the capital of the country, overcoming the Mexican federal army, protecting in our advance the civilian population and permitting the people in the liberated area the right to freely and democratically elect their own administrative authorities.

Second: Respect the lives of our prisoners and turn over all wounded to the International Red Cross.

Third: Initiate summary judgments against all soldiers of the Mexican federal army and the political police that have received training or have been paid by foreigners, accused of being traitors to our country, and against all those that have repressed and treated badly the civil population and robbed or stolen from or attempted crimes against the good of the people.

Fourth: Form new troops with all those Mexicans that show their interest in joining our struggle, including those that, being enemy soldiers, turn themselves in without having fought against us, and promise to take orders from the General Command of the Zapatista National Liberation Army.

Fifth: We ask for the unconditional surrender of the enemy’s headquarters before we begin any combat to avoid any loss of lives.

Sixth: Suspend the robbery of our natural resources in the areas controlled by the EZLN.

To the People of Mexico: We, the men and women, full and free, are conscious that the war that we have declared is our last resort, but also a just one. The dictators are applying an undeclared genocidal war against our people for many years. Therefore we ask for your participation, your decision to support this plan that struggles for work, land, housing, food, health care, education, independence, freedom, democracy, justice and peace. We declare that we will not stop fighting until the basic demands of our people have been met by forming a government of our country that is free and democratic.

JOIN THE INSURGENT FORCES OF THE ZAPATISTA NATIONAL LIBERATION ARMY.

General Command of the EZLN

1993

Chapter 1: The World-Farm

The whole world is like a giant farm.

The question is, who are the farmers?

Hello, friends.  My name is Ezra Niesen.  I live in the United States, near the Mexican border.  I have heard a lot about the problems you are having in Mexico since the North American Free Trade Agreement.  We are having a lot of problems here too.

Forgive me for the way I talk.   I have never met you, so I don’t know how you talk to each other.  Sometimes you will probably think I talk to you like you would talk to a child.  I talk simply because the things I have to say are very complicated.  These things affect everyone, so I’m trying to explain them in ways everyone can understand.  (Also, I’m hardly the poet Subcomandante Marcos is, and since I wrote this book in English for someone else to translate into Spanish or any other language, I don’t want anything to be misunderstood.)

What I have to tell you about is called planetary biology.  There is more to learn about it than I can tell you about in this book.  That’s not because you can’t learn it, but because I don’t know enough about you to be able to teach it to you.  What I can teach you about it though is the most important part of it.  I can teach you how planetary biology works, so then you can learn more about it on your own.

As Subcomandante Marcos has said, revolutions are won with reason, not with bullets.  Science is a very highly developed form of reason.  That’s why so many powerful people do so much to prevent revolutionaries from learning about science.  Science is always revolutionary, because it’s the ongoing process of people learning things we didn’t know yesterday.  Politicians hate for people to learn about science, because every government on Earth was founded by people who thought they knew a lot more about the world than they really did.

My book Planetary Biology and the Anti-Capitalist Revolution is a different version of this book.  The difference is that I wrote this book for farmers and other workers, and I wrote that book for people with university educations who can get more books from libraries.   Since farmers know certain things about the world, and people with university educations know different things, in order to tell both groups of people the same things, I have to explain it differently.

I have heard a lot about the problems you are having with people taking your farms—and everything else you have.  I am having another problem with those people and people like them. If we work together, we can help each other solve our problems.

The problem I’m having is just a different version of the problem you’re having.  There are certain people in the world who assume that having lots of money proves they know everything.  But those people are not nearly as smart as they think they are.

There are some people here in the United States who really do know as much as the people who are taking your farms think they know.  We know these things because we’re very good at figuring things out.  Also, we have a lot of machines here that you don’t have, which is why we can figure out things you can’t figure out.

I am one of the people who figure things out.  (I don’t work as a scientist for a number of reasons, a big one being that, as a lot of great scientists have discovered too late, when you’re one of the best in the world at science, stupid politicians always find a way to use your discoveries to build more powerful weapons and oppress people ever more efficiently—which is why I write science books for revolutionaries.)  Unfortunately, there are more of the people who take your farms than there are of people like me, and those other people are the ones who own most of the money and write all of the laws.

Having more money than you doesn’t prove those people are more intelligent than you, it just proves they have different education than you do, and have different jobs than you do.

How to make money is not the most important thing anyone can know about.  The most important thing to know about is how plants and animals live.  We all depend on plants and animals for our food, and for many other things also.

As farmers, you spend your lives working with plants and animals.  Unfortunately, most people in The United States are not farmers.  So most people in The United States don’t know much about how plants and animals live.  They don’t even know that knowing those things is the most important.  Now a lot of things are going wrong in the world and they don’t know why.

Since you are farmers, you already know more about the most important things in the world than most Americans do.  People who study science have learned a lot more about how plants and animals live than anyone else knows.  That means I can teach you what scientists have discovered more easily than I can teach it to most people in The United States.

Since the people who are taking your farms think they know so much about how the world works, I will teach you more about how the world works than they know.  Right now you’re hiding in the jungle and doing all the other things guerillas usually do.  Now I’ll teach you how to prove you’re smarter than the people you’re fighting against.

The things I have to tell you about are published in books that can be found at any university in the English-speaking world.  I’m sure a lot of them have also been translated into Spanish.  None of those books are written for farmers, which is why I wrote this book.  But you also have school teachers and university students on your side.  They can read those books.  Then you can all work together to learn more on your own.  Then you can all prove that you’re smarter than the people who are taking your farms.

You can’t win your revolution with rifles, because you will never be able to shoot the people who are making the decisions to take your farms.  Even if you could, they would only be replaced by more people just like them.  We’ve had problems like that here in The United States too.

You can win your revolution if you can prove that peasant farmers can learn more about how the world works than the people who are taking your farms know.  Right now, the people who are taking your farms are winning because they’re choosing to be stupid, and you don’t know how to prove it.  They could read the same books at universities, and then they could know as much about how the world works as I do.  But if they knew as much about how the world works as I do, they wouldn’t be taking your farms.

It isn’t possible for anyone to know as much as I know and a few other people know, and still think that taking your farms is a good idea.  If the people who are taking your farms really were as smart as they think they are, they would know that taking your farms is a mistake.   The few of us who know enough about how the world works to know that taking your farms is a mistake, also know enough about the world to know that there isn’t anything left about the world that anyone can discover to prove that taking your farms really is a good idea.

To win your revolution, you can prove how much it’s possible for peasant farmers to learn about how the world works.  If you can do that, you can prove that the people who are taking your farms, who went to universities, have no excuse not to know the same things you know.

This is part of what I meant when I said the whole world is like a farm, but who are the farmers?   If you think about how much you know about how your own farm works, that’s how much people like me have figured out about how the whole world works.  You know how to keep your plants and animals healthy, you know how to produce healthy food, and you know how important good soil and clean water are. You know how important those things are on your farm.   Some people, like me, realize how important those things are all over the entire world.  We’re very good at figuring out things like that, so that’s what we do.  We’re not doing it just so we can know something you don’t and then we can come take your farms.  We’re doing it because how to keep the whole world as healthy as you keep your own farm is important for everyone to know.  And one important thing we’ve discovered says that people like you, who know the most about how to work on individual farms, are the best people to work on those farms.

The people who are taking your farms are trying to be the farmers for the whole world.  But you know how those people destroy your farms trying to make as much money as they can.  Well they’re doing the same thing to the entire world.  Just one problem is that they think that being farmers for the whole world means they can treat you and everyone else like animals.  But that just proves how stupid they are, because that’s not how the world works.

For the whole world to work like a healthy farm, people have to not treat each other like animals.   In one way, you can say that nobody is the farmer.  In another way, you can say that everyone is a farmer.   There is no small group of people who can run the entire world like a farm, in the traditional way that a farmer and his family runs a traditional farm.  The closest anyone can come to being that small group of people is to help everyone to work together, without treating anyone like animals.   When I talk about the small group of people I belong to, who have figured out more than anyone else has about how to be the farmers for the whole world, what we’ve figured out is that in the world-farm, everyone is a farmer, and everyone is equal, but we all have different jobs.

The things I know about are no secret.  I have nothing to gain by preventing anyone from learning what I know.  I’m a lot better at learning these things than most people are, so most people won’t be able to learn as much as I know.   Even so, I’m better off teaching everyone as much as I can about what I know, than I am hoarding the information to myself and getting people to pay me for what I know.

In the same way, if you and I lived in the same village and we were both going to work as subsistence farmers, there would be a lot I could learn from you.  If we were working together in the same field, we would both be better off if you were in charge there.  Not because you want to tell me what to do, but because you would know more than I did about what we both wanted to do.

Right now what you and I both want to do is to stop the people who are taking your farms.  You’ve figured out how to do a lot of things that work in your local area and that apply to your situation.  I, and people like me, have figured out a lot of things that work everywhere and that apply to everyone’s situation.  So if I tell you what I know, and you add it to what you know, your revolution will be more successful, and both of us will be better off.

I should say also that this isn’t just some sneaky trick to try to get you to fight the revolution for me.  For you to win your own revolution on your own terms is all the payment I need, because I already know what your terms are, and I already know that I—and most other people—would be better off living in a world where you won your revolution.  It has been a lot of hard work for me and other people who figure things out to figure out all the things about the world I have to tell you about in this book.  It’s also a big threat to a lot of powerful people, which is why, as far as I know, nobody else who is as good at figuring things out as I am, dares to write books like this and tell people like you what we’ve discovered.   We all know what we want, and in our own ways we are all struggling for it, and we are all taking risks.

The people who have most of the money and write all the laws think they know a lot more about how the world works than they really do.  To beat them, you have to prove they aren’t really as smart as they think they are, by proving that you’re smarter than them.   If you prove those people aren’t really as smart as they think they are, you’ll do exactly what I’m trying to do.

If you can win your revolution with the help of students at Oaxaca University, the same revolution can spread to every university in the world.  The people who are taking your farms learned how to take your farms by going to universities.  But if you can get university students to help you prove that you’re smarter than those people, and then your revolution spreads to every university in the world, then people at universities will start learning what you want people to learn, which is that taking people’s farms is a mistake.

If you can spread your revolution to universities all over the world, you can hijack the education system of the entire world, and destroy Capitalism at its source.

Chapter 2: The History of Planetary Biology

If you live in the jungle, and your family has lived there for 2,000 years, you probably know everything you need to know to live well in the jungle.  But if you moved to the desert, you wouldn’t know how to live well there.  There would be different plants and animals there, so you wouldn’t know how to farm as well in the desert as you could in the jungle.

However, if you picked up a rock in the desert and let go of it, it would still fall to the ground just like it did in the jungle.  If you rubbed your hands together in the desert it would make them warm, just like it did in the jungle.  The plants that lived in the desert would still need water and the right kind of soil.  And so on.  Some things would be different in the desert than they were in the jungle, but some things would be the same.

Scientists have been studying things like this, to try to figure what other things work the same way in the desert as they do in the jungle, or in any other part of the world.  That way, just like you’ve figured out how to live well in the jungle, people could figure out how to live well in every part of the world.

In 1968, a great scientist named Dr. Aurelio Pecci brought together a group of scientists from all over the world to a meeting in Rome, in Italy, to study humanity’s impact on the world on a global scale.  He realized that the whole world was like a farm.  He also realized that a lot of people didn’t know that.  He also realized that nobody knew how the world-farm worked.

Dr. Pecci saw a problem no one else could see at the time.   The population of the world was growing, people were building more and more factories, they were growing more and more food, they were using up more and more resources, and they were generating more and more pollution.  But the Earth is only so big.  People need food to live, and growing food requires farmland.  There had to be a limit to how many people the Earth could support, because there was a limit to the amount of farmland on the Earth, and a limit to how much food the soil of the farmland could produce.

Dr. Pecci tried to answer some important questions:  How many people could the Earth support?  When were we going to reach that number?  And, what was going to happen when we did?   So he founded the Club of Rome to find answers to those questions.

The information the Club of Rome had to work with wasn’t nearly what it is today.  But it was enough for them to get a good idea of the answers.  The population of the world would reach the limitations of the world sometime in the 21st century.   When it did, we were going to run out of resources quickly.  The main reason our population size was growing so quickly was because of machines and factories.  When our resources were gone, there would be no more resources to take to the factories to build more machines.  When our machines started breaking down, a lot of things were going to go wrong, like, anyone who didn’t work on a farm wouldn’t be able to get the food they needed, because there wouldn’t be any more trucks to haul it from the farms to the cities or wherever the people lived.  With the food distribution network gone, a lot of people would starve.  That would cause a lot more problems.  If that happened all over the world, billions of people would die in the 21st century.

Solving that problem would require us to live differently.   If you’re a subsistence farmer, you don’t need to live differently (or not much, anyway), but most people in America and many people in the rest of the world would need to.

Some of the scientists published their discoveries in a book called The Limits to Growth.   A lot of people listened to them.  But a lot more people didn’t.  The problems the scientists predicted kept getting worse.

In 1987, another great scientist, named Dr. Ervin Laszlo, brought together another group of scientists from all over the world, to a meeting in Budapest, in Hungary (which is another country in Europe), to try to figure out as much as they could about how people think.   Since people are a part of the world, they’re a part of the world-farm.  It had been 19 years since the Club of Rome met, and the problems they had predicted kept getting worse, not better.  Dr. Laszlo realized that the world-farm was never going to work unless someone could figure out why making our problems worse instead of better seemed like such a good idea to so many people.  In order to help change people’s minds, he started studying how people’s minds work.

The field of science that has built up around those two groups is what I call planetary biology.

In my family we’ve been working on a similar project for longer than these scientists have.  My grandmother was a philosopher and an artist, and my grandfather built airplanes.  They had completely opposite points of view on a lot of things, but they were happily married for 67 years.  My grandfather was always interested in how things work, and my grandmother was always interested in thinking about everything in the world.  So between them, they had to figure out how everything in the world worked, just so they’d be able to talk to each other.

That’s been a tradition in my family ever since.  Science is the study of how things work, and my grandfather, my father, and me, are exceptionally good at it.   My grandfather was an engineer and an architect, and my father was a mathematician, an architect, a teacher, and a sociologist.  I was raised on science from the time I first learned to talk.

Now these great scientists started trying to figure out how everything in the world works, and my family had a head start over them.

1968 was an important year here in America for another reason.  Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was the greatest American activist of the 20th century, and he was assassinated in 1968.  The scientists of the Club of Rome were saying that great social change would be necessary to keep from destroying the environment, and meanwhile Dr. King had made a lot of great social changes happen.  My dad realized then what these official scientists are realizing now:  Great social changes happen because someone figures out how to explain to everyone why the old way of doing things doesn’t work, what they need to do differently, and why doing things differently is going to benefit everyone.

My dad could’ve become an official scientist and joined the Club of Rome.  But instead, he set out to lead a life of adventure, and he kept up on new discoveries scientists made.  He and my mother raised my brother and me the same way.

I have 8 years of university education, which should make me a Doctor of what I do, but my 8 years of education is in 4 different fields.   I’ve traveled and lived all over the United States.  I’ve met a lot of different people and seen how they live.  I’ve been a carpenter, a mechanic, I’ve been a maintenance worker at a hotel (where a lot of Mexicans worked), and I’ve also been a teacher, an artist, and a helicopter pilot.

The year after I graduated high school, I went to live in Ecuador for a year.  I learned some Spanish and I saw how much differently the peasants and the materially wealthy people lived.  And when I went out in the streets with my long hair and my black beret, people always said I looked like Ché Guevara.   So I guess now is the time to see if I can live up to the name.

By now, a lot of scientists who are working on planetary biology are getting worried about what’s going to happen.  The problems they’ve been talking about still aren’t getting solved.  The people taking your farms is just one example, and all the illegal immigrants coming to America is another.  The people who are taking your farms, and people like them, have always been able to produce a lot of things by extracting resources from the world.  But these are the people who don’t understand what science is or what it means.  These people assume that just because the world has produced a lot for them proves it will always produce as much as they want.  But the world doesn’t work that way.  You can’t produce as much as you want on your farm, you can only produce a certain amount, and that’s all.  The whole world works the same way.

This is one way that my not being an official scientist benefits me.  The official scientists depend on the people who are taking your farms, or people like them, to pay for a lot of their work.  So there’s only so much they can do to get people to pay attention to their science, before the people who are taking your farms stop paying them for their work.  But I don’t have that problem.  So I can tell anyone I want about planetary biology.   I’ll start by telling third world guerillas who are fighting to defend their farms.

Chapter 3: How Science Works

Science is a way of studying the world that’s different from any other way of studying the world.  In a lot of ways it works better than any other way of studying the world.  In some ways, science is difficult to learn how to use.  But in other ways, science isn’t nearly as complicated as most people think it is.

In one way or another, every other means of studying the world is humanocentric.  You can learn a lot about your local area by seeing and hearing and smelling and tasting and touching the things around you.  But the whole world is gigantic.  You are just one little speck on the world, and so is everyone else.  It isn’t possible for one person to learn about every local area in the world in the same way, because no one could live that long.  That means that if a person wanted to learn as much about the whole world as you know about your local area, he would have to figure out a different way to do it.  That also means that if a person learns a lot about one area and assumes that the entire world must work the same way, he’s going to believe a lot of things that aren’t true.  If he then acts upon his beliefs, he’s going to make a lot of mistakes.

Also, in one way or another, every other means of studying the world involves a person’s emotions.  In a lot of different ways, people try to figure things out, think they discover an answer, feel like the answer is right, and then believe that it must be right, just because they feel that it’s right.  But what if your feelings are mistaken?  Then you run into the same problem.  You end up believing a lot of things about the world that aren’t true, and you make a lot of mistakes.

For most of the things people try to figure out and most of the decisions they make based on the things they believe to be true, a humanocentric way of looking at the world works pretty well.   But there are some situations where that humanocentricism doesn’t work very well.

If you’re a farmer you already know that humanocentricism isn’t always the best idea.  If you feel like you’ve gotten enough rain in a year because you have enough water to drink, but then you look outside and see that your crops aren’t getting as much water as they need, then obviously you haven’t gotten enough rain that year.   Humanocentricism doesn’t work when plants and other animals are involved.

For people who make bigger decisions, that’s a bigger problem.  In Europe there are a lot of factories and the countries are a lot smaller than the United States or Mexico.  If the smoke that a factory gives off creates a lot of acid rain, but the acid rain falls in someone else’s country hundreds of miles away, the factory owner can’t just look around and see the results of his actions.  If he feels that burning a lot of coal in his factory and making a lot of smoke is a good idea, and doesn’t know about the acid rain, he won’t realize his mistake and change his mind, like you would’ve if you made a small humanocentric mistake on your farm.

As you know, presidents of countries and other government officials make a lot of big decisions that affect a lot of people.  If they use a humanocentric way of making their decisions, they’re going to make a lot of mistakes that affect a lot of people.  That was a big problem that the Club of Rome discovered:  Politicians were using a lot of humanocentric points of view to make their decisions, and they didn’t realize that there are a lot of ways humanocentricism can lead people astray.  So they were making a lot of big mistakes.

Scientists have figured out a way to solve these kinds of problems by being very careful in how they interpret their discoveries.  They make sure not to depend on their feelings to determine whether or not something is true about the world.  They remember that whatever they see with their eyes only gives them one little piece of information about the world.  One little piece of information all by itself doesn’t prove anything.  Scientific discoveries always depend on a lot of clues that all show the same thing to be true.

Scientists call this objectivity.  Objectivity depends on five basic things.  They are: observability, universality, self-consistency, reproducibility, and debatability.

Those five basic things aren’t difficult.  You do them all the time.

Suppose you grow a certain breed of corn you farm, and your neighbor grows a different breed of corn on his farm.  He tells you his breed is better, because it produces twice as much food as yours.  What would you want to do before you would believe him?

First of all, you would want to see all this food he says he’s producing on his farm.  He could just as easily say his breed of corn can grow 10 times as much food as yours, or 100 times as much food, or any other number.  But if he can’t show you all that food, his saying he can grow it doesn’t prove anything.  That’s what scientists call observability.

Let’s say your friend does show you all the food he said he grew.  What else would you want to know before you believed him?  Your neighbor is saying that his breed of corn can produce twice as much food as your breed of corn.  But there are a lot of other things that could make his farm produce twice as much food as your farm.  He could’ve planted twice as much corn as you did.  He could’ve watered his corn differently.   He might have different soil on his farm than you do.  If his breed of corn really does produce twice as much food as your breed of corn, then his breed of corn would produce twice as much as your breed of corn no matter what conditions it grew in.  If his breed of corn only produces twice as much food when it grows on his farm, then it isn’t the breed of corn that grows so well, like your neighbor said, it’s some combination of the breed of corn and one or more other factors, like water or soil nutrients.   This is what scientists call universality.  Did your friend discover something that works under all conditions, or only under certain conditions?   In order for your neighbor’s claim to be universal, his breed of corn would have to produce twice as much food as your breed no matter what conditions it grows in.  If that doesn’t happen, then your neighbor hasn’t discovered a breed of corn that grows twice as much food as your breed, like he claimed to have discovered.

Something else you would want to look at would be to the way you were growing your corn.  This overlaps with universality a lot in this example.  It’s different from universality because here you aren’t just looking at how much food his corn produces, you’re also looking at how much food your breed of corn produces.  When your neighbor said that his breed of corn produced twice as much food as your breed of corn, he was talking about a pattern of how things happen in the world.  This is what scientists call self-consistency.  If it is true that your neighbor’s breed of corn produces twice as much food as yours, then that means that if you plant the two crops beside each other in the same field, no matter where the corn grows, what kind of soil it has, or how much water it gets, his breed of corn will always produce twice as much food as yours.   Maybe there are some growing conditions where your breed of corn would produce twice as much food as his breed of corn.  Whatever happens, if you can find any conditions where his breed of corn doesn’t produce twice as much food as your breed of corn while they’re both growing in the same conditions, then the pattern of his breed corn growing twice as much as your breed isn’t true.  Once again it would mean your neighbor hasn’t discovered what he claimed to have discovered.  If he has discovered what he claims to have discovered, it will be the results that prove it.  Your neighbor is not the judge of how much food his crops produce.  The judge of how much food his breed of corn produces is the crop itself.

Something else you could do to see if your neighbor’s breed of corn really did produce twice as much food as your breed would be to grow some of it yourself and see what happens.  Something else you could do would be for both of you to give some of your seeds to another farmer to grow, or 10 other farmers to grow, or any other number.  If your neighbor shows you twice as much corn sitting in baskets as you have after the harvest, that doesn’t prove he grew it all.  He could’ve snuck out to the store some night and bought a lot of corn and brought it home to show you.  If his breed of corn really does produce twice as much food as your breed of corn, then anyone could grow the two breeds of corn together and prove it, without his being able to cheat.  This is what scientists call reproducibility.   If your neighbor has discovered what he claims to have discovered, then anyone can repeat the same process and get the same results.

Finally, in order for your neighbor to prove what he claims to have discovered, you have to be allowed to disagree with him.  If he held a gun to your head and told you his breed of corn produced twice as much food as your breed, what would you say?  “Oh, yes sir, I believe you 100% absolutely,” or something like that.  In addition to being allowed to disagree with him, you have to be able to ask him questions about how he did it, to find out why he believes it is his breed of corn that produces twice as much food as your breed, instead of the way he grows it.  So you could ask him how he grew his corn, and then you could grow some corn the same way.  You could also grow some corn differently to see what happened then.  If he claims to have discovered that something is true and you can’t look for reasons that it might not be true, then he hasn’t proved that his breed of corn grows twice as much food as your breed.  All he’s proven is that he can prevent you from disagreeing.  This is what scientists call debatability.

As you can see, this process of your friend claiming to have discovered something and you figuring out if what he’s claimed to discover is true, is just a process of reasonable people figuring something out.

That’s what scientists do.  They’ve been doing this for hundreds of years, so they’ve figured out a lot of things this way.  Some scientists have been exceptionally good at figuring things out this way, so they’ve figured out a lot of things most people couldn’t figure out.

As you can see also, science depends on the same things democracy depends on:  people’s participation, people being allowed to have different ideas, and people being able to work out their disagreements by talking about them as reasonable people.  That’s a big reason I can say that if I show you how to use science to help win your revolution for democracy, we will all be better off.

Science is not a democracy in the sense that people get to vote for whatever they want.  Politicians who don’t understand how science works keep trying to do that here in the United States, and it keeps getting us into trouble.  People can’t vote on how they want the universe to work.  But scientists can’t vote on how they want to the universe to work either.

Science is not a democracy in the sense that everyone is equally good at it.  Some people are a lot better at it than others.  But that’s true of every occupation.

Science is a democracy in the sense that everyone can learn about it.  Democracy depends on personal empowerment.  Personal empowerment depends on informed decision making.  Informed decision-making depends on people having accurate information.  Discovering accurate information is the whole point of science.  The more accurate information people have, the more personally empowered they will be.  So this is another way that a revolution for democracy is also a revolution for science.

The biggest problem people have with learning how to use science—which is something everyone, including you, has to be careful of—is that if you aren’t willing to look at all the evidence and see what it means, whatever you’re using isn’t science, it’s humanocentricism.  If you only look at the evidence that proves whatever you want to be true and ignore the evidence that conflicts with what you want to be true, that isn’t science.  That’s propaganda.  A lot of people, like politicians, Capitalists, and religious leaders, love to get hold of scientific information and say that it proves that what they’re saying is true.  But if other evidence contradicts what they’re saying, then what they’re talking about isn’t science at all.  It’s just them making things up and telling other people what to do, just like politicians, Capitalists, and religious leaders always do.

No one is immune to making this mistake.  Scientists escape it because they have been very careful to learn how to recognize it and how to counteract it.  As farmers, you have a lot of practice at avoiding humanocentricism on your farm because there are so many other living things on your farm that you depend on.

This is another way that the whole world is like a farm, and that scientists have learned a lot about how to be farmers for the entire world.  The world is full of living things that all depend on each other.  Being farmers for the whole world depends on people learning how not to be humanocentric.  You have already learned a lot about how not to be humanocentric.  The question is, what will it take to make the Capitalists learn it?

Chapter 4: Science versus Politics

Now I need to tell you how science can be used as a political weapon.

You may have heard how the Soviets used to arm Communist revolutionaries with Soviet weapons.  They armed the North Vietnamese, they armed the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, they armed the Cubans, they armed everyone who was fighting a revolution against Capitalists or monarchs or dictators.

The AK47 was a well-built rifle.  It served the North Vietnamese well.  It was simple, it was powerful, and it was reliable.    I used to know a South Vietnamese refugee who had been an officer during the war.  He said the men in his platoon hated the M16s the Americans gave them, and every chance they got they would destroy their M16s and use captured AK47s instead, because the Soviet rifles worked so much better than the American rifles.

Now the Soviet Union is gone, so you don’t have an infinite supply of assault rifles.  And I’m guessing you probably didn’t want to be Soviet puppets anyway.

So how do I turn science into a simple, powerful, reliable weapon for third-world guerillas that will work better than the AK47?

It’s really not that difficult.  All it takes is one person who’s very good at science, and some rebels who really want to win.  If a handful of farmers are willing to fight the Mexican army with hunting rifles, I hope some of you will be willing to read a book and learn some new things.

Russia is a gigantic country where it gets very cold in the winter.  Every time Russia has been invaded, the Russian’s strategy for defending their country has always revolved around the regular intervention of what they call General Winter.  The country is so big and the winter is so cold that no one has ever been able to conquer the country before winter has set in, and invaders never know how to fight in the Russian winter. The Russians always know this is going to happen, so every time they lose a battle and the invaders force them to retreat, they burn all the farms and everything else the invaders can use while the fall back.  So the invaders have to try to ship all their supplies all the way in from wherever they came from.  Their supply lines break down because they can’t ship their supplies through all the snow, and their soldiers starve and freeze to death because they run out of food, they run out of heating fuel, and they didn’t bring warm enough clothes.

Russia was invaded by Napoleon Bonaparte in the 1800s, after he conquered the rest of Europe.  Russia was invaded twice by the Germans in World War I and World War II.  The Russians always drive the invaders out because they figure out how to cooperate with the world and the invaders don’t.

The first trick to using science as a political weapon is learning how to cooperate with the world while your enemies defeat themselves.    I’ve told you how all the science I have to tell you about can be found in books that are available in any university library in the English-speaking world and many other countries also.  I’ve also told you how science depends on people asking questions and looking for the answers in the physical world we all live in.  That means that you can ask your local supporters to read the books I have to tell you about, and they can contact your other supporters all over the world and ask them to read the same books, and they can all see for themselves what they say.

Science depends on people asking questions, and it doesn’t depend on people asking questions to me.  It doesn’t matter where in the world people live, and it doesn’t matter who asks the questions.  The answers are the same anywhere you go.

Once you learn how science works and what scientists have discovered, I’m sure you and your supporters will be able to figure out some way to use it.  Since Capitalists learn how to be Capitalists by going to universities, if you can attract some supporters in universities all over the world, you can kill Capitalism at its source.

Basically, instead of exporting AK47s to anti-Capitalist revolutionaries all over the world, I’m exporting General Winter all over the world.  And I don’t even want you to be my puppets, because that’s not how science works.

The question people always ask now is, why do I think the books I’ve read prove the world works a certain way?  What about all the other books people have written?  Why shouldn’t people read those books?

It will take me this whole book to answer those questions.  For now, I’ll say that the scientists who wrote those books know how much better science works than humanocentricism, so they write their books in ways that leave people who disagree with them nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.  What these books all have in common is that they start with simple, well-established scientific principles and then build on them step by step.  They begin with patterns of cause and effect that scientists have discovered to be observable, universal, self-consistent, reproducible, and debatable, and that no amount of debate or observable evidence has ever succeeded in disproving.  The only way anyone can prove these books are wrong is by proving they know something about science that scientists don’t know.

This still doesn’t answer my original question though.  How do I turn science into a simple, powerful, reliable weapon that Third-World guerillas can use?

There is no perfect answer to that question now because the scientists who have been working on planetary biology don’t write books for farmers.  In this book I explain all the science in terms of things you can see happening on your farm, but you probably can’t double check it by reading the academic books I read.  This is one thing you’re going to need the help of other anti-Capitalists for.  But if you tell them about this book and ask them to help you figure out if I know what I’m talking about, among you all you can figure it out.

That’s the big problem with using science as a political weapon, that’s how I’ve solved part of it, and that’s how the rest of the problem can be solved.  Now here’s why solving the problem will benefit you and anti-Capitalists everywhere.

Until recently, science hasn’t been complete enough as a body of information that scientists could claim to know as much about the world as politicians claim to know.  The politicians were lying about how much they knew.  Politicians’ careers depend on their appearing to know everything, even though they don’t.  Scientists’ careers, on the other hand, depend on their not lying about how much they know.   So if a politician claims to know everything and a scientist doesn’t claim to know everything, to anyone who doesn’t understand what science is and how it works, it sounds like the politician has a much better idea of what he’s doing.

To use science as a political weapon, you need to know how to tell the difference between someone talking about fake science and someone talking about real science.   There are two easy ways to do that.

The first is the easier of the two to use.  Listen to the way the person is talking.  Does his tone of voice make you feel like asking questions, or does it make you feel like not asking questions?

When a scientist talks about science, he isn’t afraid of you asking questions.  If he’s talking about well-established scientific discoveries, he already knows there aren’t any questions you can ask that will prove him wrong.  If he’s talking about a new idea he thinks might be right and there are questions you could ask that would prove him wrong, people asking questions that new hypotheses can’t explain is a critical part of the progress of science.  Either way, the scientist has nothing of importance to lose, and a great deal to gain, by your asking questions.

As far as the science relates to you, the scientist will recognize that you’re better off asking questions than not asking questions.  If there’s some part of it you can’t understand, you won’t be able to learn the science or put it to use.  So if you ask questions to clarify what the scientist means, again he benefits, because now you know more about science than you did before.  Scientists everywhere are trying to attract public support to science, and by asking questions to help yourself better understand what he’s talking about, you’re doing exactly that.

You have to be careful how you ask your questions.  The simplest way to avoid accidentally causing problems is for you to want to hear what the scientist has to say.  If you ask your questions with the attitude that any answer the scientist gives will be wrong, with your tone of voice you’ll make it difficult for him to figure out what he needs to say and how he needs to say it to get you to understand what he’s talking about.  With all those extra things you’ve forced him to think about to try to answer your question, whatever answer he gives won’t sound as good.  It’ll sound confused and will be harder for other people to understand.  Religious people in the United States who try to disprove scientists’ discoveries use this trick against scientists all the time.

If the person’s tone of voice makes you feel like not asking questions, definitely ask questions.  If the person is talking about science in a way that makes you feel like not asking questions, it means he’s trying to hide something.  He’s trying to keep you from thinking about something, or he’s trying to keep you from saying something, or both.  If he’s afraid of you asking questions about science, he’s not a scientist.

It doesn’t matter how the person is talking.  If the end result is your not feeling like asking questions, that’s the clue you need to watch for.

One way for a politician to keep you from feeling like asking questions is to make you react to his emotional state.  For instance, if he’s angry or intimidating, and that makes you afraid to ask questions, he’s made you feel like not asking questions.  If a military dictator shakes his fist in the air and shouts angrily, that’s a perfect example of someone making people afraid to question him.

Another way for a politician to make you feel like not asking questions is to use an emotional state that gets you to sympathize with him.  President Bush does this all the time.  He acts really friendly and really stupid.  The easiest way for you to get along with someone like that would be for you to act stupid too.  The easiest way for you to act stupid would be for you to be stupid.  If your friend was stupid and you asked him a lot of questions he didn’t know how to answer, it would make him look stupid, and that would damage your friendship.  The easiest way for you to get along with a friendly, but stupid person is to talk to him on his level.  You decide most or all of this subconsciously.  Then you focus on questions you think the other person can answer and forget questions you think the person can’t answer.  I’ll tell you why that happens later in the book.  For now, my point is that President Bush’s stupidity is contagious.  He constantly weaves this illusion around himself that’s turned all of Washington D.C. into a deep, dark pit of stupidity.

Listening to a person’s tone of voice is easy, but tones of voice can be misunderstood.  The second technique is more difficult to use, but more effective if you can use it.  It can be used after you’ve identified a politician by his tone of voice, it can be used independently if you can’t tell whether a person is a politician or a scientist, and it can be used on people who seem to be scientists to see if they’re really scientists or if they’re politicians who are good at impersonating scientists.

This is also how people can recognize if a book about science is reporting discoveries that are true.  This is how people can recognize if the scientists who wrote the books I have to tell you about really did discover how a part of the universe works.

This technique is called first principles.   In science, a first principle is a founding idea of an area of study.  This could be an entire branch of science or just some small part of a branch of science.

A first principle is a rule that, one way or another, has been found to apply to everything in an area of science.  This gives you a frame of reference.  When you are talking about something in that area of science, you automatically know that this rule applies to it.

An easy example of a first principle is the freezing point of water.  Water freezes at 0º Celsius.  From that you know that if you’re talking about a piece of ice, you’re talking about a temperature that’s 0º Celsius or less.  You also know that if you’re talking about water at a temperature above 0º Celsius, you’re not talking about ice.

Now suppose you hear that the governor of your province has had a great idea for how to make everyone’s refrigerators work better.  As governor of your province, he’s going to make water freeze at 10º Celsius.  Then he goes on to talk about how much electricity that will save, how much money that will save, how many more people will be able to afford refrigerators then, and a lot of other great things that will happen.  Then all the people who don’t know anything about science are amazed by how smart their governor is for being able to think of such a big and complicated plan, and they’ll be glad they voted for him.  Then they’ll tell all their friends about him, and the governor’s speech will be played on the radio and everyone will think he’s the best governor you’ve ever had.

You’re a farmer, so how are you supposed to argue with a big speech by your governor who everyone thinks is so smart?   This is how first principles turn science into a simple, powerful, reliable weapon that guerilla rebels can use.  You don’t need to know anything about refrigerators or electricity or economics to be able to prove your governor’s big plan won’t work.  You only need to know one critical piece of information to prove that everything your governor promised everyone was a lie.  Water doesn’t freeze at 10º Celsius!

This example sounds ridiculous, but I’m just using it to illustrate the idea.  Politicians do things like this all the time.  The only reason they get away with it is because the public doesn’t know enough about science to recognize that their politicians keep promising to violate first principles of science.

Most of this book is about how to attack first principles as the weak points in Capitalist ideology, and how to make sure you cooperate with first principles in the post-revolutionary society.  This is not to say that you can build the entire post-revolutionary society on first principles alone, but it is to say that if you don’t cooperate with first principles, whatever post-revolutionary society you try to build won’t work.

Equally importantly, since Capitalism doesn’t cooperate with first principles, first principles are all you need to destroy the foundation of Capitalism—as opposed to wasting your efforts on trying to destroy its individual manifestations one at a time.

By learning enough about science to destroy Capitalist ideology structurally, you learn how to do something else that’s crucial to the revolution.  Now you don’t have to depend on your tone of voice to convince people you know what you’re talking about.  Now you can stop being a politician and trying to make people feel like you know the answer to everything.

There are some things about a society that the people who live there have to decide how to do.  There are other things that scientists already know aren’t possible.  If you don’t know about those things, you’re going to make a lot of promises to people that are impossible to deliver, and then the people will think you’re just another untrustworthy politician.  But if you do know about first principles, you can keep from making a lot of mistakes and set realistic goals for yourselves.

This is another way that science and democracy depend on the same things.  If a leader lies to his people about science, his plans won’t work.  If the people don’t know enough about science to recognize that their leader lied to them, when the leader’s plans don’t work, it’s always the people who suffer.  But if the people do know enough about science, when they recognize their leader is lying to them, they can catch him.  But if the leader knows enough about science to keep from making stupid mistakes, he won’t need to lie to his people, and he won’t have to worry about getting caught.

Revolution begins with education.

It’s time to educate the world.

Chapter 5: Science and Religion

Now I must talk about the difference between science and religion.  They are both ways that people have used to try to figure out how the world works, but they work differently.

The goal of religion is to make the world make sense.  If you don’t believe me, ask a religious leader about anything you want.  One way or another, he has an answer for your question.

The goal of science is to discover patterns of cause and effect that make the world work the way it does.   Scientists try to find answers to every question in the world too, but not for the same reason.  If you ask a scientist a question that he doesn’t know how to answer, he’ll tell you he doesn’t know the answer.  The reason for that is that the goal of science is to find reliable information.

You depend on reliable information and discovering patterns of cause and effect on your farm.  You know that you have to plow your fields a certain way, you have to plant your seeds at the right time of the year, your crops have to get the right amount of water, and so on.  You know that if certain things happen, it makes your plants grow up healthy and it makes them produce a lot of good food.  If any of the things your plants need to grow big and healthy don’t happen, your plants won’t grow as well.

There is a pattern of cause and effect taking place here because certain things happening make other things happen.  You need reliable information because making your plants grow as well as possible depends on your knowing how to make them grow as well as possible.

How do people use religion to figure out how the world works?  With a religion, there are things no one can see, and there are stories people tell about how those things work.  With science, there are also things no one can see, and there are stories people tell about how those things work.

But where did the stories come from?  That’s where religion and science are different.  Religious stories are either stories people tell because they have an idea and that’s the best way they can figure out to tell their idea to someone else, or else they learned the stories from their parents, and their parents learned them from their own parents, and so on.  With religious stories like that, either nobody knows who told the story first, or else you know it was first told by someone who lived thousands of years ago.

People tell religious stories because they figure out something important about life, and then they want to teach it to their friends or their children.  People teach their children what they figure out about life, and people have always done that.  The problem with religious stories is that thousands of years ago, people had the same ideas people have now, but they didn’t have as many words to be able to talk about them.  So if you hear words that were first spoken by people who lived thousands of years ago, you can get an idea of what they meant, but you can’t guarantee that they were using their words the same way people use those words now.

For instance, 2,000 years ago, there was no word for airplane, because airplanes hadn’t been invented yet.  There was no word for bicycle, because bicycles hadn’t been invented yet.  There was no word for microscope, because microscopes hadn’t been invented yet.

Also, back when Jesus lived, he couldn’t tell his followers about tomatoes.  People who lived in Israel didn’t have tomatoes, so they didn’t have a word for tomatoes.  People who lived in Mexico had tomatoes, so they had a word for tomatoes, and they could talk about tomatoes.  The same was true for corn—people in Mexico had it, and people who lived in Israel didn’t.

That means that if a Maya figured out that eating healthy food was important and he taught his children about it by telling them a story about a person eating corn and tomatoes, someone from Israel wouldn’t be able to understand what the story meant.   The person from Israel might’ve had the same idea, but he taught it to his children with a story about a person eating wheat and peas.  So the two people figured out the same things, but they can’t recognize that the other person figured out the same thing they figured out—the same way a person from the jungle and a person from the desert can figure out how to live well where they live but don’t know how to live well where the other person lives.  The person from Israel with his story about wheat and peas might be able to recognize that the person from Mexico had an idea that was kind of like his, that he’s telling with his story about corn and tomatoes, but he still can’t recognize that they’re the same idea.

People are the same all over the world.  People all over the world have wondered the same things about life.  People all over have figured out answers, and have told stories about them to their children.  People have wondered what makes the universe work, they have wondered what happens to people after they die, they have wondered how people can make themselves happy, and they have wondered how to get people to cooperate with each other.  But if people use different stories to tell about the same ideas, a lot of people can’t recognize that people who tell different stories are just like them.

Say Hernan Cortes met Montezuma.  Cortes said, “Hey, Montezuma, buddy, this is a nice city you’ve got here.  You Aztecs must know a lot about life.  Tell me, what have you figured out?”

Montezuma says, “Well, Quetzalcoatl told us the secret to being happy is to eat corn and tomatoes.”

Cortes says, “Corn and tomatoes?  You stupid Indian!  You don’t know anything!  Jesus told us to eat wheat and peas!  Now we’re going to have to have a war with each other!”

That’s just a joke, but I hope you can see my point.

There are also new religious stories that people tell.  Some people know they’re just making up a new story, and know they’re just comparing it to their religion to make it easier for people to understand.  Those are just the same as ancient religious stories people made up, except that now you know who made up the story.  People have always done that.  The ancient stories people tell now were new stories back in ancient times.  The ancient stories people still tell today became ancient stories because the people who told them figured out a good way to teach something that, one way or another, has been important for people to learn.  Since that way of teaching that lesson works so well, and the lesson has been so important, people keep telling the story.  If you make up a new religious story today and it’s a good way to teach an important lesson, people will still be telling your story in 2,000 years from now, and to them, your new story will be an ancient story.

There are some new religious stories people tell because they believe they have been chosen to be special messengers for their religions.  These people get an idea for a story, and then they feel that everyone is supposed to listen to them.  The Pope does this all the time.  He tells everyone that his god has given him a message, and now Catholics everywhere are supposed to obey it.  But how do you decide whether the Pope really is a special messenger, or if he’s just making something up?

If the Pope told you that Jesus told him that you were supposed to plant your corn at harvest time and harvest your corn at planting time, you’d probably say, “Well then, Jesus must not know anything about farming.”  And then you’d probably go right on planting your crops the way you knew they would grow best.  Or you might ask the Pope why he believed that planting your crops at harvest time was a better idea than planting them at planting time, when you have a lot of personal experience at farming and you have a lot of good reasons to believe that planting your crops at planting time is the best idea.  Whatever answer the Pope gave you, he would probably say that even though planting your crops at harvest time sounded like a bad idea, you had to have faith that it was a good idea.

But what if the Pope had his great new idea because he had been smoking a lot of marijuana?   Some people would plant their crops at harvest time, and what would happen?  Their crops wouldn’t grow.  Then you would say that was proof that the Pope didn’t know what he was talking about, and everyone would forget his new religious story about how planting crops at harvest time was the best idea, and would go back to planting their crops at planting time.

The Pope doesn’t tell people new religious stories about simple things like this that would be easy for people to figure out whether he was right or not.  He tells people new stories about very complicated things that most people can’t figure out.  But scientists do figure out very complicated things.  They do find evidence about whether or not complicated new religious stories are right or not.   So this silly little story about the Pope giving everyone bad advice that they’re supposed to accept on faith is something that happens all the time, but it happens to scientists, not to farmers.

Scientists realized these kinds of problems people cause when they depend on religious stories, so they figured out a different way to study the world.

Science works by people studying how the world works now, by studying things they can see for themselves, without depending on ancient stories people told.  Then scientists study how all the things they can observe fit together.  For example, if they see that Aztecs ate corn and tomatoes, and they see that Spaniards ate wheat and peas, they can study corn, tomatoes, wheat, and peas, to see what they’re made of.  They can see that the food the Aztecs ate had the same nutrients as the food the Spaniards ate—or pretty close, anyway.  Then they can study physiology—how people’s bodies work—and discover that people need a certain combination of nutrients in order to be healthy.  Then they can see that the Aztecs and Spaniards were both eating food that made them healthy.  Then they can study neurology—how people’s brains work—and see that when people are healthy, it makes them happy.  Ancient people didn’t know about chemistry or physiology, but they did figure out that eating certain foods make you healthy.  People don’t really need to eat wheat and peas to be happy just because Jesus told them to, or to eat corn and tomatoes because Quetzalcoatl told them to, but their ancestors each figured those things out, and telling those stories was the easiest way they could find to teach their children to eat healthy food.

Religion works well as a way of figuring out how the world works if you live a simple life in a village where things don’t change very much.  When things change a little bit, you can figure out what changed and how you’re going to need to live differently now.  Then you can make up a new story and tell it to your children.

For people who build big machines and use them to make big changes in the world very fast, religion doesn’t work very well.   Science works by people figuring out how the world works now and being aware of what ancient people thought about, but not depending on their words meaning exactly what they sound like they mean.  Religion works by people today believing ancient people talked just like people do now, so that whatever words the ancient people said still mean the same things now.  But that doesn’t help people who make big changes in the world very quickly.

Scientists study the world the way they study it so they can figure out chains of cause and effect.  By figuring out how things work now, they can back up and see if things work this way now, and this is what the world is like now, what the world must have like before, in order for that chain of cause and effect to turn the world into what it is now.

If you saw some broken glass lying next to a rock, you could guess that someone threw a bottle against the rock.  Then you could look at the pieces of glass and see if they looked like they could make the shape of a bottle.  When you saw the broken glass you wouldn’t have to say that Jesus must’ve put it there.  This is the kind of thing scientists do, but they can do a lot more of it, because they have more machines for figuring out things like this than you do.

Once scientists figure out what happened to make the world like it is now, they can back up again and figure out what it was like before that, and so on.  They can also look ahead and see if the world is like this now and we know what is happening now, what will happen next?  And what will the world be like afterwards?

If you try to do the same things with religious stories, it doesn’t work.  If you know what the world is like now and you think you know what the world was like before because you think you understand exactly what the ancient people meant, but you misunderstood them, then you misunderstand what happened to make the world change from the way it was before to the way it is now.  That would be like seeing some broken glass and saying, “Oh, well, the Bible says God created the world, so God must’ve created that broken glass.”

That sounds silly, but that’s the idea.  A serious way it happens has been happening for a long time.  Someone might say, “It says in the Bible that all the land is supposed to be mine.  Look at those stupid farmers over there.  That land is supposed to be mine!”

If people try to figure out how the world works by seeing how it works now, thinking they knew how it used to be, and then guessing to try to figure out how it went from being the way it was then to the way it is now, they can’t use that to figure out a chain of cause and effect that will show them what will happen next.  They will think they figured out a chain of cause and effect, but it won’t work.  They will expect one thing to happen, but something else will happen instead.  Then they won’t know why it didn’t work.

A scientist would say, “I live on this land, and those farmers live on that land.  If I take their land, they won’t have anywhere to live.  If I try to take their land, they’ll try to fight me.”

That person who said, “The Bible says those stupid farmers are living on my land,” doesn’t understand why you think the land is yours.  If he thinks the Bible says the land is supposed to be his, he might think that you’re supposed to know that too.  Then when he tells you to get off his land, and you tell him it’s not his land, it’s your land, he won’t know what to do, because he didn’t expect that.  So then he’ll try to think of something else.  Maybe he’ll think that the fact you think the land is supposed to be yours proves how stupid you are.   Or maybe he’ll think you’re just bad people.  If he thinks he’s supposed to have all the land and you’re not supposed to have any land, then he obviously thinks he’s more important than you, or better than you.  But he’s not, he’s a human just like you are.

You know you need land to live on.  So if the guy thinks you’re not supposed to have any land and you’re just too stupid to know that, maybe he’ll call up the army and come take all your land.  Then he’s going to have a whole bunch of people in his country who are starving and other people who are trying to fight him, because without their land they can’t get enough food now.  But he’s still not going to be able to figure out why everything went wrong, because the Bible told him all the land was supposed to be his.   That’s pretty much what happened to the Indians in the United States.

Again, this is kind of a silly little example, but I think you can see how this affects you in real life.  This might’ve happened a little bit differently in Mexico than it did in the United States, but not very much.  In both countries, when the Europeans came, they believed the Bible told them they were supposed to own all the land.

So the question this raises is:  How are we supposed to figure out who is supposed to live on which land?   Just because some people tried to use religion to answer the question doesn’t mean you can use science to answer the question.  People still have to figure that out for themselves.  But science does show us how the world got to be the way it is now, so it gives us some big clues about what will happen if we make different choices now.

A lot of what scientists have discovered contradicts what a lot of religious people have believed.  There are a lot of people here in America who refuse to believe the scientists’ discoveries, and I bet there are a lot of people in Mexico who feel the same way.  If you are going to argue with these people, you must be prepared.

One argument people use to try to disprove science is to say, “I don’t know how you could figure something like that out with science, so you must be making it up.”  Another argument people use is, “I don’t believe it’s true, so it can’t be true.”  Well you know how to make food grow out of the ground because you are farmers—which means you get lots of practice at making food grow out of the ground.  Science is studied by scientists.  Most of them don’t know how to grow food, because they spend all their time studying science—which means they have a lot of practice at what they do.  If a person who you know isn’t a farmer tries to use this argument, ask him, “You don’t know how to grow food.  Does that prove that food doesn’t exist?”  Of course, if he is a farmer, you have to ask him about something else he doesn’t know how to do, but you get the idea.

Another argument a person might make is something like, “The Bible says this land is supposed to be mine.”  You already know how this argument works.  Just because the Bible says something must be true, doesn’t prove it is true.  A lot of people assume it does, but all that proves is that the people have been taught to believe that anything the Bible says must be true.  Montezuma was an emperor, and he had no way of knowing about the Bible before Cortez came along.  But he had a different religion, which was taught to him by his ancestors, and he probably believed that religion was true just as much as Cortez believed his own religion was true.  If people want to argue about who’s religion proves which land is supposed to belong to who, maybe you could go find Montezuma’s great-great-great-great-grandson and tell everyone he’s supposed to be the president of Mexico!

There are many other arguments that people make against science.  I won’t tell you what to say for the rest of them, I’ll just tell you what the science means.  For me to explain it to you will take some time.  For you to explain science to people who think you’re just a bunch of stupid farmers will probably be difficult.

Chapter 6: Science and the World-Farm

There are many kinds of science I must tell you about.   Scientists have discovered many things they can study, but each of them needs to be studied a different way.  Some kinds of science have been around for hundreds of years.  Others have been around for only a few years, and not many people know about them.

One thing you must remember when talking about science is that sometimes it turns out the world doesn’t work the way you thought it did.  When you were a child, you probably felt like the world was supposed to work a certain way, and had to learn that it didn’t work that way.   Maybe you wanted to stay up all night and eat candy all the time and never take a bath.  Then your mother had to teach you you couldn’t do that, because you’d be tired and hungry and dirty.

Science works the same way.  Just because you’re an adult now doesn’t prove you know everything there is to know about the world.  The people who are taking your farms believe they know everything, and it isn’t working for them either.  If you’re good at farming and you spend your life farming, you learn a lot about farming that most people will never know.   The same is true for any occupation, including science.  If you’re good at figuring out how the world works and you spend your life figuring out more about how the world works, you learn more about it than most people could figure out on their own.

One kind of science is called physics.  This isn’t hard to understand.  Scientists use physics to study things like how hard you would have to push on something to make it move, or how strong different kinds of wood are.   The Maya and Aztecs and other people who lived in Mexico built great cities and pyramids, so they must’ve figured out a lot about physics, in order to cut all that stone, move it, and fit it together.  Some physicists study how stars work, and the Maya even studied that, but the Maya didn’t have telescopes, so there is a lot more people can study about stars now.

Other physicists study atoms.  That is important for many other kinds of science.  Atoms are tiny pieces that fit together to make everything in the world, including the air.  They’re so small that no one can see them.  They are kind of like grains of sand that make up a beach or a desert—the beach or the desert is a big thing that’s made up of many, many very small pieces.  Only with atoms, everything is like a beach or a desert, and they are made up of pieces that are much smaller than grains of sand.

The first people I know of who thought of atoms lived in ancient Greece.  The people there built big stone temples, like the Maya and a lot of other people in the world.  Every temple that was built was brand new at one point, with freshly cut stone blocks for the steps leading in the front door of the temple.  Some of the old men who lived in ancient Greece noticed that the steps of the temples that had been built when they were boys were now worn down where people walked on them.  They wondered how that happened.

Those old men also noticed that other things get worn down over time.  If you rub two sticks together, you can rub the bark off both of them.  When you do that, you can see that friction rubs pieces off of the sticks.  So these old men reasoned that the stone steps could be wearing down because of the friction of people’s feet, if stone was also made of pieces like wood was.  The only difference was if the stone was made of pieces that were so tiny no one could see them, the stone would wear down so slowly that no one could watch it happening.

As you can see, that’s a fairly simple thing to notice.  Other groups of people in the world had stone temples and wise old men, so other groups of people could’ve figured that out too.

Another kind of science is called chemistry.  Chemistry is the study of how atoms work together in big groups to make everything in the world work.  There are many different kinds of atoms, and each of them works differently.  By figuring out what the atoms a thing is made of do, you can figure out a lot about how the thing works.

Air has a lot of oxygen atoms in it, as well as some other atoms.  Some of those are carbon atoms.  When the carbon atoms connect with oxygen atoms, it makes carbon dioxide, which is part of the air you breathe.

Wood has a lot of carbon and hydrogen atoms in it.  Water is made of hydrogen and oxygen atoms.  So this is one example of a way that scientists have discovered something about the world that nobody else noticed, and of how the world works differently than a lot of people thought it did.  Air, water, and wood are very different things from each other, but they’re all made of different combinations of the same atoms.

The same is true for everything else in the world.  There are only about 100 types of atoms in the world (although many types of atoms have a few different variations).  Wood, water, and everything else in the world are different from each other not because they’re each made of completely different things, but because they are made of a few different things that interact with each other in many different ways.

Each of those 100 different atoms is made up of even smaller pieces.  This is another example of something scientists have discovered that no one else thought of, and that seems strange to a lot of people.  The smaller pieces of the 100 different atoms are all the same as each other.  Those smaller pieces are called sub-atomic particles.  There are three kinds of smaller pieces, called protons, neutrons, and electrons.  Those same three pieces make up all the 100 different atoms.  The different atoms are different from each other because they have different numbers of protons, neutrons, and electrons from each other.

In the same basic way that air, wood, water, and everything else in the world are different from each other because they’re made up of different combinations of 100 different atoms, those 100 different atoms are made up of 3 kinds of subatomic particles.  In the same way that everything in the world is different because of the different ways 100 different atoms interact with each other, the 100 different atoms are different from each other because of the different ways 3 different kinds of subatomic particles interact with each other!

This is an example of something that’s more complicated than I know how to explain to you.  But this is the basic idea behind how chemistry and physics work.  Now that you know this much, you could ask a school teacher or university student to tell you more about it.  You could say, “I’ve heard that everything in the world is made of 100 kinds of atoms, and those 100 kinds of atoms are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons, I’ve heard that air, water, wood and everything in the world is different because of the way those 100 atoms interact with each other, and that the 100 kinds of atoms are different from each other because of the different ways protons, neutrons, and electrons interact with each other.  Now what else can you tell me about that?  How does that work on my farm?”  Then the other person could tell you about how those atoms interacting with each other make good soil nutrients, how they make healthy plants grow, how air and water pollution are created, how soil nutrients get depleted, how rain forms, and many other things.

You could learn a lot more about how your farm works that way.  If you already know how to grow your food well and keep your farm healthy, obviously you already know enough about farming to be able to do those things.  But one thing that learning about how chemistry works on your farm would let you do would be to prove to the people who are taking your farms, and to a lot of other people, that you’re not just a bunch of dumb, superstitious peasants, you’re people just like them who know a lot about farming, just like they know a lot about whatever they do.

Something else that learning about chemistry would let you do would be to recognize how organic farming works differently from industrialized farming, why organic farming works better in the long run, and why industrialized farming produces more food in the short term but destroys the land in the long term.

You probably already knew that organic farming works better in the long run than industrialized farming.  But by learning about the chemistry involved in farming, you could learn why science doesn’t prove that you were wrong, and you can learn how to prove that anyone who tries to use science to prove you were wrong is lying.  Your ancestors developed farming thousands of years ago, and if you’re still farming on they same land they farmed, it means you know how to farm in a way that keeps your farms healthy year after year.  That means you own some of the most valuable land in the world.  That’s why the Capitalists want to take your land from you.  What I’m telling you about here is that the things you know about farming can be broken all the way down into subatomic particles, and it’s still the best way to keep your farms healthy.  If you learn about the chemistry of farming, it might show you that the world doesn’t work the way your ancestors believed it did, but that doesn’t change the fact that they figured out how to grow healthy farms.  Your ancestors learned how to grow healthy farms, and by learning about chemistry, you would just be carrying on that tradition.

Ultimately, what everything in the world being made of 100 kinds of atoms and 3 kinds of subatomic particles means is that everything in the world is part of the same system of cause and effect.  Everything in the world is connected to everything else, and everything affects everything else.  You know how cause and effect works on everything on your farms.  This is another way that the whole world is like a farm.  Scientists have discovered that cause and effect works on everything in the world in the same basic ways it works on your farm, just much, much bigger.

Atoms stick together into bigger pieces called molecules.  Sticking molecules together takes energy.  The energy is stored in the molecular bonds that hold the atoms together.  When you break the molecules, you release the energy.

You can see three important chemical reactions that happen with trees.  One is called photosynthesis.  The tree sucks molecules of carbon dioxide out of the air, and it soaks up sunlight through its leaves.  It breaks the carbon dioxide molecules.  It releases the oxygen atoms back into the air, which is what we breathe.  It keeps the carbon molecules for itself, which is why the tree keeps growing—because it keeps adding more and more atoms to itself.  It uses the energy from the sunlight to turn a lot of carbon atoms into bigger carbon molecules.

If a branch breaks off the tree and you take it home to build a fire with it, you are making a different chemical reaction happen.  Now you add some heat to the wood when you light the fire.  That heat breaks some of the big molecules of the wood.  Breaking the big molecules in the wood releases more heat.  Some of that heat breaks more big molecules, and that releases more heat.  And so on.  Basically, when you burn a piece of wood, you’re letting the sunlight back out of the wood that made the tree grow in the first place.

When you eat an ear of corn, you do the same thing.  You chew the corn up and swallow it.  Then the acids in your stomach break the big molecules in the corn and that releases the energy from the big molecules.  That’s where you get the energy from your food.  Basically, when you digest food, you’re releasing the sunlight energy and using it in your own body.

When you break up the molecules in the corn, you absorb some of the atoms into your body and turn them into different molecules.  This is how children grow, and this is how adults build muscles or get fat.

As farmers, I’m sure you already knew that everything in the lifecycles of the world were connected to each other.  By studying things like this, scientists have discovered that you were even more right than you realized.

Biology is the study of life.  This is the study of plants and animals, which you already know a lot about.  Biology is mainly what I’m going to teach you about in this book.

Biology is one of the most complicated things anyone has ever studied.  I told you how plants grow and how people get energy from eating plants.  Those are pretty simple chemical reactions.  All of biology is made up of chemical reactions like those, but there are so many, and many are so complicated, that it makes studying biology very complicated.  Everything that happens in biology is some kind of a chemical reaction.  Figuring out how they all work has been the big mystery.

There is a lot that people can learn about biology.  But most people here in America don’t learn much about it.  As farmers you spend your whole lives working with plants and animals, so you already know more about biology than most people in America.  You probably know more about biology than President Bush.

Physiology is the study of how your body works.  A physiologist can study how your arm works or how your heart works.  Neurology is the study of how your brain works as an organ of your body.  A physiologist studies how your muscles make your arm move.  A neurologist studies how things move around in your brain to make it work.

Psychology is the study of how people think.  This is another very complicated field of science.  Psychology is the study of how your brain works by studying the thoughts it creates.  Your brain is made up of the nutrients from the food you eat, just like every other part of your body.  Your brain is just the most complicated organ of your body.  It creates your thoughts somehow, but how it creates thoughts is so complicated that for a long time no one had any idea where thoughts came from.  But thinking is what your brain does, so all your thoughts have to come from your brain.  Figuring this out has been another big mystery in science.

Sociology is the study of how people act in groups.  Sometimes when people are in the company of other people, they think things and do things they wouldn’t think or do if they were alone.  Sometimes when people are in the company of large groups of people, they think and do things that they wouldn’t do any other time.   How all the people in a town act is one example.  How the people figure out who their leaders are going to be, and how people decide how to work together, and things like that.

Anthropology is the study of the differences and similarities between different groups of people.  For instance, what do people in Mexico have in common with people from the United States?  Also, how are people from Mexico different from people from people from the United States?  You can also break either one of those groups up into smaller groups and compare those groups to each other.  How are people who live in northern Mexico different from people who live in southern Mexico, and how are they the same?  Or, how are Indians who live in Mexico different from Europeans who live in Mexico, and how are they the same?

Archeology is the study of how ancient people lived.  This is a big field of science in your part of the world.  The great cities and pyramids of the Aztecs and Maya give us a lot of clues about how they lived.  By studying the things groups of people left behind, we can learn things about their history that they didn’t write down.

There are many other fields of science, but those are the most important for the things I’m going to be talking about.

Now, here’s an example of what scientists can do when they combine all these different branches of science.

Suppose a group of scientists hear about the ruins of an ancient city somewhere in the jungle.  So they go visit it.

When they walk into the ancient city, they see a big stone pyramid.  That one thing they can see gives them many clues about how the people in the city lived.

First of all, it tells the scientists that the people knew a lot about mining and architecture, to be able to cut the stones, carry them into their city, and stack them on top of each other to build a big pyramid.  That means the people in the city knew some important things about physics, so that’s something the scientists could use physics to study.

The big stone pyramid also tells the scientists that the people in the city were probably farmers.  Moving a lot of big stones and building great pyramids with them takes a lot of energy.  The people had to get all that energy from food.  So where did they get all that food?  That’s something the scientists can use chemistry and biology to study.

The big stone pyramid also tells the scientists that the people in the city had a lot of political organization. This is something scientists can use sociology to study. First, building a big stone pyramid takes a lot of people working together to build one thing.  Why would so many people all want to build the same thing?  Usually it’s because one person had the idea to build that thing, and he was some sort of an emperor, so he could tell everyone else to build it.

The other reason a big stone pyramid is a sign of a lot of political organization is because all the people who move the big stone blocks have to eat.  A big stone pyramid exists because a lot of people spent a lot of time moving big stone blocks.  That means that all those people didn’t spend all that time producing their own food.  That means that someone else must’ve produced the food those people ate.  The question that presents is:  Why did the people who produced the food give it to the people who moved the big stone blocks?  One reason they might’ve done it was because the people who grew the food believed that building a big pyramid was important work, so they were willing to trade the food they grew to the people who built the pyramid in exchange for their work.  The other big reason is because the same emperor who told the workers to build the pyramid also told the farmers to produce food for them.

Then the scientists can use anthropology to compare the way these people lived to the way other groups of people lived.  If they find many cities with big stone pyramids in them, they will probably discover that the people in the different cities had other things in common with each other, like farming and a lot of political organization.  They can also look at differences among the different groups of people.  For example, the people in another city might’ve grown different food and might’ve built their pyramids differently.  If one group built smaller pyramids than the other, that’s a clue that their farming might not have produced as much food—but it could also be a clue that the people with the bigger pyramid had more good stone near their city.

Anthropologists can also compare the way the people in the ancient city lived to the way the people in an ancient village lived.  The people in the village might’ve built a temple also, but it would be a smaller temple because there weren’t as many people in the village who could help build it as there were people living in the city who could build that temple.  If the two groups of people built different sizes of temples but their temples contained statues of the same god, that would be a clue that both groups of people practiced the same religion.  But it could also be a be a clue that the people practiced different religions and worshipped different gods who looked the same because both groups of people were farmers who lived in the jungle, so the same things were important to the two groups of people, so their different gods embodied the same aspects of the world.

Once scientists discover some clues like these, they can look for more clues to try to learn more about the people.

This is what I mean by you learning patterns of cause and effect that make your plants grow, and scientists learning patterns of cause and effect that make other things happen in the world.  In the same way that you could figure out whether or not your neighbor really had discovered a breed of corn that could produce twice as much food as yours, scientists can use those same kinds of techniques to figure out how everything else in the world works.

Chapter 7: The Science of Life

Now I must tell you more about the complicated fields of biology and psychology.

People have always studied plants and animals, for as long as people have existed.  They studied all the same things you study about your own plants and animals.  How do you breed better plants and animals?  When is the best time to plant your seeds?  How do you make your plants grow the best?  What food do animals like to eat?  Where is the best place to look for animals when you go hunting?  What time of the year do certain animals come to your area?  And so on.

Your ancestors and the Europeans and other agricultural people figured all those basic things out long ago.  That was enough for people to grow their farms and feed their families.

But a few people were still curious to learn more.  There were some things they didn’t understand well yet, so they kept studying plants and animals, because they thought they might be able to figure out more important things.

A big thing people still wondered about was why there were different kinds of plants and animals.  They could see that children inherited characteristics from their parents.  They could see that people could breed plants and animals to pass their characteristics on to the next generation.  They could see that if they bred some animals or plants together that had certain characteristics, and they bred plants or animals together that had different characteristics, they would have two breeds of plants or animals that had different characteristics from each other.

If a farmer had some horses, he could breed lightweight, fast horses together to get more lightweight, fast horses.  He could also breed big, strong horses together to get more big, strong horses.  Now he has lightweight, fast horses, and big, strong horses.  Then he could breed the fastest of the fast horses together and get even faster horses.  He could breed the strongest of the strong horses together and get even stronger horses.

People could breed corn the same way.  If a farmer had a field of corn and some of the plants grew sweeter corn cobs than the others, he could breed those plants with each other to make sweeter corn.  Then he could breed the sweetest of those plants together to make even sweeter corn.  Meanwhile he could breed the plants that had the biggest corn cobs together to make plants that grew bigger corn cobs.  Then he could breed the plants with the biggest of the big corn cobs together, to make plants that grew even bigger corn cobs.

Farmers all over the world figured out how to do this.  These scientists wondered if it was possible to breed plants or animals together for so long that they would turn into different plants or animals.  If you bred fast horses with fast horses, and strong horses with strong horses, long enough, could you turn them into two completely different animals?

In the same way, donkeys and horses are very similar animals.  Are those two different animals both descended from the same ancestors?  Horses are bigger and faster than donkeys, but donkeys can climb better and can walk over rough ground better.  Was there one ancestor species where the ones that were bigger and faster bred with each other, and the ones that could climb better and walk over rough ground better bred with each other, until they turned into two different animals?

If that had happened, the scientists had to answer two more questions.  How long did it take?  And, what made it happen?

Animals are different because they have different characteristics.  Parents pass their characteristics on to their children.   A breed of strong horses and a breed of fast horses have different characteristics, and donkeys and horses have different characteristics.  The only difference is, fast horses and strong horses have a few different characteristics, and donkeys and horses have a lot more different characteristics.   Breeding animals together makes their characteristics change slowly, but it does make their characteristics change.  If animals’ characteristics change, that means one kind of animal could turn into a different kind of animal.  Since their characteristics change slowly, that means that turning one animal into another animal would take a very long time.  But no matter how slowly it happened, if it went on long enough, it could happen.

To answer the question of how long this breeding took, first you have to answer a different question.  How old is the Earth?  That will give you some idea how long plants and animals could’ve been breeding with each other.   If the Earth isn’t old enough for plants and animals to have bred together long enough to turn into different plants and animals, then this couldn’t have happened.

For a long time, nobody knew how old the Earth was.  Nobody had any way of finding out how old the Earth was.  A lot of people thought the world was about as old as people were.  The Old Testament of the Bible was written about 5,000 years ago, so a lot of people thought the world was about 6,000 years old.

If the world was only 6,000 years old, that wouldn’t be enough time for horses and donkeys to start out as the same animal and breed with each other differently until they became two different animals.  So that idea wouldn’t work.

But nobody was sure how old the Earth was.  Maybe the Earth was older than 6,000 years.  Maybe there had been enough time for animals to turn into other animals.

Eventually, some scientists figured out how to build machines that would help them find out how old the Earth was.  They discovered that instead of the Earth being 6,000 years old, it’s 4,500,000,000 years old.  That would be plenty of time for animals to turn into other animals.

The other big question that had to be answered was, why would plants and animals that had certain characteristics breed with each other by themselves?  People could make plants and animals do that, but people didn’t make plants and animals do that.  If people didn’t do it, what else could’ve done it?

A great scientist named Charles Darwin figured out the answer to this.   This was back before anyone figured out how old the Earth was, but he had a good idea that the Earth could be old enough for this to happen.

Charles Darwin lived in England in the 1800s.  He sailed around the world in a sailing ship.  He visited many places, saw many different plants and animals everywhere he went, and met a lot of different people everywhere he went.

He spent a lot of time in South America, and especially the Galapagos Islands.  The Galapagos Islands was where he made his big discovery.

The Galapagos Islands are a group islands out in the middle of the ocean.  That gave him some important clues no one could get in most other places.

First, the Galapagos Islands are isolated, out in the middle of the ocean.   People didn’t live on the islands then, so they hadn’t brought their own animals with them.  Also, the same animals had lived on the islands for a long time.  New animals didn’t come to the islands very often.

Second, there were many islands, and they were close to each other, so the animals that did live on the islands had spread to all the islands.  But because they were islands, the animals didn’t cross from one island to another very often.

What Charles Darwin discovered was that each of the islands had the same animals on them, but on each island, each type of animal had slightly different characteristics.  In the same way that a farmer can make different breeds of horses, on the Galapagos Islands, each island had its own breeds of turtles, and birds, and lizards, and whatever.

Each island had a slightly different environment. Since each individual plant or animal of a certain type had slightly different characteristics, some of them would have characteristics that would help them survive and reproduce a little better than the others.  Since those plants or animals could survive and reproduce a little better, they would have more children.  Since they had more children, that would mean that more members of the next generation would inherit their characteristics.  Then they would be able to survive or reproduce a little better than the other plants or animals, and then they would have more children.  Then even more of the next generation would have the characteristic, and so on.  Eventually the characteristic would spread to all of the type of plants or animals, so the whole group would have the new characteristic.

Since each island had a slightly different environment, and each individual plant or animal had slightly different characteristics, the characteristics that would help plants and animals survive and reproduce on one island would be slightly different than the characteristics that would help them survive and reproduce on a different island.  That means that if the same type of bird or turtle or whatever lived on two different islands, certain characteristics would get passed down to more birds or turtles in the next generation on one island, and different characteristics would get passed down to the birds or turtles in the next generation on the other island.

Charles Darwin discovered a lot of things like the same type of birds living on two different islands who have different shapes of beaks.  Birds might have different beaks because there were different insects living on the two different islands.  Or the insects might be the same but the trees they lived in were different.  Either way, the birds always had the shape of beaks that helped them catch their food the best.

The same pattern of cause and effect would work everywhere in the world.  If the ancestors of horses and donkeys lived somewhere where there were plains and hills, and they could live pretty well in either place, some of the animals would live on the plains, and some would live in the hills.  In order for all the animals to get as much food as they could, they would spread out to everywhere they could live pretty well, wherever there was food for them.

The animals that lived on the plains would need to be fast, because the plain would be flat, so they could run easily.  All the other animals on the plain could run easily too, including the ones that would eat these animals.  So out of the animals that lived on the plains, the ones that could run the fastest would survive and reproduce the best.  So they would have the most children.  Then out of their children, the ones that were the fastest would survive and reproduce the best again, so the third generation would be even faster.  And so on.  Just like the farmer could breed his fastest horses together, the environment on the plains, itself, would breed the fastest animals with each other.  All the animals would try to breed with each other, and the ones that were the fastest would be the most successful, because the slower animals would be the ones that got eaten by predators the most.

Meanwhile in the hills, the animals that lived there would need to be able to climb well and walk across rough ground well.  So the hills themselves would breed the best climbers with the best climbers.  Again, all the animals would try to breed with each other, but the ones that could climb the best would be the most successful, because the ones that couldn’t climb as well would fall and kill themselves more often.  So the best climbers would have the most children, and then the next generation of the animals would be better at climbing than the first generation.

This is called natural selection.  The environment breeds the animals that are best at surviving and reproducing in that environment.  When that happens for thousands or millions of generations, the animals on the plains turn into horses, and the animals in the hills turn into donkeys.  This is another thing I meant when I said that the whole world is like a farm, but who are the farmers?

Charles Darwin called this evolution.  Evolution is the cumulative adaptation to an environmental pressure.  That’s just a fancy way of saying that the animals or plants that survive and reproduce best in an environment are bred for the characteristics that help them survive and reproduce, generation after generation.  When that goes on long enough, two different groups of animals that had the same ancestors get so many differences between them that they can’t breed with each other any more.  Then you say that the two animals are two different species.

Horses and donkeys are two different species, but they’re still a lot more closely related to each other than most other species.  Horses and donkeys are similar enough to each other that they can still have children together—and their children are mules—but their children are sterile.  Horses and donkeys can’t mix back together and turn back into the same species now, because mules can’t have children with each other.  That means they can’t pass their characteristics down to the next generation, and that means that the mules that are the best at surviving and reproducing can’t pass their characteristics down to the most children of the next generation.

Every single characteristic of every plant or animal is a characteristic that either helps it survive and reproduce now, or else it helped it survive and reproduce at some earlier time.  As farmers you probably know that your own plants and animals use most of their characteristics to survive and reproduce.   The same is true for plants and animals all over the world.  Whatever characteristics plants and animals don’t use to help them survive and reproduce are characteristics they used at some other time.