Who will win 2011 Elections? (part 2)

By Potpher Mbulo
DATE: 08-04-2011

As a follow up to my note entitled “Who will win 2011 Elections?” I have taken it upon myself to put into account observation of critics of my work and I have also incorporating my detailed second opinion.

ANALYSIS:

To start with, though the total registered number of voters (RV) and the average voter turnout (VTO) at national level does not affect verdict of election outcome but affects total votes cast, however, RV and VTO at provincial level affects electro outcome. Therefore it’s not just my opinion but it is a fact that statistical calculations based on summed up presidential election results at national level are not very close to reality. A better analysis is one that takes into account the country’s demography at provincial level. This is what I aim at doing in this presentation. In this regard, data of cardinal consideration are:

1. Total Registered voters at provincial level
2. Voter turnout at provincial level
3. Distribution of votes based on past election trends at provincial level
4. Popularity growth at provincial level
5. The Patrick Levy Mwanawasa (PLM) factor
6. The Charles Milupi (CM) factor
7. The Mongu demonstration factor
8. Possibility of rigging
9. New young voters
Lets ride through how we incorporate the above considerations into the analysis:

1. Total Registered voters (RV) at provincial level:

As earlier assumed in the first presentation, that 2011 election will register more than 5.5 million voters. Now based on past election registration trends, I have relatively apportioned registered voters to provinces according to share ratios trends. As of the 14th January 2011 ECZ’s register of the on-going registration process showed:

CB 832,116
LSK 755,333
NOR 626,682
SOU 625,190
EAS 614,373
CEN 462,643
LUA 394,872
WES 375,821
NW 297,685
TOTAL 4,984,715

Extrapolating the share ratio trend while limiting the total number of registered voters to 5.5 million, we calculate that the following holds:

Copperbelt: 914,812 registered voters
Lusaka: 834,682 registered voters
Northern: 723,391 registered voters
Southern: 667,746 registered voters
Eastern: 645,488 registered voters
Central: 556,455 registered voters
Lwapula: 500,809 registered voters
Western: 389,518 registered voters
North Western: 267,098 registered voters
TOTAL: 5,500,000 registered voters

Just a brief comment: The reason why PF is so prominent at national electro outcome is because it’s popular in the three prominent provinces in terms of registered voters (RV) i.e. Copperbelt, Lusaka and Northern provinces have the most registered voters. Notice that RV is highest in these regions and actually, the list of provinces here above was made in accordance with descending RV with the most on top. Most importantly, this data has been reviewed in light of new raw data of 31-03-2011 close date of ECZ register. (See notice at the end of this presentation)

2. Voter turnout (VTO) at provincial level:

To ascertain voter turnout (VTO), I had to refer to past trends as well as a discussion with friends. For instance, it is expected that duel to the Mongu fracas, there will be apathy (VTO = 55%) towards voting in Western province. The apportioned VTO for each province is as follows:

Copperbelt: VTO = 70.00%
Lusaka: VTO = 70.00%
Northern: VTO = 65.00%
Southern: VTO = 75%
Eastern: VTO = 93.66%
Central: VTO = 75.10%
Lwapula: VTO = 65.00%
Western: VTO = 55.00%
North Western: VTO = 65.00%

3. Distribution of votes based on past election trends at provincial level:

In general, the distribution of votes to candidates per province is calculated by considering registered voters (RV) of the province, voter turnout (VTO) and popularity growth. The formula I used is here below:

P = rtw(1 + g)/100
Where: P = postulation of 2011 election result
r = number of registered voters in year 2011
t = percentage voter turnout
w = latest poll score i.e. 2008 election in percentage
g = popularity growth or gain in poll score of year 2006 to 2008 in percentage

Notwithstanding the rule’s generalization, this rule has been disregarded rather overridden by the Patrick Levy Mwanawasa factor at Copperbelt and Central provinces. Again the rule has been overtaken by the Charles Milupi factor in Western province. In these three instances I have apportioned sharing ratios as percentages.

4. Popularity growth at provincial level:

The formula for determining popularity growth is as follows:

g = (w1 – w2)/100
where w1 = latest percentile poll score i.e. 2008 election
w2 = percentile poll score in 2006 election

As earlier mentioned, even this rule has been disregarded rather overridden by the Patrick Levy Mwanawasa factor at Copperbelt and Central provinces. Again the rule has been overtaken by the Charles Milupi factor in Western province. In these three instances we have apportioned sharing ratios as percentages.

5. The Patrick Levy Mwanawasa (PLM) factor:

The Patrick Levy Mwanawasa (PLM) factor is presumably a belief that some members (Lamba/Lenje) within MMD such as Shakafuswe, George Mpombo, Mike Mulongoti, etc have fallen out of favor with the MMD. In view of this, a sizable number of votes will swing back from MMD to UPND in Central Province and Rural Ndola of Copperbelt Province. We have apportioned sharing ratios as percentages.

Copperbelt province:

With PLM factor Without PLM factor
PF = 65.40% 65.08%
MMD = 20% 29.24%
UPND = 14% 5.10%
Others = 0.60% 0.57%

Central Province:

With PLM factor Without PLM factor
PF = 27.6% 27.57%
MMD = 33% 51.19%
UPND = 38.6% 20.42%
Others = 0.80% 0.81%

6. The Charles Milupi (CM) factor:

An influential new entrant on the political scene in Western province has emerged. This is no other than Charles Milupi. Though he might not stand in the elections in 2011 at presidential level, with his exit from MMD, he definitely will swing a significant number of votes from MMD to the opposition mostly to UPND.

With CM factor Without CM factor
PF = 9.99% 10.00%
MMD = 50% 65.43%
UPND = 40% 23.43%
Others = 0.01% 1.15%

7. The Mongu demonstration factor:

The issue of Barotseland Agreement visa vie Mongu demonstrations early this year and failure by MMD to do damage control should not be overlooked in Western province. Is it termed “damage control” or is it “damage repair”? Anyway, whatever you say, the effect will tend to alienate voters in Western Province. A few of the disgruntled elements will vote for the opposition but mostly of these angered individuals will might likely choose to stay away from casting their vote. For this reason, I have set the Voter Turnout at 55% in Western Province. For those that will vote for the opposition, I have incorporated their grievance in the Charles Milupi factor shown above. In any case, this low voter turnout ratio tends to caution the Charles Milupi factor’s contribution to national summation and thus there is no need for skeptics to cry foul play on my part.

8. Possibility of rigging:

Rigging can only be to an extent. If an incumbent loses too much, it’s difficult to rig. Moreover, if MMD did rig before, say in 2006 and 2008, that rigging component is already factored in the data as the analysis looked at the final ECZ results.

However I know that Voter Turnout Ratio in Luapula in the years 2001, 2006 and 2008 were as follows respectively: 71%, 36% and 30%. I can explain why there was a low voter turnout in 2008 as it was a by-election with a lot of relocation of voters since voter registration in early 2006 making it difficult for electorates to cast their vote after two years. However, I was just wondering why there is a big disparity between year 2001 and 2006 in terms of voter turnout. FTJ who hauls from Luapula was supporting LPM in 2001 and perhaps GRZ inflated the VTO ratio in Luapula as it was very difficult to monitor elections in the light of the fact that many roads were impassable in 2001 in Luapula. If, I’m not mistaken, ZAF Helicopters were used to ferry ballot boxes from remotes to totaling centers back then in Luapula. In this regard it was easy to rig. However, I’m not saying that MMD did rig.

Well you may ask: how can GRZ manipulate Voter Turnout Ratio (VTO)? I’m glad you asked. Simply by slowing down the voting process and by making sure ballot papers are delayed in reaching polling stations where the opposition is strong. That way GRZ can insure voting starts at say 11:00 hrs instead of 7:00hrs and stop the exercise at 18:00hrs in Lusaka, Copperbelt and Northern Province. In the mean time, GRZ can commence voting at 6:00hrs and end at 19:00hrs in the incumbent’s stronghold such as Eastern Province. Deliberate creation of apathy or high voter turnout is a great tool for smart rigging.

I have deliberately put the VTO ratio in Eastern province at all time high of 93.66% to cater for rigging. Without this, say we reset the VTO ratio to 70% in Eastern province, we see PF win at national total of 39.69% followed by MMD at 36.60% and with UPND at 22.91% of total votes cast translating into 1,551,267 votes for PF followed by 1,430,452 votes for MMD while UPND has 895,502 votes. In such a scenario, PF leads MMD by over 120,000 votes.

9. New Young Voters:

There are over a million new young voters on the register this year 2011. Most of these want change of government and they are mainly pro PF. I don’t want to appear to be harsh to MMD. I have not assigned any factor to the computation. I assume this is taken care of in the usual various political parties’ popularity growth rate. If critics are not satisfied, they can argue with statistics on which the popularity growth rate is determined and I must hasten to say these statistics on which I calculate popularity growth rate are not mine but is raw data from ECZ.

Now we are through with the cardinal considerations. Let’s go to the results that show the final outcome. The results of this comprehensive analysis that takes into account the issues discussed above yields the following final tabulated results:

SAMMARY OF RESULTS:

Jan 2011 Registered Voters = 4,942,000
2011 Projected Registered Voters = 5,500,000
Total Votes Cast = 4,094,965
Average Voter Turnout = 74.45%

2001 2006 2008 2011 Votes Cast
PF: 3.35% 29.37% 38.13% 38.60% 1,580,792
MMD: 28.69% 42.98% 40.09% 38.60% 1,580,817
UPND: 26.76% 25.32% 19.70% 21.99% 900,542
Others: 39.59% 2.33% 0.76% 0.80% 32,815
TOTAL 98.39% 100.00% 98.68% 100.00% 4,094,965

DISCUSSION:

We should not be deceived by the results in the table that shows that MMD and PF have a tie at 38.60% while UPND is trailing at 21.99%. What makes MMD to equal PF is the setting of voter turnout in Eastern Province at an all time high of 93.66%. Since MMD is popular in that region, Eastern Province contribution to total national count becomes very profound.

CONCLUSION:

Only if and if only the voter turnout trigger point of 93.66% in Eastern Province is achieved, MMD’s presidential candidate will not pass the post else PF’s presidential hopeful will carry the day. Like earlier mentioned, I have deliberately put the VTO ratio in Eastern province at all time high of 93.66%. This is the breakeven point for MMD to bypass PF all things being equal. Without this, say we reset the VTO ratio to 70% in Eastern province, we see PF win at national total with 39.69% followed by MMD at 36.60% and with UPND at 22.91% of total votes cast translating into 1,551,267 votes for PF followed by 1,430,452 votes for MMD while UPND has 895,502 votes. In such a scenario, PF leads MMD by over 120,000 votes.

NOTICE:

As the ECZ Register closed on 31 March 2011, the unverified data is as follows:

CB 869,406
LSK 776,866
NOR 658,902
SOU 655,380
EAS 654,204
CEN 482,571
LUA 409,754
WES 389,609
NW 310,398

TOTAL 5,207,090

I did plug in this raw data in my excel sheet & against my postulated RV values. I’m glad to report that I calculated average discrepancy of 0.0001098%. This proves that my postulation based on past election trends was accurate within reliable range & thus my conclusion is valid.

However I admit that I had overestimated the total registered voters i.e. 5,500,000 registered voters yet it’s supposed to be a total of 5,207,090 registered voters. I had overestimated my data by 292,910 translating into 5.63% overestimation. Does this have any consequence on the final result and the eventual conclusion? Absolutely not as you will see.

Using this new raw data which was captured by close of ECZ Register on 31-03-2011 and placing VTO in Eastern Province at 70%, PF still wins scoring 38.42% (1,421,376 votes) while MMD follows closely at 37.33% (1,381,000 votes). This means PF wins the election with over 40,000 votes ahead of MMD. Notice that in 2008, PF lost by 35,000 votes against MMD

With this raw data, for MMD to breakeven with PF, the trigger point is achieving a VTO of exactly 77.80% in Eastern province against an average national VTO of 72.24%

Who will win 2011 Zambian Presidential Elections?

By Potpher Mbulo

DATE: 08-04-2011

I would like to have a honest scientific analysis where facts override my personal opinion. So please take time to read what I’m about to write. Back in 2001, who would have imagined that Sata could be popular now? From statistics, in 2001, Sata was beaten by the likes of Anderson Mazoka (UPND), Christon Tembo (FDD), Kaunda Tilyenji (UNIP), Godfrey Miyanda (HP), Benjamin Mwila (ZRP). As a matter of fact, Sata was in the distance 7th position from Levy Mwanawasa. It’s unbelievable now that Sata is a big short at Zambian presidential hopefuls. Do you know why Sata was so unpopular back then? I won’t answer this question right now.

Lets go to 2006 Presidential Election Results:

Levy Mwanawasa (MMD); 1,177,846 votes; 42.98%
Michael MC Sata (PF) 804,748 votes; 29.37%
Hakainde Hichilema (UDA) 693,772 votes; 25.32%
Godfrey K Miyanda (HP) 42,891 votes; 1.57%
Winright K Ngondo (APC) 20,921 votes; 0.76%

Now compare this with the 2008 Presidential Election Results here below:

BANDA RUPIAH B (MMD) 718,359 votes; 40.09 %
SATA MICHAEL C (PF) 683,150 votes; 38.13 %
HICHILEMA HAKAINDE (UPND) 353,018 votes; 19.70 %
MIYANDA GODFREY K (HERITAGE) 13,683 votes; 0.76 %

Against total votes cast, Sata with his PF jumped from 3.35% of votes for him in 2001 to 29.37% of votes in 2006 and finally again gaining to 38.13% of votes in 2008

Against total votes cast, MMD jumped from 19.45% of votes in 2001 to 42.98% of votes in 2006 and finally to slopping down a little to 40.09% of votes in 2008

Against total votes cast, UPND jumped from 18.15% of votes in 2001 to 25.32% of votes in 2006 and finally to slopping down to 19.70% of votes in 2008. In Mazoka days, UPND was only second to MMD.

From the above statistics we can see that only PF has been consistently picking up momentum in gaining ground. There is no reason to assume that PF will change from this positive trend. On the other hand, MMD and UPND are losing ground. Is it possible that MMD and UPND can gain ground? I think that’s an illusion considering the fact that the new voter register has not shown that PF stronghold along the line of rail, Copperbelt, Luapula and Northern indicated less registered voters than usual.

As at mid January 2011 the continuous voter registration captured 4,984,715 registered voters.

Compare this with 3,944,135 registered voters in 2008. It is logical to say that in 2011, we expect to have more than 5.5 million registered voters.

Let’s go to the mathematics.

Assumptions:

Registered voters = 5,500,000 (based on projected final registered voters. We may know the exact number before the end of this April 2011)

Voter turnout = 45.43 % (based on 2008 Elections)

Actual votes = 2,498,650 (extrapolated )

Formular:

P = rt(w + g)/w

Where: P = postulation of 2011 election result
r = number of registered voters in year 2011
t = voter turnout based on latest election i.e. 2008 election
w = latest poll score i.e. 2008 election in percentage
g = gain in poll score of year 2006 to 2008 in percentage

Table of Data and Computed Results:

CANDIDATE 2006 2008 Gain PROJECTION %PROJECTION

Sata 29.37% 38.13% 8.76% 1196504 47.76%
RB 42.98% 40.09% -2.89% 949242 37.89%
HH 25.32% 19.70% -5.62% 359283 14.34%
TOTAL 97.92% 97.92% XXXXX 2505029 100.00%

Assuming he still maintains his momentum and there are no surprises and all things being equal, this means that Sata in 2011 will win by at least 247,000 votes against RB based on 8.76% gain Sata had when we compare 2006 and 2008 statistics not withstanding that in 2008 he lost by 35,000 votes to RB. Don’t dismiss this conclusion. Using the same analysis, I had projected that MMD would win by a narrow margin in 2008. Now according to the above mathematics, Sata will win by scoring 47.76% of total votes cast. Had the MMD agreed to a 50 plus 1 clause, there was going to be a rerun. But greediness and arrogance of the MMD to hijack the failed constitution making process is going to haunt the MMD as they will see Sata win with a minority vote at 47.76%

Among the Zambian politicians, there have only been two who have stood out by their personal ingenuity and charisma almost single handedly to command an impressive electorate following. Should I dare mention them? The Late Anderson Mazoka and Michael Chilufya Sata. There is something striking about this old man called the Cobra.

Do you know why Sata was so unpopular back then in 2001? Believe it or not, the dented Chiluba name (corruption and Third Term Bid) has always had an effect on Zambian politics. In 1991 Chiluba was popular and so was Mwanawasa. By 2000 FTJ had lost popularity because of corruption allegations and Third Term Bid. He opted to field Mwanawasa but alas Mwanawasa was perceived to be an ally of a villain in 2001 elections. MMD’s performance in 2001 elections were thus not impressive. But Mwanawasa regained popularity through distancing himself from FTJ. Towards the end of his demise rule he realized that Sata was just vocal but not corrupt and for that reason he begun to get along with Sata. My humble opinion is that RB’s association with FTJ is going to ruin the MMD.

Thinking Aloud: ANALYZING THE EVOLUTION OF SPECIES.

Thinking Aloud: ANALYZING THE EVOLUTION OF SPECIES.

HOW DID LIFE ORIGINATE?

By Potpher Mbulo

If life did "evolve" into existence, how did it come into being? I know that evolutionist do not have to discuss abiogenesis to work in Neo-Darwinism. After all Neo-Darwinist do not even attempt to explain how any one of the many biological systems at molecular level could have come into existence by the Darwinian mechanism. All we hear them say is that we evolved from ape like creatures. Is it too much a thing to ask them to explain at molecular level how an eye evolved? But you should know that abiogenesis is a branch of Evolution, and Evolution can be defined as continuous naturalistic, mechanistic process by which all living things are hypothesized to have arisen from a single living source which itself assumably arose by a similar process from a non-living, inanimate world which (non-living matter) in turn “evolved” from energy which hypothetically has always been from eternity past.

It thus follows that such a pure naturalist misconstrued “theory” encompasses the Big Bang hypothesis, Abiogenesis, Neo- Darwinism and whatever naturalistic hypothesis you deem fit or have been proposed to replace the incumbent misconceptions of the general “theory”. If one part is defective how does the rest of the system (general “theory”) work? Worse still in your case, the whole system has no single workable mechanism. At every point its all trash!!!!

As scientists, we cannot confidently talk about mutations and adaptations if we deliberately ignore the question of how life evolved in the first place. Most evolutionists shun the topic relating the origin of the first building blocks of life. To make matters worse, the issue of how information coded in DNA arose is a thorn in the fresh of evolutionists. If the question of how did life originate has not been answered yet, those of us who are prudent, shall never accept the hypothesis that claims that a single organism did change into an infinite array of creatures. An erected scientific theory is that which is based on a solid foundation. We shall always entertain it as a hypothesis. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle once said:

"It is a mark of an educated mind that entertains a thought without accepting it."

The controversy surrounding the origin of the first organism in this far-advanced ere of science today proves that Neo-Darwinism has no base. I shall in this thesis show that indeed this is the case.

What is life? What do we mean by life? Spiritually speaking, life is a status. Scientifically, life is not a status, but a process - a series of chemical reaction using carbon-based molecules, by which matter is taken into the system and is used to assist the system's growth and reproduction, with waste products being expelled. I shall restrict myself to discuss this subject within the scientific broad view definition of life.

A virus cannot qualify to be a living organism because matter is not taken into a system and waste products are not being expelled out of a system. It is for this reason that biologists disagree on whether viruses should be considered a form of life. A cell is a biological system in which the processes occur.

Early experiments suggested that it was relatively simple to produce some of the building blocks of life such as amino acids, the components of proteins. However, the euphoria of the Miller-Urey experiment of 1953 has given way to a paradigm crisis of 1993 in origin of life research. The wishful, yet workable atmosphere of ammonia, hydrogen, methane, and water vapor has been replaced by the more realistic, but stingy atmosphere of nitrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide, and hydrogen cyanide. This is the venom that volcanoes vomit. These are poisonous to life. This atmosphere poses a much more difficult challenge. Molecules relevant for life would be much rarer. Even more damaging is the possibility of the presence of molecular oxygen in the atmosphere from the break-up of water vapor induced by UV rays. Molecular oxygen would poison any reaction leading to biologically significant molecules. As we see it now, it is evident that the much talked about Miller-Urey experiment of 1953 has currently been thrashed aside by new data that indicate a more realistic, but stingy atmosphere of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen cyanide, nitrogen and carbon dioxide. These are the gases that volcanoes vomit out and we all admit that. The wishful yet workable atmosphere of ammonia, hydrogen, methane, and water vapor that Chemist S. L. Miller used can not find place in the origin of life in the light of what volcanoes belch out. Worse still, even today's experiments in which researchers try to simulate the early earth have been severely crippled. These experiments generally use purified reactants, isolated energy sources and exaggerated energy levels. These are procedures that unrealistically drive the reaction toward the desired product. Another thing to lament about is that the products are protected from the destructive effects of the energy sources that produced them in the first place. It is thus unthinkable to conceive that life could have evolved in the deep ocean vents. How about at the surface, precisely the more promising ponds that have special clays that act as catalysis for formation of organic molecules? What one needs is just to answer the question: what are the effects of oxygen gas on organic molecules? The sure answer is oxidation of the very thing we hypothetically want to achieve. If we presume an atmosphere that has no oxygen then we ought to bear in mind that the ozone layer is a product of oxygen. No oxygen means no protection from deadly UV. Worse still some of the water vapor molecules will be broken down by UV rays resulting into Oxygen gas, which causes oxidation of organic molecules. Dr. Klaus Dose once wrote:

“More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.” [From Interdisciplinary Science Review 13(1988): 348-56.]

Again, in 1983, evolutionist researcher C. Ponnamperuma announced that all five of the critical organic compounds called "bases" (Cytosine, Guanine, Thymine, Uricil and Adenine) that are responsible for coding genetic information in the DNA and RNA of living cells were synthesized in a Miller-Urey type of experiment.

But firstly, it should be noted that experimental results are totally different from natural results as earlier pointed out in my preamble where I did say that these experiments generally use purified reactants, isolated energy sources and exaggerated energy levels. These are procedures that unrealistically drive the reaction toward the desired product. If asked I can elaborate more.

Secondly, what was achieved in the experiment were bases and not and an array of bases that can depict a gene.

Thirdly, but all of these difficulties together, as staggering as they are, are not the real problem. A harpaharzedly and arbitrary arrangement of a simple array of such bases can not be equated to the complex DNA molecule and its numerous highly specialized codes for synthesis of proteins.

The major difficulty in chemical evolution scenarios is how to account for the informational code of DNA without intelligence being a part of the equation. DNA carries the genetic code - the genetic blueprint for constructing and maintaining a biological organism. DNA is "transcribed" into RNA; RNA is "translated" into protein; geneticists speak of the "genetic code". All these words imply intelligence, and the DNA informational code requires intelligent preprogramming, yet a purely naturalistic beginning does not provide such input. Though chemical experiments may be able to construct small sequences of nucleotides to form small molecules of DNA, this doesn't make them mean anything. There is no source for the informational code  in a strictly naturalistic origin of life. The simplest possible cell, according to recent theoretical analysis, would need a bare minimum of 256 genes coding for the required enzymes, which are long polypeptides. And it is doubtful whether such a hypothetical organism could survive, because such an organism could barely repair DNA damage, could no longer fine-tune the ability of its remaining genes, would lack the ability to digest complex compounds, and would need a comprehensive supply of organic nutrients in its environment. Indeed the major difficulty is linking up the building blocks at all, let alone in the right sequence. This is because thermodynamic considerations show that long molecules like proteins and nucleic acids tend to break up into their component monomers (amino acids and nucleotides respectively). Any undirected energy input is more likely to be destructive rather than constructive, and to increase the variety of undesirable side reactions possible.

Again which one evolved first between DNA and RNA? You need DNA to make up RNA while you need RNA to make up DNA. Genetic information does not just spontaneously arise from random DNA sequences. The informational code, the relevant molecules, all catalysts and a "house" constitute a complex irreducible system that needs all it's constituents to be present and functioning. The terminology "irreducible complexity" was coined by Professor Michael Behe. One time I was privileged to watch him on TV and this is what he had to say:

"A system is irreducibly complex if it is composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. Life at the molecular level is replete with such systems, and biochemists do not even attempt to explain how any one of them could have come into existence by the Darwinian mechanism.”

The result of biochemical investigation of cellular mechanisms, according to Behe, "is a loud, clear, piercing cry of ‘Design!’"

The much celebrated evolutionist biologist Sidney W. Fox's experiment that shows that simple heating of dry amino acids can create protein molecules leaves a lot to be desired. Once water is added these proteins assume the shape of round, cell-like objects called proteinoids, which take in small molecules from the surrounding liquid, grow by attaching each other and divide. This at face value seems to depict a resemblance to bacteria and infact experts have trouble distinguishing them from bacteria. But ladies and gentlemen, liquid water must have been critical to achieve evolution of the first organic molecules. After all, the first living things were strictly aquatic creatures. Not only that, liquid water is a fluid medium in which materials could move and aggregate. A point should be noted here that in the sea you need high concentration to make it possible for aggregation. Back to the topic at hand, furthermore, don't evolutionists believe we all evolved from the sea? I Potpher know that all cells of all living organisms are strictly aquatic. Land-based organisms are merely more-less like protective shells filled up with millions of aquatic cells. So as it were if we presume that evolution did bring forth life from organic molecules which in turn did evolve from inanimate none living world, then the place of this process must be the sea. This fact then defeats Sidney W. Fox's initial dry environment. I'm in no way suggesting that I believe that life evolved in the sea. If the sea was primordial soup of amino acids and simple proteins, why don't we have a record in fossil of such a prevalent occurrence imbedded in sediment containing the organic slime of the primitive sea? Another issue to consider is how did big molecules such as complex proteins and DNA find themselves inside an impenetrable primitive cell membrane (proteinoid)? How about how did only left-handed molecules find themselves inside such a closet? Worse still don't we know that left-handedness is destroyed by intense heat?

It is a scientific fact that without the ozone layer, the UV light will destroy organic molecules. It is for this reason that indeed fossil and geochemical evidence suggest that life did not emerge on earth's land surface until oceans plants which were shielded from sunlight by the sea water, emitted enough oxygen to build up the ozone (O₃) layer in the earth's atmosphere. This layer could then shield land-based life from UV rays. But as earlier argued, a dry environment rich in protein with heat energy is a prerequisite needed to achieve a primitive cell membrane. So if it was dry then it also means that UV did a stoppage to the assumed progress. Even more damaging is the possibility of the presence of molecular oxygen in the atmosphere from the break-up of water vapor. It therefore appears that both the shield and the organism simultaneously evolved against the dictates of natural law and probability. So one just has to conclude as persuaded by evidence that design is the only option that could have conceived life.

Shalom! Shalom!

Ever-loving,

Potpher

ANALYZING THE EVOLUTION OF SPECIES.

By: Potpher C. Mbulo

Let me give you a brief history: Evolution is not a science because it is not determined by subject matter or energy but by it's the method of dealing with evidence. I would like to prove that those that foster their pattern of hypotheses as gospel truth use questionable sources and random statistics to support their PREDETERMINED conclusion through self-serving views usually with a commercial intent or personal publicity.

Read more »

The Folly of Relying on Agriculture And Mining

By Potpher Mbulo

DATE:  14-03-2011

This is for thought provocation in economics. Diversification of the economy away from the mines into agriculture is a foolish call. I say so because Zambian industry’s major problem is not unique. As a matter of fact, African’s industries at large might exhibit varying symptoms but have the same disease. The colonial rulers left an indelible filthy mark by way of the Ricardian Law of comparative advantage.

Read more »

Vestigial Organs And Perfectionalism

By Potpher C. Mbulo

DARWINISM:  Charlse Darwin used as evidence for his theory the fact that some organs seen in adults and embryos appear to be vestigial. According to the evolution theory such organs as the tiny buried hind-limb bones of whales are remnants of the walking legs of their terrestrial ancestors. The Creation theory has trouble explaining them, it is believed.

DISCUSSION: 

Most previous evolutionists, such as Darwin's grandfather Erasmus, had inclined towards an alternative theory of the mechanism of evolution, now usually associated with Lamarck's name. This was the theory that improvements acquired during an organism's lifetime, such as the growth of organs during use and their shrinkage during disuse, were inherited. So who is believing in Lamarckism? Here is my poem for you:

Read more »

UNLOCKING THE BOOK OF REVELATION

By Potpher C. Mbulo

The key to understanding the book of Revelation is to note the year in which it was written by John the Apostle. First of all, we should understand that Potius Pilate the Governor at Jerusalem who witnessed the verdict of crucifying Jesus Christ reigned about 26 - 30 AD. Ofcourse bible scholars say that the Crucifixion occurred in 30/33 AD. The final last fall of Jerusalem (the dispensation of Jews) occurred in 70 AD during the late reign of Nero the Roman. Again, it's worth noting almost all bible scholars agree that the book was written in 90 - 95 AD at an island called Patimos. Perhaps John was at the island because of the dispensation as he was a Jew.

Read more »

The Trouble With Our Democracy

By Potpher C. Mbulo

Date:  04-03-2010

We the Zambians demand more than a pact. Not in quantity but in content. We want listening leaders. Yes, it’s not good to have too many political parties. Too many political parties cause the split vote effect. The split vote effect dilutes possibility of unsitting an incumbent government as there is vote sharing of t...he opposition political parties. It is to counter the split vote effect that we have the pact and may God help us keep it together as it also removes impediment to unity in a highly tribal polarized environment.

The trouble with our democracy and the world over is that despite that democracy is about having the legible citizens electing representatives of their opinions to sit in the National Assembly or Council Chambers where they can put forward those opinions, this concept is defeated by the fact that it all seems to boil down to political parties, and what they think as directed by their leaders.

Read more »

EXISTENCE, ESSENCE AND THE MIND

By Potpher C. Mbulo

DATE: 11-11-2010

   

The primary objective of this article is to describe my theory “The Learning Of The Mind” . In order to have a clear understanding, primary philosophical views about existence and essence are discussed. The grand question “Does existence precede essence?” is at the center of the converse.

Read more »

Zambia – A Rich but Poor Country.

By Potpher Mbulo

Zambia is greatly endowed with minerals, fertile land and fresh water yet it is gifted with bad culture. Zambia in the pre-colonial days experienced mining activities at minimal scale, subsistence farming and fruit gathering. My interest is fruit gathering which inculcated a lazy culture because things come on a silver plate. Adverse conditions are what shake people out of their comfort zone.

As fate would have it then come colonialization that taught Zambians to get educated for white-collar jobs. There was no deliberate policy to insure self-employment for school leavers. This developed unhealthy culture of job seekers. As a matter of fact stigmatization of people who wanted to venture into business upon finishing school was such that these people were viewed as school failures. From psychology of deindividuation in the mines where leadership was dominated by whites, we also learn that Africans believed that big businesses could only be run by whites.  To date the inferiority complex still lingers in many citizens. Little wonder that entrepreneurship is not proficient in such an environment where individuals deindividualise themselves.

Read more »

God Does Not Exist

By Potpher Mbulo

A renowned philosopher in Medievalism, Umberto Eco, says he come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. In reflection to this, I say a man without ambition for truth does not know that deeply buried in deception is always found laziness to pursue truth through objectivity. Thus he who does not know that he does not know, knows not that he holds the highest degree in foolishness. However, a fool who knows that he is a fool is no longer a fool for he has taken the first step to wisdom. Moreover it’s no surprise that such sentiments come from a former catholic ardent believer and a staunch critic of the bible. His biggest fallacy is his assumption that the universe has no meaning. Anyway that’s his opinion. Nevertheless anyone is free to infer design or self construction depending on the analysis of the phenomena. If I find a sharp stone with a wooden handle attached to it with a rope, I will conclude that someone designed the tool. What Eco can’t appreciate is that a living cell is more complex than a sharp stone fastened to a wooden handle. Here is where he lacks logic.

Read more »

Parallel Vote Tabulation (PVT)

By Potpher Mbulo

Date: 10-03-2011

PVT is an exercise attempted to mirror the official count of all polling stations. PVT is an election observation methodology that is employed for independent verification (or challenge) of election results. It involves observation of the voting and counting of ballots at the polling stations, collection of official polling station results and independent tabulation (totaling or summation) of these results, parallel to election authorities. If the PVT is performed on statistical sample of the polling stations, it is called Quick Count.

In Zimbabwe’s 2008 elections, with the help of the then President of South Africa, Thabo Mbeki, a concession was arrived at to have PVT. Results at individual polling stations were displayed on the outside of the polling stations. MDC supporters took pictures, often with camera phones, and sent these to a central location (in Johannesburg), where the results were tabulated. PVT showed that Tsvangirai had polled 50.3% of the vote. However the official result still showed Mr Tsvangirai securing the majority vote at 48.6% of the votes thus forcing a runoff election which Mr. Tsvangirai refused to participate and he argued that he had won the election with a 50 plus 1.

Read more »