Did you know that scientific evidence abounds to support the biblical accounts of creation and the flood? Were you aware that reports outlining this evidence passed peer review, and were published in the open scientific literature? Have you heard that, decades later, this evidence still stands unrefuted by the scientific community? An Overview Etched within Earth’s foundation rocks — the granites — are beautiful microspheres of coloration, halos, produced by the radioactive decay of primordial polonium, which is known to have only a fleeting existence. The following simple analogy will show how these polonium microspheres — or halos — contradict the evolutionary belief that granites formed as hot magma slowly cooled over millions of years. To the contrary, this analogy demonstrates how these halos provide unambiguous evidence of both an almost instantaneous creation of granites and the young age of the earth. A speck of polonium in molten rock can be compared to an Alka-Seltzer dropped into a glass of water. The beginning of effervescence is equated to the moment that polonium atoms began to emit radiactive particles. In molten rock the traces of those radioactive particles would disappear as quickly as the Alka-Seltzer bubbles in water. But if the water were instantly frozen, the bubbles would be preserved. Likewise, polonium halos could have formed only if the rapidly “effervescing” specks of polonium had been instantly encased in solid rock. An exceedingly large number of polonium halos are embedded in granites around the world. Just as frozen Alka-Seltzer bubbles would be clear evidence of the quick-freezing of the water, so are these many polonium halos undeniable evidence that a sea of primordial matter quickly “froze” into solid granite. The occurrence of these polonium halos, then, distinctly implies that our earth was formed in a very short time, in complete harmony with the biblical record of creation. Replies to Objections Every question regarding the validity or implications of this polonium-halo evidence has been systematically dealt with, in our published reports and in various discussions with those holding differing views. We invite you to peruse the points we have raised in our exchanges, consider them, and decide for yourself the truth of the matter. Of particular interest will be our recent discussion with the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) regarding the validity of our work. In the Exchanges section of our website we’ve posted our letter to Dr. K. R. Walker, requesting the references to successful granite synthesis experiments that UT’s Dr. Larry Taylor had referred to. We also have posted two letters from Dr. Brent Dalrymple that refer to the unrefuted Polonium evidence for the creation of granite. Challenge to the National Academy of Sciences The Academy has vehemently opposed creation science, even claiming that the evidence for creation has been scientifically invalidated. We have repeatedlychallenged the Academy to publicly explain where the polonium-halo evidence for creation has ever been scientifically invalidated. For over 15 years, they have refused to even try, for they know that their statement is insupportable when it comes to the polonium-halo evidence. We have posted here letters and other documents pertaining to our challenge to the National Academy of Science. Reports Our published reports date back to the 1960’s. Twenty of these reports can be downloaded free of charge from this web site. A number of these also appear in the appendix to our book, Creation’s Tiny Mystery. Every question regarding the validity or implications of the polonium-halo evidence for creation has been systematically dealt with in our publishedreports. Every proposal for an evolutionary origin of polonium radiohalos has been systematically and experimentally falsified. No hypothetical, naturalistic scenario has yet been suggested that can account for Creation’s “tiny mystery” of the polonium halo. Of course, you can find claims to the contrary on the internet and elsewhere. But if these claims had any real substance, they would have passed peer review and been published in the open scientific literature. The fact that they have not been, or have themselves been experimentally falsified, demonstrates the fact that this unique evidence for Creation still stands unrefuted. Some of our newest research concerns astronomy and cosmology. Our findings provide a radically new model of the cosmos while also showing why the Big Bang Theory is fatally flawed. For more on this topic, please see our sister site, www.OrionFdn.org. Tax-Funded arXiv Engaged in Religious Discrimination Our sister site, www.OrionFdn.org, has an entire section on this topic. Basically, what happened is that we posted ten papers outlining fatal flaws in the Big Bang theory on the arXiv, an internet service hosted at the time by Los Alamos National Laboratory. The arXiv distributes physics papers worldwide, and we had previously posted papers there with no problem. This time, when those in charge of the arXiv discovered that our papers very clearly outlined the fallacies of the Big Bang, and were supportive of a model of the universe that harmonizes with Genesis, the papers were removed. After we posted them again, they were removed a second time, and our password was revoked. You can read the subsequent letters that were exchanged by clicking the links on the page “Documentation of Censorship by the Los Alamos National Laboratory arXiv Staff”, a page on our sister site. The arXiv is funded by tax funds. It is therefore inappropriate for the arXiv to discriminate on the basis of religion against scientists who do not ascribe to evolution. Videos/DVDs One of the easiest ways to learn more about polonium halos and similar evidence for creation is to watch our two videos, Fingerprints of Creation andThe Young Age of the Earth. Both are available on VHS cassettes and DVD, and both can now be seen immediately over the internet as a free video stream. Check out our latest video, Center of the Universe — The Great White Throne. In this documentary we explore the amazing astronomical discovery that the universe has a nearby center that can be identified with the location of the Great White Throne, God’s dwelling place in the heavens described in the book of Revelation. Book Our book, Creation’s Tiny Mystery, by scientist Robert V. Gentry, chronicles the evidence of polonium halos, and the challenges of proposing a scientifically-based creation model of the Earth amidst the widespread acceptance by most scientists of ancient, evolutionary models. The entire book may now be read online, but you’ll also want the convenience of having a printed copy to peruse. To order our book and/or videos, Call Us at (800) 467-6380, or use our order form.

by Marcy Darnovsky

---

At the cusp of dot-com frenzy and the biotech century, a group of influential scientists and

pundits has begun zealously promoting a new bio-engineered utopia.  In the world of their

visionary fervor, parents will strive to afford the latest genetic ìimprovementsî for their children.

According to the advocates of this human future (or, as some term it, ìpost-humanî future), the

exercise of consumer preferences for offspring options will be the prelude to a grand

achievement: the technological control of human evolution.

My first close encounter with this techno-eugenic enthusiasm was in a 1997 book written for an

unconverted lay audience by Princeton geneticist Lee M. Silver.  In Remaking Eden: Cloning

and Beyond in a Brave New World (New York: Avon Books), Silver spins out scenarios of a

future in which affluent parents are as likely to arrange genetic enhancements for their children

as to send them to private school.

Silver confidently predicts that upscale baby-making will soon take place in fertility clinics,

where prospective parents will undergo an IVF procedure to create an embryo, then select the

physical, cognitive, and behavioral traits they desire for their child-to-be.  Technicians will

insert the genes said to produce those traits into the embryo, and implant the embryo in the

motherís womb.  Nine months later, a designer baby will be born.  After a few centuries of

these practices, Silver believes, humanity will bifurcate into genetic ubermenschen and

untermenschenóand not long thereafter into different species.  Here is Silverís prediction for

the year 2350:

“The GenRichówho account for 10 percent of the American populationóall carry synthetic

genes. Genes that were created in the laboratory….The GenRich are a modern-day hereditary

class of genetic aristocrats….All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment

industry, and the knowledge industry are controlled by members of the GenRich class.”

How do the other 90 percent live? Silver is quite blunt on this point as well: “Naturals work as

low-paid service providers or as laborers.”

That rich and poor already live in biologically disparate worlds can be argued on the basis of

any number of statistical measures: life expectancy, infant mortality, access to health care.  Of

course, medical resources and social priorities could be assigned to narrowing those gaps.

But if Silver and his cohort of designer-baby advocates have their way, precious medical talent

and funds will be devoted instead to a technically dubious project whose success will be

measured by the extent to which it can inscribe inequality onto the human genome.  Silver

pushes his vision still further:

“As time passes,…the GenRich class and the Natural class will become the GenRich humans

and the Natural humans entirely separate species with no ability to cross-breed, and with as

much romantic interest in each other as a current human would have for a chimpanzee.”

Silver understands that such scenarios are disconcerting. He counsels realism.  In other

words, he celebrates the free reign of the market and perpetuates the myth that private

choices have no public consequences:

“Anyone who accepts the right of affluent parents to provide their children with an expensive

private school education cannot use ëunfairnessí as a reason for rejecting the use of

reprogenetic technologies….There is no doubt about it…whether we like it or not, the global

marketplace will reign supreme.”

When I first read Silverís book, I imagined that these sorts of bizarre prognostications must be

the musings of a lab researcher indulging in mad-scientist mode. I soon learned differently.

They are not ravings from the margins of modern science, but emanations from its prestigious

and respected core.  Silver vividly and accurately represents a technical and political agenda

for the human future that is shared by a disturbing number of Nobel laureate scientists, biotech

entrepreneurs, social theorists, bioethicists, and journalists.

Since the late 1990s, this loose alliance has been publicly and energetically promoting the

genetic technology known as ìhuman germline engineeringîó modifying the genes passed to

our children by manipulating embryos at their earliest stages of development.  Such genetic

modifications would be replicated in all subsequent generations, providing supporters with the

basis to claim that “we” are on the brink of “seizing control of human evolution.” Frank about

their commitments to control and ìenhancement,” advocates of human germline engineering

claim that the voluntary parental participation they foresee refutes any characterization of their

project as “eugenic.”  With public conferences, popular books, scholarly articles, websites, and

mainstream media appearances, they are waging an all-out campaign to win public acceptance

of their techno-eugenic vision.

The promoters of a designer-baby future believe that the new human genetic and reproductive

technologies are both inevitable and a boon to humanity.  They exuberantly describe near-term

genetic manipulationsówithin a generationóthat may increase resistance to diseases, ìoptimizeî

height and weight, and boost intelligence.  Further off, but within the lifetimes of todayís

children, they foresee the ability to adjust personality, design new body forms, extend life

expectancy, and endow hyper-intelligence. Some even predict splicing traits from other

species into children: In late 1999, for example, an ABC Nightline special on human cloning

speculated that genetic engineers would learn to design children with ‘night vision from an owl’

and ‘supersensitive hearing cloned from a dog.’

How plausible are such scenarios?  Because human beings are far more than the product of

genesóbecause DNA is one of many factors in human developmentóthe feats of genetic

manipulation eventually accomplished will almost certainly turn out to be much more modest

than what the designer-baby advocates predict.  But we cannot dismiss the possibility that

scientists will achieve enough mastery over the human genome to wreak enormous damage –

biologically and politically.

Promoting a future of genetically engineered inequality legitimizes the vast existing injustices

that are socially arranged and enforced.  Marketing the ability to specify our childrenís

appearance and abilities encourages a grotesque consumerist mentality toward children and

all human life.  Fostering the notion that only a ‘perfect baby’ is worthy of life threatens our

solidarity with and support for people with disabilities, and perpetuates standards of perfection

set by a market system that caters to political, economic, and cultural elites.  Channeling hopes

for human betterment into preoccupation with genetic fixes shrinks our already withered

commitments to improving social conditions and enriching cultural and community life.

Germline engineering is now common in laboratory animals, though it remains at best an

imprecise technology, requiring hundreds of attempts before a viable engineered animal is

produced.  Human germline manipulation has not been attempted: The only kind of human

genetic procedures currently practiced involve efforts to ‘fix’ or substitute for the genes of

somatic (body) cells in people with health problems that in some way reflect the functions of

genes.

In about five hundred ‘gene therapy’ clinical trials since the early 1990s, doctors have tried to

introduce genetic modifications to patientsí lungs, nerves, muscles, and other tissues.  These

efforts have been largely unsuccessful.  In late 1999, their safety was also called starkly into

question by the death of an 18-year-old enrolled in a clinical trial, and by ensuing revelations of

almost 700 other ‘serious adverse effects’ that researchers and doctors had somehow failed to

report to the proper regulatory authorities.  Some observers have commented that gene

therapy would more accurately be called “genetic experiments on human subjects.”

Many people are reluctant to oppose human germline engineering because they believe that

‘genetics’ will deliver medical cures or treatments.  But there is no reason that we cannot forgo

germline engineering and still support other genetic technologies that do in fact hold promising

medical potential.  In fact, the medical justifications for human germline engineering are

strained, while its ethical and political risks are profound.

Fortunately, the distinction between human germline engineering and other genetic

technologies (including somatic genetic engineering) is a reasonably clear technical

demarcation.  In many countries, this demarcation is being drawn as law.  Legislation that

would ban human germline engineering and reproductive cloning is making its way through the

Canadian parliament.  Germany’s Embryo Protection Act of 1990 makes human cloning and

germline engineering criminal acts, and the Japanese legislature is considering establishing

prison terms for human cloning.  A number of other European countries forbid cloning and

germline engineering indirectly by outlawing non-therapeutic research on human embryos.

Twenty-two European countries have signed a Council of Europe bioethics convention that

includes similar restrictions.  In the United States, however, neither federal law nor policy

forbids human germline engineering or cloning, though federal funds cannot be used for any

kinds of human cloning experiments.

In order to bring the new human genetic technologies under social governance, strong political

pressure and a broad social movement will be necessary.  Though no such movement

currently exists, efforts to alert and engage a variety of constituencies are getting underway.

The movement that this work aims to catalyze will need to draw in a wide range of

constituencies, and encompass a variety of motivations.  Some participants will base their

opposition to a techno-eugenic future on their commitments to equality and justice, and to

human improvement through social change rather than technical fix.  Others will be moved by

the threats to human dignity and human rights, and the horror of treating children as

custom-made commodities, that germline engineering and cloning entail.  Still others will find

their primary inspiration in the precautionary principle, or their wariness of techno-scientific

hubris and a reductionist world view, or their objections to corporate ownership of life at the

molecular level, or their skepticism about the drastic technological manipulation of the natural

world.

It will be far easier to prevent a techno-eugenic future if we act before human germline

manipulation develops further, either as technology or ideology.  This is a crucial juncture: a

window that the campaign for human germline engineering is trying to slam shut.  Your

participation is urgently needed.

(A longer version of this article is forthcoming as ‘The Case Against Designer Babies: The

Politics of Genetic Enhancement,’ in Brian Tokar, ed.  Redesigning Life? The Worldwide

Challenge to Genetic Engineering, Zed Books.)

Slonca nie maja nad ludzmi litosci. Sa tak odmienne, tak przebiegle : od najjasniejszych do najwiekszych I wszystkie w stanie ulotnym,ze ledwie nadarzamy z naszymi elektronicznymi, sloniowatymi maszynkami. Zreszta slonca to straszni pozerzy, ktorzy nadymaja sie na nasz ludzki widok,a za plecami spuszczaja z wentyla I karlowacieja zniencka,aby zapasc sie pod materie I dalej nawet nie wiem co sie dzieje I wole nie wiedziec. A moze powinienem. Moze powienienem sie bac,ze wiatr sloneczny naszej prywatnej bomby wodorowej trzymanej helem w kupie z helem wygra, przbije pasy van allena przedrze sie przez atmosfere I zwegli moje tak przydatne ramiona I seksi lydki w czasie opalania na plazy albo orki, bo nie zwrocilem uwagi na to – co stalo sie z Ikarem. Jeszcze tragiczniejsza wersja to zmierzch elektroniki w ulamku sekundy I nagle okaze sie,ze nikt nie wie ile I komu wisi pieniedzy, wszystkie domy I mieszkania stana sie splcone z dnia na dzien, bo nie bedzie, jak wyslac I wyliczyc elektronicznych rachunkow. Moze te samoloty tak lataja po calym swiecie I rozpylaja aluminiom, bo aluminium utlenione ma ladunek ujemny I jest to jakies uziemienie,a moze izolator nie wiem, nie wnikme.Znowu moze ten pyl aluminiowy rozpylany w powietrzu to sztuczny pas Van Allena, trzeci,ale juz w naszej atmosferze,ktory dzielnie walczy z fotonami. Jedno miasto juz kiedys wysiadlo w Kanadzie z powodu “przebicia” z kosmosu , trzy dni naprawiali zanim stala sie swiatlosc ta nasza..z elektrowni – samorobka. Tego samego obawiano sie w Chinach niedawno, bo duzo zalezy od tego czyja buzia chinska, czy brazylijska na przyklad Ziemia akurat sie opala. I musze podziekowac tym panom,ktorzy kopijuja moje pisanie na komputerze,ze przestali mi przeszkadzac, bo moze ich zainteresowalem ? To milo, jak klawiatura nie traci liter, spacji I teksty nie znikaja, jak wsciekle duchy tesciowej na widok jalowego seksu z jej corka na stole w kuchni.

Chyba odszedlem od tematu. Glod. Mysle o kuchni. Tak – slonca nie mozna bagatelizowac ,99,9% procent “materii” w naszym ukladzie slonecznym to nasza bomba wodorowa – uczesana w swastyge – bo swastyga to wykres ruchy wiatrow slonecznych w granicach slonca,albowiem fakt, ze jadro kresi sie szybciej niz powierzchnia powoduje prady wiatrow slonecznych z cyklicznymi wyladowniami…co iles tam tysiecy lat. Do tego trzeba jeszcze dodac, ze nasze slonce karlowacieje I moze dlatego jest coraz zimniej…hmmm…Al Gore to wielki czlowiek,ze nam tak stara sie dodac otuchy, zaklada na nas ten globalny kozuch globalnego ocieplenia – szkoda ,ze tylko w wyobrazni,ale zawsze cos. I skoro slonce maleje – to czemu na Marsie sa piramidy I maja to samo rozstawienie co pirmaidy w Gizie …jezeli slonce bylo jeszcze niedawno wieksze – naturalnym sie wydaje,ze zycie na Ziemi bylo niemozliwe…i wtedy mieszkalismy na czwartej planecie od wiekszego wtedy slonca , bo jak kurczaki w wylegrani nasze bilogiczne zycie wymaga bardzo konkretnych warunkow, aby istniec. Nas na Ziemie zaimportowano na zmywak. I to wszystko z powodu jaj,ktore wyprawia Slonce. Ile lat zanim nasza cywilizacja bedzie mieszkac na Venus… o to by byly juz jaja – mieszkac na planecie na ktorej dzien jest dluzszy od roku. Nikt nie chciallby isc do wiezienia ani do szkoly nawet na jeden dzien. Lenie. Kto by glosowal na PO, jakby wszyscy byli tylko w pracy ? Policjantow nie licze – to musi byc hobby. Rozpisalem sie, a oczy od notebooka bola. Tak wiec nie nalezy bagatelizowac slonca – mimo,ze ono samo sie bagatelizuje w naszym ukladzie slonecznym I pisze to wszystko z jednego powodu. Zastanawialem sie nad zagadnieniem filozoficznym – a mianowicie : czyl ludzki intelekt jest w stanie, przy niepoliczonej ilosci slonc we wszechswiecie w swojej wyobrazni zaprojektowac niepoliczona ilosc motyk potrzebnych do rzucenia sie na nie ? I jaka jest potrzebna motyka na nasza zaplatana swastyge na nieboskolonie I jaka bedzie reakcjia motyki z naszym sloncem ? Czy te samoloty nie sa przypadkiem nasza ludzka motyka,albowiem zdecydowanie musi to byc najdrozsza operacja w dziejach ludzkosci. Jechalem nie tak dawno przez wiecej nie polowe Ameryki I liczylem smugi, samoloty, ilosc aluminium I innych zwiazkow rozpylanych w powietrzu, ilosc zalog w kazdym samolocie, ich stwaki godzionwe oraz stawki cen metali na gieldach oraz ich fabrykacja w stan, ktory mozna rozpylic I wyszly mi biliony dolarow w skali swiata. Z wrazenia w Ohio omal nie wjechalem do rowu,ale te smugi dzialaly na mnie , jak Peee-Owcee na niebie, takie barany, ktore sie liczy, aby zasnac. I nawet nie dziwie sie juz,ze ludzie wybieraja latwiejszy cel I rzucaja sie z motyka na Slonce Peru. Tylko ja sie pytam PO CO ? To juz dawno jest karzel – przez ptaki obsranej faszystowsko-komunistycznej rewolucji dla panowania Londynu. Tego ostatniego zdania mialem nie napisac,ale znowu nie potrafilem, nie byc soba. Polska urodzila sie na Slasku i to sobie Tusk zapamietaj.

CZY CYGANIE Z PO TO NAPRAWDE HINDUSI ?

REAL ID
As REAL ID looms, states revise driver’s license laws
Published 18 February 2011

States must be in compliance by May with the regulations laid out in the 2005 REAL ID Act; the law, a recommendation of the 9/11 commission that investigated the 2001 terror attacks, creates a national security standard for state-issued identification cards to be used for purposes like boarding airplanes and entering federal buildings; REAL ID, originally intended as a counterterrorism tool, has had an unintended side effect that has won support of immigration enforcement advocates — it requires driver’s licenses issued to immigrants to expire at the same time as their stay in the United States, invalidating the licenses of immigrants who overstay their visas; states that allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses are now revising their laws as a federal deadline for REAL ID approaches

It’s got to start somewhere. So they are introducing  REAL ID.

The last three states to allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses — Washington, New Mexico, and Utah — are now steeped in battles to revise their laws as a federal deadline approaches for all fifty states to issue identity cards that meet a new national standard.

States must be in compliance by May with the regulations laid out in the 2005 REAL ID Act. The law, a recommendation of the 9/11 commission that investigated the 2001 terror attacks, creates a national security standard for state-issued identification cards to be used for purposes like boarding airplanes and entering federal buildings.

Fox News reports that REAL ID, originally intended as a counterterrorism tool, has had an unintended side effect that has won support of immigration enforcement advocates — it requires driver’s licenses issued to immigrants to expire at the same time as their stay in the United States, invalidating the licenses of immigrants who overstay their visas.

“You are making (it) very difficult for them to assimilate,” said Janice Kephart, director of national security policy at the Center for Immigration Studies said of illegal immigrants. “The inability to assimilate plus enforcement will drive a natural attrition over time.”

Christian Gleim, director of policy and communications at the Coalition for Secure Driver’s License, said the regulations, combined with more than $100 million in grants to states, have already led to “remarkable improvements” in driver’s license procedures in more than forty states and Washington, D.C.

“The most important improvements have been in increasing scrutiny of identity claims by applicants,” Gleim said. “In addition to making it more difficult for foreign terrorists to get state issued driver’s license and IDs, it has made it much more difficult for common criminals to game the system.

As a result, thousands of imposters have been detained by police and hundreds have been prosecuted and convicted.”

Not everyone is sold on the idea that “national ID standards” will serve as a deterrent to illegal immigration.

Illegal immigrants “didn’t come here for a driver’s license,” said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), who nonetheless praised the move toward tighter driver’s license rules but argued it will not fix the broken immigration system.

“One reason why we have such large scale illegal immigration is because we’ve made it so easy. … We say, ‘Don’t come to the U.S. but as long as you’re here, we’ll give you what everybody else has,’” Mehlman said.

Immigration advocates are pushing for a repeal of the REAL ID Act, saying the license programs for undocumented workers provide public safety because unlicensed drivers usually do not carry auto insurance.

“The most common argument you hear against it is it’s an argument of attrition — if we make their lives miserable, the undocumented will go away,” said Christine Neumann-Ortiz, director of Voces de la Frontera.

“I think that argument doesn’t stand up to reality when you look at states like California where a majority of undocumented immigrants have had no access to driver’s licenses,” she said. “The undocumented do not go away. The only consequence of those state policies is you have more unlicensed, uninsured drivers on the road because by and large, public transportation is not as convenient as it is in other parts of the world.”

Fox News notes that many states, including Maryland, Michigan, Oregon, Wisconsin, and Hawaii, have repealed laws enabling illegal immigrants to acquire licenses, and experts say harder line approaches toward illegal immigration in Arizona and elsewhere has pushed illegals into states with lower thresholds for enforcement.

Melissa Savage of the National Conference of State Legislatures, said it is possible that some states could begin offering a two-tiered licensing system so illegal immigrants can still have driving privileges.

“If you go back to the core reason for driver’s licenses and making sure people have a record, if that’s a priority, that’s the one reason,” she said.

As for the remaining states that allow illegal immigrants to obtain licenses, all three are working on new legislation.

After a surge in applications from out-of-state illegal immigrants, Washington late last year tightened its requirements for issuing driver’s licenses in an effort to reduce the number of people who acquired them fraudulently. Now, the Democratic-controlled Senate is considering a bill that would require applicants for driver’s licenses to prove they are in the country legally. The bill is under review in the Senate Transportation Committee.

In Utah, which last year became the only state to offer a special class of driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants, the Republican-controlled Senate is considering a bill that would eliminate the state’s driving privilege card by the end of the year. The card, which doesn’t allow people to board a plane, get a job or buy alcohol, is held by nearly 42,000 illegal immigrants since the statehouse established the option six years ago largely to provide a way for non-citizens to obtain auto insurance.

In the Democratic-controlled New Mexico Legislature, a House committee last week rejected, on a party-line vote, a bill that would have allowed illegal immigrants to have annually renewable driving permits, which would not serve as a form of identification. Democrats on the committee supported the effort to shelve the bill, effectively dooming it for the session.

New Mexico Republican Gov. Susana Martinez, who did not support the bill, said she wants legislation that would stop the licensing practice and cancel more than 80,000 licenses given by the state to foreign nationals. The state contends it doesn’t know how many of the licenses have gone to illegal immigrants because it does not ask the immigration status of license applicants.