New Rule

If you post an Attack on

any scientific principle, , Compelling and Reasoned theory or

Natural Explanation of the Universe

Replacing it with a Supernatural Explanation

You MUST be Prepared

to Offer EQUAL, Compelling and reasoned


FOR YOUR Position with:


Empirical Results of Repeatable






The Management


Happy Darwin Day

Tomorrow is ‘Darwin Day’

Darwin Day is a global celebration of science and reason held on or around Feb. 12, the birthday anniversary of evolutionary biologist Charles Darwin.   Charles Darwin was born  in 1809 and first published his ‘On the Origin of Species’  on November 24, 1859

Darwin’s book introduced the scientific theory that populations evolve over the course of generations through a process of natural selection. It presented a body of evidence that the diversity of life arose by common descent through a branching pattern of evolution.

Today the Theory of Evolution still stands very strong…despite all the lying rhetoric constantly thrown at  it by religious creationist types.


Jesus is a Hoax

Jesus is a hoax.  How can I say that? Pretty easily it turns out.  I can say that because I follow a chain of logic from a known fact.

Evolution is a fact.  Lots of people in America want to ignore this, and many choose to try and disprove it by using junk science and holding on to beliefs that were long ago discredited.  There are those who denounce and scream that it cannot be true because it removes the need for a God and His dogma, something they just know is right and true, despite the lack of any proof whatsoever.

You don’t get to vote on evolution…which a lot of evangelical Christians think they can do and make it go away. Evolution is real science and is not really a “theory” anymore, though the title ‘Theory of Evolution’ will remain because that’s the way science works.  The fundamentalist Christians attempts to discredit evolution and teach their phony alternatives, “Creation Science” or “Intelligent Design”, in schools is a total failure and it is recognized by most intelligent people as just religious doctrine posing as science.

Science moves forward on the basis of testable, repeatable, and reviewable evidence, religion however has no evidence behind it and depends wholly on the non-questioning faith of its adherents.  Any teacher who tries to teach faith-based dogma in a science class is clearly not suited to be a teacher. Our leadership in science and technology cannot be subservient to anyone’s religious persuasions.

Evolution today presents a major conundrum to Christianity and it’s dominate dogma of original sin and the blood atonement of Jesus.  Just believe in Jesus and your ‘sins’ are washed away.  Well that Jesus may or may not be reality.  We know that evolution could not produce a single parent couple through which we all descended; this is predictable from the way we know evolution works.  Additionally there is the DNA and archaeological evidence totally backing this up.

This is what gets the ball rolling.  These simple proofs that there was NO Adam and Eve is what gives lie to the whole Bible. If there is NO Adam and Eve, as described in the Bible and this is surely fact, then there is surely NO fall and the subsequent original sin, and it is original sin that the whole Christian shtick is based on.  If there were NO original sin then there is no need for redemption; if there is NO need for redemption then there is no need for Jesus, If there is no need for Jesus…what use is the story of a crucifixion and resurrection?  Besides lacking any contemporaneous proofs at all, the whole story reeks of Bronze Age myth.  Are we still to believe in gods that demand blood sacrifice?  Haven’t we grown past this medieval, dark ages reasoning?  I know I have.

Religions problems with science are many and varied. Evolution tells us the earth, biosphere, animals, and humans evolved in a certain way and on a schedule of sorts. It makes predictions of what is to be found and how things will work.  Genesis has stories that conflict with known science.  We know in fair detail how and when the universe came into being, how and when our earth came into existence, and how and when humans came to inhabit our planet.

If you claim to be an intelligent member of modern society do you still believe in magic and demons, witches, devils, imps, goblins, incubuses, succubus’s, wraiths, unicorns, etc.?  Christians do, and of course in the dark ages the churches killed people who they thought were witches or devils and such and those who denied some of the Bibles more egregious blunders.

The primal reason Evolution is giving Christians so much grief is of course that evolution says the Christian creation story is just flat wrong…it never happened that way and the first two chapters of Genesis are totally wrong…the story is not factual in any way.  We know how dinosaurs and other land animals, plants, insects, birds, fish, humans, etc. came into being and we know it was not by ex-nihilo creation by some Bronze Age god.

Evolution could not, did not, produce a single mother and father of all future humans, so there was no Adam and no Eve. And with this now known to be fact the Christians have to really rethink their beliefs and decide where they are to go from here on. There is no voting on this…we do not get to choose what we want to be reality.  What is real and true is truth, no matter what some goat herders wrote a few thousand years ago.

John Schneider, former teacher of theology at Calvin College in Michigan says it’s time to face facts:

“There was no historical Adam and Eve, no serpent, no apple, no fall that toppled man from a state of innocence. Evolution makes it pretty clear that in nature, and in the moral experience of human beings, there never was any such paradise to be lost. So Christians, I think, have a challenge, have a job on their hands to reformulate some of their tradition about human beginnings.”

. . funny pictures - Schrodinger:
see more Lolcats and funny pictures, and check out our Socially Awkward Penguin lolz!

Migratory Humans in North America

Very interesting site with a long list of dates and probable happenings up and down the Mexican, California, Oregon, Washington, and British Colombian coast from a Veeerryyy long time ago. Evidences of Man/Women traveling around this part of the planet from more than 20,000 years ago…way more. The Chinese, Japanese, and other Asiatic people were no doubt visiting and settling in North America, long before the white Europeans came to the East coast.

I don’t think the last story has been written about the many travels and accomplishments of ancient man/women across the time stream of this earth.

The Biblical story of human Genesis purported to be some 6,000 years ago in the Middle East has occupied and limited our vision for way too much time.  It has caused so much doubt of what the scientists have been saying for hundreds of years. We need to listen to them, as they are telling the real story of humanity.

Humans have accomplished so much more than a lot of people think. We have traveled the globe from early on; invented so much, so early on, but religion keeps trying to hold us back, to stop the advances, to saddle us with non-existent magic and supernatural and demons and the sins (?) of our fore-fathers.

Well anyway, check out the site when you have time, it has some really interesting time-lines. When you come across the geological sea level data, think about all the Native American flood myths.

For latest post go: Here

Add to Technorati Favorites

Answer to…Science, Religion Definately Don’t Mix

Hi empy, Thank you for your reply.

I hope you don’t mind if I made a column for my answer to your reply :-} Better writing tools and more room here.

You wrote:
>>As a Bible believer I have absolutely no difficulty to believe that the Universe is millions of years old. After all. where does the Bible give a date to creation? The word ‘day’ in Genesis can not mean twenty four hour day as our Sun came into the scene on the forth day of creation.<<

Would you believe BILLIONS of years? The Universe is probably at least 14 billion years old, and the earth 4 billion or so. Some theists think that the Biblical creation “days” refer to periods of million of our years’

You wrote”
>>According to the Bible the univers came first, then only on the forth stage of creation our Sun and Moon come into existence(Gen.1:16). Then came plant life and later animals came into existence. My Bible says that man came to the scene only at the end. To me this is basically agreement between modern science and the ancient piece of writing which the Bible is.<<

Excerpt from KJV, Genesis 1: 9-19

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Plants came before the Sun in the Bible, and in the real world, the sun came before earth. I’ve often wondered about that. If these “days” were millions of years, how did the plants survive until the sun was created? If the creation time were actual 24-hour days that would make more sense, at least the plants would make it. But then, that would make the Geological evidence WAY off.

You wrote:
>>The date of Adam and Eve can not be traced from genealogy in Genesis as the Bible often skips generations when it comes to genealogy , as Christ is called ‘son of David’, and the age of man on earth is surely much more than 6000 years. But it can not be millions of years as no trace of modern civilized man is there on the face of the earth going back to that time.<<

Allegorical reference to Jesus as the “son of David” The Bible lists in two places the genealogy that comes from David and leads to Jesus…They don’t agree on the lineage by the way.

Yes, there are traces of modern humans going back well over 100,000 years. In a cave on Mount Carmel, (Kebara cave) in the holy land, there are bones and artifacts of modern humans as well as Neanderthals. The human traces go back at least 50,000 years, the Neanderthal 100,000 years.

Many bones and artifacts have been found in Africa, and indeed over a lot of the earth, of intermediate humanoid forms that walked upright, made and used tools, and had social groups. They weren’t quite human, but they weren’t apes either. These date back at least 2 million years, although some argue for at least 3.5 million years.

IBM and the National Geographic Society teamed up a few years ago and started taking DNA samples from people around the word. Early findings are showing that ALL modern humans alive today can trace their ancestors to Africa, primarily Ethiopia and Namibia, and most all the lines go back about 200,000 years.

You wrote:
>>The Bible says that Cain built the first city (Gen.4:7). He was the second generation of modern civilized man. Tell us where is the earliest trace of human settlement on the face of the earth? <<

Well Cain was kicked out of Adam and Eve’s cave at a time when there were no other humans on the earth; according to the Bible. He married soon. Who did he marry? Some believe it was one of his many sisters. He went on to build a city…with whom? Maybe the Neanderthal’s, or most probably the other Homo-Sapiens roaming around then. There were human settlements everywhere 4000 years ago or 10,000 years ago, or longer.

There is tremendous information lying around on the earth to witness humans inhabiting the whole planet tens of thousands of years ago. Not a year goes by without at least one or two new archaeological finds pushing these dates back many years.

You wrote:
>>It may be of interest to you that the Bible does not concern itself withn pre-Adamic human race/s. The Bible only concerns itself with modern civilized man who occupies the present earth.<<

Yeah, that always bothered me. Was God denying his Neanderthal creations back then? They go back 250,00 years. There were plenty of them. They were spread all over Europe and the Mediterranean. They buried there dead, often with grave goods, flowers, personal artifacts, etc., so I’m thinking—they were thinking. That is they were reasoning, tool making, fire making, family grouping, humanoids …What’s up with God denying them?

Now if you are a conservative evangelical type person, you will of course deny that we can date old stuff, or they are lies. Nothing I can do about that, but if your books or ministers are telling you science lies…I think I would look a little further. Most conservative evangelical types I know, and I know at least 50, ignore evidence, because to read and cogitate on it would make themselves question their faith, and I think that is sad.

Anyway, I thank you kindly for taking your time to reply to me, and I wish you all the best.

Add to Technorati Favorites

New Intelligent Design…BaaaD Science

“We often refuse to accept an idea merely because the tone of voice in which it has been expressed is unsympathetic to us.” Nietzsche

The creationist and Intelligent Design pushers continue their desperate fight against science and rationalism. The recent sample I came across is filled with doublespeak and lies disguised as truths. It will be available the end of this month from Tate Publishing Co.There will three books in the series and they carve up Evolution and call it the ‘old physics of cause and effect.’ Seemingly aimed at the High School market, the excerpts I read made me more confused than I already am:)

Chapter 3 Book 1 The Quest for Right
The Agency of Revitalization

“The fact-finding investigation concentrates on the importance of the earth’s inner heat and reveals the hitherto unknown mechanism of said heat. The surprise findings, taken from the pages of the Bible, tighten the reins on those theorists who permitted their imaginations to slip past the boundaries of true science, beyond the pale of investigation. The vain assertions of geologists are pitted against classical physics, the old physics of cause and effect, and the scientific record of creation, the Bible.”

And this, from Chapter 4 Book 3
Filing Fictions Away
” The outlined premises, based on the dictates of classical physics, justify the disposition that the scientific record of creation, heretofore considered religious dogma by obstructionists and not worthy of scientific regard, remains intact as a responsible and verifiable truth; the evidence upholds the fact that the moon was formed within a 24-hour period only 6000 years ago. The conceptional errors of Baldwin are annulled by the bona fide truths presented by the investigation.”

Now of course I have only read excerpts from the authors page, and I may be wrong, but it seems to me that he is saying that magic is the new science. This is going to screw up more teen-age brains than all the pot in California.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Intelligent Design Pushers LIE

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” — Stephen Roberts

Immediately below is excerpted from Discovery institute website, retrieved on 01.05.08. Their address is:

” Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated)
By: Staff
Discovery Institute
July 1, 2007

Editor’s Note: Critics of intelligent design often claim that design advocates don’t publish their work in appropriate scientific literature. For example, Barbara Forrest, a philosophy professor at Southeastern Louisiana University, was quoted in USA Today (March 25, 2005) that design theorists “aren’t published because they don’t have scientific data.”
Other critics have made the more specific claim that design advocates do not publish their works in peer-reviewed scientific journals-as if such journals represented the only avenue of legitimate scientific publication.” end excerpt

Then they go on to list some ‘religious science’ that got peer review in the scientific arena. Among them is this jewel:

Begin excerpt again. “Stephen Meyer, “The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories” Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 117 (2004): 213-239.

Meyer argues that competing materialistic models (Neo-Darwinism, Self -Organization Models, Punctuated Equilibrium and Structuralism) are not sufficient to account for origin of the information necessary to build novel animal forms present in the Cambrian Explosion. He proposes intelligent design as an alternative explanation for the origin of biological information and the higher taxa.” End of excerpt

Well this is great for the ID movement that the Discovery Institute not only backs, but actively pushes on schools and people. They finally got an article published in a scientific journal….but….
….Not long after the article was published, an embarrassed Council of the ‘Biological Society of Washington’ comes out with this statement

excerpt follows from Biological Society of Washingtom

“The paper by Stephen C. Meyer, “The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories,” in vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 213-239 of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, was published at the discretion of the former editor, Richard v. Sternberg. Contrary to typical editorial practices, the paper was published without review by any associate editor; Sternberg handled the entire review process. The Council, which includes officers, elected councilors, and past presidents, and the associate editors would have deemed the paper inappropriate for the pages of the Proceedings because the subject matter represents such a significant departure from the nearly purely systematic content for which this journal has been known throughout its 122-year history. For the same reason, the journal will not publish a rebuttal to the thesis of the paper, the superiority of intelligent design (ID) over evolution as an explanation of the emergence of Cambrian body-plan diversity. The Council endorses a resolution on ID published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (,** see below, which observes that there is no credible scientific evidence supporting ID as a testable hypothesis to explain the origin of organic diversity. Accordingly, the Meyer paper does not meet the scientific standards of the Proceedings.” End of excerpt Their address is:

excerpt from American Association for the Advancement of Science
** “Over the past several years proponents of so-called “intelligent design theory,” also known as ID, have challenged the accepted scientific theory of biological evolution. As part of this effort they have sought to introduce the teaching of “intelligent design theory” into the science curricula of the public schools. The movement presents “intelligent design theory” to the public as a theoretical innovation, supported by scientific evidence, that offers a more adequate explanation for the origin of the diversity of living organisms than the current scientifically accepted theory of evolution. In response to this effort, individual scientists and philosophers of science have provided substantive critiques of “intelligent design,” demonstrating significant conceptual flaws in its formulation, a lack of credible scientific evidence, and misrepresentations of scientific facts. Approved by the AAAS Board of Directors on 10/18/02″

Recognizing that the “intelligent design theory” represents a challenge to the quality of science education, the Board of Directors of the AAAS unanimously adopts the following resolution: ” excerpt ends. It goes on to basically say that ID is not science, never will be, keep it out of our public schools.
The full statement can be read here:

What this little exercise in ‘investigative blogging’ is showing me, is that the Discovery Institute, as of 01.05.08, is knowingly passing off what they know to be rebutted, as mainstream science. In other words-they lie.

Gives me an all warm and fuzzy feeling when the pastor lies to me.

Peace to all

Fair use doctrine material included and credited.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Intelligent Design or Creationism

“It ain’t the parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand.” – Mark Twain

Aha, the challenge is taken up. I just love arguments like this. It’s what makes the Internet great. More he said, he said.

He Said: With many years experience as a biologist, creationist, ex-evolutionist, and teacher, I wonder what special knowledge that …name deleted…. And thewordofme have for making such irresponsible statements.

Well sir, I have no special knowledge. I’m semi-literate, as I admit to on my blog’s About page. My claim to knowledge about this subject is that I am a voracious reader. For over 45 years these subjects of creation, religion, God myths, and lately the rise of the Young Earth Creationists, and it’s offshoots Intelligent Design and The Discovery Institute. In matters of science I tend to believe scientists over preachers. In matters of a magic creature, I tend to believe in scientists…i.e…no such thing.

He said: If either of you had any conviction in the veracity of the myth of evolution, you would be unafraid to have it exposed and scrutinized in the classroom f or fear of it being exposed as the fraud that it remains.

Certainly sir, I have no fear about that, but there’s a problem….most of the scientists are busy sciencing, and have probably gone through this many times, and are too busy to go through it again. Having said that, there have been many debates on the subject and I expect there will be more. Science always wins because religion has to fall back on ‘magic’ and that’s not allowed in science.

He said: A sure sign of the desperation of evolutionists is typified by statements like yours that make blatant, unsubstantiated claims as if saying so makes it right. Your ploy is “When all else fails, then deny”.

I admit nothing I deny nothing. Get that rubber hose away from me. Boy, you talk about ‘unsubstantiated claims’.

He said: What is especially shameful is that you would deny students the rare opportunity to become active participants in an important contemporary controversy and allowing them participation in the scientific process of weighing the evidence and drawing their own conclusions. It is not only unscrupulous and unconscionable, but terribly bad science.

I really have to think you are kidding in this paragraph. If, in fact you are a teacher, you will/would realize the inanity of what you are saying. First of all this is not ‘an important contemporary controversy’… it has been settled many times. Secondly: the ‘terrible bad science’ you mention, would come from you. Thirdly: the unscrupulousness would be coming from you.

Science class in school is for science subjects. I would NOT like your religion pushed upon my kids. I sure you would feel the same about mine.

Religion classes belong in church or a separate, elective class in school. The constitution alludes to this.

For someone to preach to our young kids in school that the Earth is only 6,000 to 8,000 years old and men were roaming the land with dinosaurs, and that the whole Earth was flooded at one time when God was angry with us is pure foolishness. The evidence is right in front of us and it is NOT what you believe on faith.

Add to Technorati Favorites