Okay, Macie's dream skeerd me.
Can I use it as an excuse to be lazy and delay my goal to "run", not walk, a 5k? Nah, the weather's nice...it's time to get active. I'll carry mace...and hone up on my kick ass skills.
Her dream reminded me of the time my husband and I actually experienced the real life version.
The "incident" happened on July 4th of '93. My sister and her husband lived in an apartment complex very near the university here in Topeka. Unfortunately, the neighborhood was not as stellar as it was when we were attending college. There was a time when we could roam the neighborhood around the university and the bar district without any worries, but it took a turn over the years, and '93 was the year when the neighborhood was starting to get ugly. Today, they've torn down most of the area and have rebuilt a large portion of it.
Anyway, the university always had an awesome 4th of July fireworks display, and my husband and I went with a group of friends to enjoy the festivities. Afterward we stopped at a few of the old hangouts, and then everyone decided to shoot off fireworks at the tennis court behind my sister's apartment complex. My husband and I lingered behind the rest of the group for some reason...I think we stopped to talk to some friends or something. So, when we finally headed behind the building, we were alone. I remember a guy standing at the corner of the building looking a bit menacing which gave me a steadily escalating sense of foreboding as we rounded the corner of the building.
We had to walk down one street and turn a corner onto another to get into the tennis courts. Out of nowhere, a group of about eight black men appeared behind us, and they were decreasing the distance between their group and us *very* rapidly. I'm thinking, "okay, we're about to get into some serious shit...what to do". A sense of panic was taking over, but I tried to remain as calm as possible when the group split and started walking on both sides of us. Small talk ensued...turning ugly quickly...I glance at the upcoming street corner and knew my friends would not be able to see us until we walked up a grassy hill to the courts. I was thinking...there's no chance we can out fight all eight of them, so maybe I can out run them?? I only had to make it up the hill to be spotted by the rest of our group, and I probably wouldn't have made it that far except for the fact that they were much more interested in taking down my husband than messing with me at the moment. They had no clue that the rest of our friends were so near.
So, as they were circling my husband and starting to throw punches, I ran like the devil, and hightailed it up the hill screaming at my sister and brother-in-law. Without hesitation, the two of them led the group barreling down the hill like mighty Vikings...my brother-in-law is a 6'4", 250 lb. native Norwegian who looks quite intimidating if you're planning on trying to deck him. My sister is a couple inches taller than me, putting her right at 6', and she used to arm wrestle the football players in college...and win. I kid you not. So, at least we had some fair defense against whatever we were heading into. Me?...I was scared shitless at this point, but my sister evidently knows no fear. She ran right into the group of them and started swinging and scolding them like they were 3-year olds. I could not freaking believe it. Adrenaline rush, I guess. I was worried about weapons being drawn, and was really relieved when the surprise of our friends rushing down the hill scared them off. They ran down the street, and my husband was left with only a few scratches.
Needless to say, we left the area...never to return, and my sister and her husband found a new neighborhood to call their own shortly after the incident.
Afterward, we were trying to figure out why on earth they targeted *us*. We found out that that particular day, the Topeka Capital Journal had published an article about the Ku Klux Klan. I can't remember what the article was about, but it triggered some serious anger in those folks, and I remember them mentioning the Klan when they were talking to us. I guess they were going to take out their anger on us. I still wince when thinking about what could have happened had our friends not been close by. Ugh...
Random violence...it sucks.
Friday, February 29, 2008
See! I wasn't kidding...
...Topeka weather was horrible this winter!
From here:
Now, I realize that this is nothing compared to what some of you have to put up with, but for this Topekan, it's more than I'm used to.
From here:
What this cold, wet mess of a winter all adds up to...
633,559: City street division's weather-related costs since Nov. 21, including labor and materials.
$73,417: Cost of sand, salt and liquid chloride the city has used since Jan. 1.
1,535: Tons of salt the city has used since Jan. 1.
6,677: Tons of salt and sand mix the city has used since Jan. 1.
130: Tons of sand the city has on hand.
1,280: Tons of salt and sand mix the city has on hand.
9,000 to 10,000: Tons of salt and sand mix the county has used since Dec. 1.
7,500 to 8,000: Tons of salt and sand mix the county used from Dec. 1, 2006, to Feb. 28, 2007.
18: Times the county has treated roads since Dec. 1, compared to five times last winter.
101,000: Tons of sand KDOT used in January and December. The average for an entire year is 98,825.
87,000: Tons of salt KDOT used in January and December. The average for an entire year is 93,977.
31.7: Inches of snowfall since Dec. 1, the fourth-highest December-to-February total on record.
15.4: Average inches of snowfall from December to February.
8.11: Inches of precipitation since Dec. 1, the wettest December-to-February total on record.
17: Days since Dec. 1 in which the high temperature was below freezing.
67: Days since Dec. 1 in which the temperature was both above and below freezing.
Minus 6: Lowest temperature this winter, recorded Jan. 19. The high that day was 15.
68: Highest temperature this winter, recorded Feb. 4. The low that day was 34.
12: Days since Dec. 1 in which the temperature dropped to single digits or lower.
2: Days since Dec. 1 in which the temperature dropped below zero.
46: Days since Dec. 1 with snow on the ground (including days with just a trace).
3: Days until next forecasted snowfall by the National Weather Service (a 20 percent chance on Monday).
Now, I realize that this is nothing compared to what some of you have to put up with, but for this Topekan, it's more than I'm used to.
Gorgeous Day!!
It's Friday...it's leap day, and we're going to finally experience a nice day, weather wise, in Topeka!!!!
Yes!
It's suppose to be even warmer this weekend...might hit 65 degrees.
Halle..freaking..luiah!!!
This great news calls for an early morning hit of caffeine!!! I'm having one of these today. Yes, yes, I know I'm trying to give them up, but I still have 2 left in my frig to get rid of before I attempt the 3-day "fast". God help me, I'll probably drop dead after that first day without food, but I'm going to give it a try.
Yes!
It's suppose to be even warmer this weekend...might hit 65 degrees.
Halle..freaking..luiah!!!
This great news calls for an early morning hit of caffeine!!! I'm having one of these today. Yes, yes, I know I'm trying to give them up, but I still have 2 left in my frig to get rid of before I attempt the 3-day "fast". God help me, I'll probably drop dead after that first day without food, but I'm going to give it a try.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Considering a Fast
I've tried in vain to give up my energy drinks...they run between $1-2 per drink. Between my drinking habit and my husband's smoking habit, I figure we could save about $120 a month and $1,440 a year.
Hubby has tried every smoking cure out there except hypnosis, but we'd even try that at this point. Mr. FtK turned 43 in December, and I'll be turning 43 March 6th...right around the corner. Ugh... Forty-three sounds old, and we're both starting to consider our health more seriously.
I think I might try a 3-day fast starting March 1st. I've never fasted before, but they say it's a good way to give your digestive system a break...a cleansing, I guess. Whatever...I'm just hoping it might stimulate me to get back to heathier eating habits. This winter has been so long and dreary that I've indulged in more goodies than I usually do. I've always been conscientious about my health, and I enjoy working out, but I've been lax in this respect as well this winter.
The weather finally seems to be turning around just a bit, so I think I should be able to get out on my walking route again soon. Our church is doing a 5k next month, and they provided a little pamphlet titled "The Couch to 5k Running Plan". I grabbed one, and I think I might work along this schedule to get back to running rather than walking most of my 3 mile route.
I've asked for a new pair of jogging shoes for my birthday, so I should be all set to give it a go.
I'll blog about my fast...if I gather the courage to give it a shot. March 1st is Saturday...yikes...I better start talking myself into it!
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
The Never Ending Saga
For the past few weeks, I've grown utterly bored with the whole ID/evolution debate. I'm at the point where I've heard every argument over and over and over, and I still think the Darwinists are living in the Twilight Zone. How they dismiss ID is simply beyond me.
Interestingly enough, Casey Luskin has posted an article that I'd thought about writing myself. If you've had any experience carrying on dialogue about Intelligent Design with a hard core Darwinist, you've no doubt run across every one of their standard lame arguments more than once.
If you have not had the pleasure of debating the issues with our dear Darwin supporters, here is the type of dialogue you have to look forward to.
Interestingly enough, Casey Luskin has posted an article that I'd thought about writing myself. If you've had any experience carrying on dialogue about Intelligent Design with a hard core Darwinist, you've no doubt run across every one of their standard lame arguments more than once.
If you have not had the pleasure of debating the issues with our dear Darwin supporters, here is the type of dialogue you have to look forward to.
A Picture of Peter
Remember Anne Frank's teenage crush on "Peter"? It seems a picture of Peter has turned up after all these years.
From the article.
From the article.
Michaelis is now 81 and was recently re-reading the famous diary, when he suddenly realized there were no known photos of his former best friend. Shuffling through his own pictures gathered over a lifetime, the senior found the momento given to him so long ago and donated it to the Anne Frank museum, which has released it publicly for the very first time.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
We know nothing about brain evolution
From here:
But he [Richard Lewontin] had an even more sobering message, summed up in the title of his talk - "Why we know nothing about the evolution of cognition". He systematically dismissed every assumption about the evolution of human thought, reaching the conclusion that scientists are still completely in the dark about how natural selection prompted the massive hike in human brain size in the human line.
The main problem is the poor fossil record. Despite a handful of hominid fossils stretching back 4m years or so, we can't be sure that any of them are on the main ancestral line to us. Many or all of them could have been evolutionary side branches.
Worse, the fossils we do have are difficult to interpret. "I don't have the faintest idea what the cranial capacity [of a fossil hominid] means," Lewontin confessed. What does a particular brain size tell us about the capabilities of the animal attached to it?
He is even sceptical that palaeoanthropologists can be sure which species walked upright and which dragged their knuckles. Upright posture is crucial for freeing up the hands to do other useful things.
He is also not convinced that we can use current selective forces to infer what natural selection was doing to our ancestors. He used the example of the butterfly wing. The smallest wings provide no lift at all and so could not have been selected originally for flight. One idea is that they started off as structures to regulate body temperature and were later adapted by natural selection for lift. Maybe something like that happened for human brain size.
All in all, despite thousands of scientific papers and countless National Geographic front covers, we have not made much progress in understanding how our most complicated and mysterious organ came about.
"We are in very serious difficulties in trying to reconstruct the evolution of cognition," said Lewontin. "I'm not even sure what we mean by the problem."
Friday, February 22, 2008
Extreme Mom Strike
I can't say I don't empathize with this women...to a degree.
It seems Ms. Dean went off the deep end when her four boys were running the household in what appears to have been a boys-gone-wild atmosphere:
The article doesn't mention the father, so perhaps he's not in the picture. Honestly, the thought of having to deal with 4 boys that close in age by myself is more than a bit frightening. My two are at the age where the arguments can turn to blows in seconds.
I've tried all sorts of ideas to get them to give it a rest, but the only thing that seems to work is taking away their electronic gizmos. The problem is that if you take away the computer, you find them playing the Wii. If you take away the Wii, and you find them sitting in front of the TV, etc., etc.. Perhaps the next time they get in a fight, I'll go down to the breaker and switch off all the electricity in the house. THAT'LL SHOW 'EM I MEAN BUSINESS! [emphasis added to hide my trepidation that the wanted results will ever actually transpire].
At the beginning of last year, I attempted a Mom strike. I blogged about it here, here, here and here. It wasn't terribly productive, but I do feel like they've been a little better about cleaning up since that time. I've noticed the biggest difference in my husband. He's been more apt to help with the kitchen cleanup as well as getting after the boys to help around the house.
I kinda doubt if there are many Moms out there who haven't thought about leaving the house when their kids are driving them up a tree. I've certainly done it. "Honey, we're completely out of milk...I'll be back in just a bit". Three or four hours later and one gallon of milk in hand, I saunter back into the house much less stress ridden.
I noticed that if those four boys are all her own, she was pregnant at 16, had another child at 17, had her third at age 19, and her last at age 20. Sheesh...and all boys!! Honestly, I'm thinking this poor gal deserves at least a month's stay at a relaxing health spa or a resort vs. having to deal with a courtroom battle.
It seems Ms. Dean went off the deep end when her four boys were running the household in what appears to have been a boys-gone-wild atmosphere:
A Central Florida mother of four boys was arrested on Tuesday after telling authorities that she went "on strike" more than a month ago, leaving the teens home alone for hours every day because they would constantly fight.
Melissa G. Dean, 33, was charged with child neglect after telling Ocala police and the Department of Children and Families that she leaves her children, ages 17, 16, 14 and 13, home alone.
According to a charging affidavit, Dean said the children needed to start cleaning up and stop fighting and that she had no control over them. Dean also said she was fed up with being run over in her own home and having no privacy, according to the affidavit.
The article doesn't mention the father, so perhaps he's not in the picture. Honestly, the thought of having to deal with 4 boys that close in age by myself is more than a bit frightening. My two are at the age where the arguments can turn to blows in seconds.
I've tried all sorts of ideas to get them to give it a rest, but the only thing that seems to work is taking away their electronic gizmos. The problem is that if you take away the computer, you find them playing the Wii. If you take away the Wii, and you find them sitting in front of the TV, etc., etc.. Perhaps the next time they get in a fight, I'll go down to the breaker and switch off all the electricity in the house. THAT'LL SHOW 'EM I MEAN BUSINESS! [emphasis added to hide my trepidation that the wanted results will ever actually transpire].
At the beginning of last year, I attempted a Mom strike. I blogged about it here, here, here and here. It wasn't terribly productive, but I do feel like they've been a little better about cleaning up since that time. I've noticed the biggest difference in my husband. He's been more apt to help with the kitchen cleanup as well as getting after the boys to help around the house.
I kinda doubt if there are many Moms out there who haven't thought about leaving the house when their kids are driving them up a tree. I've certainly done it. "Honey, we're completely out of milk...I'll be back in just a bit". Three or four hours later and one gallon of milk in hand, I saunter back into the house much less stress ridden.
I noticed that if those four boys are all her own, she was pregnant at 16, had another child at 17, had her third at age 19, and her last at age 20. Sheesh...and all boys!! Honestly, I'm thinking this poor gal deserves at least a month's stay at a relaxing health spa or a resort vs. having to deal with a courtroom battle.
And they call "creationists" deceptive
Ahem....perhaps they should take a long look in the mirror.
I'll be interested in comparing Dan Brooks' version of the data to the actual transcripts when they are made public.
I'd have to agree that Eugenie probably had her hand in this nasty little episode. I don't trust that woman one iota...
I'll be interested in comparing Dan Brooks' version of the data to the actual transcripts when they are made public.
I'd have to agree that Eugenie probably had her hand in this nasty little episode. I don't trust that woman one iota...
A Dino??
The carving in stone I referred to in this post was found in the jungle temples of Cambodia which were produced by the Khmer civilization beginning as early as the eighth and extending through the fourteenth century A.D..
The reason I was curious about what people thought was because the finding was being discussed at NeuroLogica Blog. Of course, Dr. Novella is a materialist and dismisses the carving as a dinosaur for obvious reasons. He believes the carving to be the likeness of a chameleon.
I don’t particularly care one way or the other, though I always find it interesting to see how materialists immediately dismiss all the ancient dragons stories, the biblical references to dinosaur like creatures, and the dino imagines that we find in ancient drawings, on ancient pottery, etc.. Read through his blog and the comments as they are quite interesting, IMHO.
Just for kicks, I showed this drawing to a few people of different ages who had no clue about this debate or the implications of finding a dino drawing in an ancient temple. I didn't preface my question with anything at all. I just showed it to them and asked what it looked like.
Of the three adults I asked, all three immediately said "a dinosaur".
Both my boys said "a dinosaur", and I asked my youngest what kind of dinosaur he thought it looked like. He said it looks like a combination between a Stegosaurus and a Triceratops.
I decided to ask a few younger kids thinking they may pose some interesting interpretations...
A fourth grade girl said a dinosaur.
A second grade girl said a rhino.
A kindergarten boy said a rhino.
After further questioning, I found out the two youngest who said a rhino didn’t consider the plates at all. It’s as though they thought the plates were decor behind the “rhino”.
No one said a chameleon, so since my youngest seemed the most interested, I asked him if he thought it looked like a chameleon. He said that perhaps the eye looked kind of like a chameleon.
At first glance, I’m relatively sure most people would have to honestly say the carving looks like a dinosaur. I’m not opposed to the rhino interpretation, although rhino’s definitely don’t have plates and a tail like a dinosaur. But, it could be that the “plates” are not part of the animal?
I’m just not seeing a chameleon.
Be sure to check out all the links I've included...interesting stuff.
The reason I was curious about what people thought was because the finding was being discussed at NeuroLogica Blog. Of course, Dr. Novella is a materialist and dismisses the carving as a dinosaur for obvious reasons. He believes the carving to be the likeness of a chameleon.
I don’t particularly care one way or the other, though I always find it interesting to see how materialists immediately dismiss all the ancient dragons stories, the biblical references to dinosaur like creatures, and the dino imagines that we find in ancient drawings, on ancient pottery, etc.. Read through his blog and the comments as they are quite interesting, IMHO.
Just for kicks, I showed this drawing to a few people of different ages who had no clue about this debate or the implications of finding a dino drawing in an ancient temple. I didn't preface my question with anything at all. I just showed it to them and asked what it looked like.
Of the three adults I asked, all three immediately said "a dinosaur".
Both my boys said "a dinosaur", and I asked my youngest what kind of dinosaur he thought it looked like. He said it looks like a combination between a Stegosaurus and a Triceratops.
I decided to ask a few younger kids thinking they may pose some interesting interpretations...
A fourth grade girl said a dinosaur.
A second grade girl said a rhino.
A kindergarten boy said a rhino.
After further questioning, I found out the two youngest who said a rhino didn’t consider the plates at all. It’s as though they thought the plates were decor behind the “rhino”.
No one said a chameleon, so since my youngest seemed the most interested, I asked him if he thought it looked like a chameleon. He said that perhaps the eye looked kind of like a chameleon.
At first glance, I’m relatively sure most people would have to honestly say the carving looks like a dinosaur. I’m not opposed to the rhino interpretation, although rhino’s definitely don’t have plates and a tail like a dinosaur. But, it could be that the “plates” are not part of the animal?
I’m just not seeing a chameleon.
Be sure to check out all the links I've included...interesting stuff.
Bush does a little boogie...
Okay, this is kinda cute...here is President Bush dancing alongside President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf during his visit to Liberia.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Just out of curiosity...
Does the carving below look more like a...
A. Chameleon
B. Stegosaurus
C. Other
A. Chameleon
B. Stegosaurus
C. Other
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Don't forget to check out the lunar eclipse tonight!
From here:
The last total lunar eclipse until 2010 occurs Wednesday night, with cameo appearances by Saturn and the bright star Regulus on either side of the veiled full moon.
Skywatchers viewing through a telescope will have the added treat of seeing Saturn's handsome rings.
...
Wednesday's total eclipse phase will last nearly an hour. Earth's shadow is expected to blot out the moon beginning around 7 p.m. on the West Coast and 10 p.m. on the East Coast. West Coast skygazers will miss the start of the eclipse because it occurs before the moon rises.
Preview of "Expelled"
Tom Bethell had the opportunity to preview Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. His impression of the movie can be read here.
MOVIE HITS THE BIG SCREEN IN APRIL...
MOVIE HITS THE BIG SCREEN IN APRIL...
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Peer review: the myth of the noble scientist
Article found here.
I'm fighting a headache today, so I won't add to the smack down...my comments would just piss everyone off anyway.
[downs another ibroprophin...]
I'm fighting a headache today, so I won't add to the smack down...my comments would just piss everyone off anyway.
[downs another ibroprophin...]
Monday, February 18, 2008
A Gay Disease?
Dare not say that HIV is a "gay man's disease" in the wrong circles lest you get accused of being a "bigot", a "homophobe", or a "religious freak".
But, check it out...Matt Foreman, outgoing Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is saying just that:
So when teachers are reading their students the story of King & King, they should probably also let them know that these gay relationships are "potentially deadly".
[Illustration Courtesy Tricycle Press]
But, check it out...Matt Foreman, outgoing Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is saying just that:
WASHINGTON, February 14, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a public statement last Friday, Matt Foreman, outgoing Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, rattled the homosexual activist community by joining the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), pro-family organizations and a growing number of homosexual activists willing to admit that homosexual behavior is both extremely high-risk and primarily responsible for the spread of HIV/AIDS in the U.S.
Addressing the topic of AIDS, Foreman drastically deviated from the "gay" lobby's party line by admitting, "Internally, when these numbers come out, the 'established' gay community seems to have a collective shrug as if this isn't our problem. Folks, with 70 percent of the people in this country living with HIV being gay or bi, we cannot deny that HIV is a gay disease. We have to own that and face up to that."
A little over a year ago, Lorri Jean, CEO of the Los Angeles-based Gay and Lesbian Center, similarly shocked the "gay" community by stating that, "HIV is a Gay Disease. Own it. End it."
Foreman's admission comes on the heels of a letter from Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America's (CWA) Policy Director for Cultural Issues, inviting Foreman and other homosexual activists to work together in discouraging homosexuals from engaging in the high-risk behaviors researchers recently determined are responsible for the epidemic spread of a potentially deadly strain of staph infection among certain segments of the "gay" community. The CDC has acknowledged that many of those same high-risk behaviors, such as male-male anal sex, are chiefly responsible for spreading HIV/AIDS.
Matt Barber addressed Foreman's admission: "It's extremely encouraging to see Matt Foreman, a homosexual activist who has for so long been in denial about the dangers of the lifestyle he has promoted, publicly coming to terms with the undeniable perils of that lifestyle.
"I only hope he will now stop promoting homosexual conduct and push for other liberal elites, especially those running our public schools, to do the same. Educators must truthfully address the 'gay' lifestyle's potentially deadly consequences.
"It's criminally reckless for the National Education Association and liberal educators to put political correctness and a deceptive political agenda above the lives, health and well-being of America's children. The evidence is there for all to see. 'Gayness' is not about 'who you are,' it's about 'what you do.' The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has now, in effect, acknowledged that reality. Their honesty is refreshing and unexpected," concluded Barber.[my emphasis]
So when teachers are reading their students the story of King & King, they should probably also let them know that these gay relationships are "potentially deadly". [Illustration Courtesy Tricycle Press]
Machines 'to match man by 2029'
From here:
Machines will achieve human-level artificial intelligence by 2029, a leading US inventor has predicted.
Humanity is on the brink of advances that will see tiny robots implanted in people's brains to make them more intelligent, said Ray Kurzweil.
The engineer believes machines and humans will eventually merge through devices implanted in the body to boost intelligence and health.
...opening up a whole new world of malfunctions.
Seasonal Affective Disorder
I swear I've got it...we've had 31" of snowfall vs. last year's 8". We got hit again this weekend with rain/ice/snow. Yuck.
I AM NOT A WINTER person. I hate the cold...I HATE being stuck inside. I'm losing my ever loving mind. I swear if I had some extra cash, I'd buy one of those light therapy gizmos.
So much for global warming....I'm freezing my arse off.
I AM NOT A WINTER person. I hate the cold...I HATE being stuck inside. I'm losing my ever loving mind. I swear if I had some extra cash, I'd buy one of those light therapy gizmos.
So much for global warming....I'm freezing my arse off.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Who said it?
"It should now be clear where the follies of evolutionary views lie. If someone presents a model for explaining the origin of life, but he cannot say where the creative information characteristic of all life forms came from, then the crucial question remains unanswered.
Somebody who looks for the origin of information only in physical matter, ignores the fundamental natural laws about information; what is more, he scorns them.
It is clear from the history of science that one can ignore the laws of nature for a limited time only."
Somebody who looks for the origin of information only in physical matter, ignores the fundamental natural laws about information; what is more, he scorns them.
It is clear from the history of science that one can ignore the laws of nature for a limited time only."
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Near Death Experiences
I've always been a tad skeptical about near death experiences, but it seems to me that there has to be something to the phenomena. There are just too many cases to write them off as hallucinations.
Dr. Egnor and Dr. Novella have been debating the mind/brain correlation. Dr. Novella is a materialist who believes that the brain controls the mind...I guess he thinks there is really no difference between them. Dr. Egnor seems to take the stance that the brain and the mind are separate.
Of course, I have no background in that field, so I'm just reading along for kicks, but something that Dr. Novella said got me thinking...
One of the commenters responded:
I was thinking that perhaps this is something that we can only speculate about because who's to know whether there is "mind" activity that is not detectable after the physical death of a person?
I could be off my rocker here, but wouldn't near death experiences lend some support to mind function after the brain is dead?
Some scientists write these experiences off by saying that NDEs are just hallucinations from a brain under tremendous stress from injury and trauma. But what they are helpless to explain is how these people who experiences a NDE can re-call and describe in vivid details what they saw and heard while laying dead in the hospital. They shock the doctors with exact details of what the monitoring machines displayed while connected to their body! Many people who have had NDEs are able to accurately describe what family members were wearing and talking about even though they were not allowed in the room where the body was being given electrical shock to try and restart the heart and breathing.
The thing that I found interesting was the similarity of events of those people who had a Near Death Experience. People who never met each other from different parts of the world all sharing the same testimony of floating out of body, entering a tunnel and seeing a white light filled with total love, or others having a hell-like experience.
Here's an example of a young child recalling amazing details about her experience.
Here's one with a gentlemen who experiences both the sensations of heaven and hell.
There are endless examples of these experiences...must be something to it.
Just a side note: I've mentioned that my Grandfather turned 100 this past November. When his wife died, which was about 15 years ago, he had an interesting experience. He's a farmer here in Kansas, and about 3 months after my Grandmother's death, he was out in the pasture doing chores, and he experienced a very strange phenomena. Out of no where he had a vision of his wife and his mother both right in front him. They were only there for a moment, but it was as if they were letting him know they were at peace. These type of experiences happen to people all the time. I know many write them off as hallucinations caused by grief, fear or drug induced, but it's difficult to write off every one of these experiences.
Dr. Egnor and Dr. Novella have been debating the mind/brain correlation. Dr. Novella is a materialist who believes that the brain controls the mind...I guess he thinks there is really no difference between them. Dr. Egnor seems to take the stance that the brain and the mind are separate.
Of course, I have no background in that field, so I'm just reading along for kicks, but something that Dr. Novella said got me thinking...
For example, if the brain causes the mind then: there will be no documented mental function in the absence of brain function; altering the brain biologically will alter the mind functionally; mental development will correlate with brain development; and mental activity will correlate with brain activity (this holds up no matter what method we use to look at brain activity - EEG to look at electrical activity, PET scanning to look at metabolic activity, SPECT scanning to look at blood flow, and functional MRI to look at metabolic and neuronal activity).
One of the commenters responded:
“For example, if the brain causes the mind then: there will be no documented mental function in the absence of brain function…”
Wow. I had never thought about the issue quite this way. I already disbelieved in the soul, based on the weakness of evidence in favor of it, but evidence in favor of the non-existence of the soul is new to me. You’ve really expressed this clearly. Thanks, Dr. Novella.
I was thinking that perhaps this is something that we can only speculate about because who's to know whether there is "mind" activity that is not detectable after the physical death of a person?
I could be off my rocker here, but wouldn't near death experiences lend some support to mind function after the brain is dead?
Some scientists write these experiences off by saying that NDEs are just hallucinations from a brain under tremendous stress from injury and trauma. But what they are helpless to explain is how these people who experiences a NDE can re-call and describe in vivid details what they saw and heard while laying dead in the hospital. They shock the doctors with exact details of what the monitoring machines displayed while connected to their body! Many people who have had NDEs are able to accurately describe what family members were wearing and talking about even though they were not allowed in the room where the body was being given electrical shock to try and restart the heart and breathing.
The thing that I found interesting was the similarity of events of those people who had a Near Death Experience. People who never met each other from different parts of the world all sharing the same testimony of floating out of body, entering a tunnel and seeing a white light filled with total love, or others having a hell-like experience.
Here's an example of a young child recalling amazing details about her experience.
Here's one with a gentlemen who experiences both the sensations of heaven and hell.
There are endless examples of these experiences...must be something to it.
Just a side note: I've mentioned that my Grandfather turned 100 this past November. When his wife died, which was about 15 years ago, he had an interesting experience. He's a farmer here in Kansas, and about 3 months after my Grandmother's death, he was out in the pasture doing chores, and he experienced a very strange phenomena. Out of no where he had a vision of his wife and his mother both right in front him. They were only there for a moment, but it was as if they were letting him know they were at peace. These type of experiences happen to people all the time. I know many write them off as hallucinations caused by grief, fear or drug induced, but it's difficult to write off every one of these experiences.
What are the odds?
Unbelievable....I bought a new blender right before Christmas (found a great sale), and my mother-in-law bought me another one for Christmas because she didn't know I'd already bought one.It was nice having two - one upstairs and one down. But, both were made of glass...evidently not a good choice for our rough and tumble household. Yesterday, my husband dropped one of them, and the thing shattered. Today, my son dropped the other one with the same results.
What on earth is going on? Is it a conspiracy or what? Are they trying to tell me they don't like my fruit smoothies, or are they becoming complete klutzes. I held my temper, but I was more than a little ticked off. I use those things all the time. Now, I'm going to have to try to find replacement blender jars...hopefully I can find something inexpensive on-line.
Ugh...
Oldest Bat Fossil - was it evolving?
For the latest "missing link" which supposedly “demonstrates that the animals evolved the ability to fly before they could echolocate”, consider another position on this particular find. Creation-Evolution News Headlines is a great source for checks and balances when considering the dogmatic insistence that everything in nature evolved from that first blob of matter that happened to miraculously evolve from primordial goo.
For mainstream science, everything must fit the evolutionary paradigm. You'll find that quite frequently it takes some seriously unrealistic just-so stories and inferences to make that happen.
[Photo credit and copyright:
American Museum of Natural History]
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Our Visiting Anole Lizards
My oldest is in 7th grade this year - his first year at junior high. He has the neatest science teacher who seems to really have a knack for getting the kids interested in science.
Her entire room is filled with interesting little creatures... chinchillas, gerbils, rats, Anole lizards, a chameleon, and King snake just to name a few.
My son just loves the two little green Anole lizards. She lets him take them out during class, and they perch on his pencil while he takes notes.
There is no school in our district Thurs. - Mon. due to teacher's conferences and President's Day on Monday. His teacher asked him if he'd like to take them home and care for them during that time. He was thrilled. I swear he's had those little guys attached to him all day. They sure are calm little things...but, boy can they jump if you don't keep an eye on them!
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
More accusations of deception
After writing this post, some Darwinists took offense to the fact that I didn’t include the PS at the end of the quote I used from a Darwinist site where poking fun of religion is done frequently.
So here it is....
Boy....convincing. When I find time, I’ll have to pull up a string of his other “humorous” “sentiments”. Nauseating stuff. Evidently no one should take offense because, after all, he's just "joking".
One of the other posters in the conversation wanted to be sure that I saw his post which was meant to ridicule my religious beliefs:
And, then...oddly enough, the poster who was ticked off at me for me not adding the PS to his post, adds the following in regard to the post above.
There are endless examples of religion bashing I could share, so I don’t know why they are accusing me of being dishonest.
So here it is....
The above post may contain an attempt at humour. Tongue may have been applied to cheek and salt may have to be pinched. Some of the sentiments are serious however. Caution: May involve thinking.[my emphasis]
Boy....convincing. When I find time, I’ll have to pull up a string of his other “humorous” “sentiments”. Nauseating stuff. Evidently no one should take offense because, after all, he's just "joking".
One of the other posters in the conversation wanted to be sure that I saw his post which was meant to ridicule my religious beliefs:
did he [Jesus] or did he not?
do note that if he did not [masturbate], he was very likely the only adult male E-V-A-R to pass through adolescence without punching the monk. Add to that he was (as your mythology demands) celibate, and you have one seriously repressed dude. i bet you couldn't sleep within ten feet of him at night because of all the man-na falling about.
makes you wonder if you can really call that 'fully human', eh, luv?
Damn. I forgot to you that he can be fully human and fully god at the same time, while also fully neither. Your world is great!
...
I am anxiously (bated breath) awaiting your pronouncement upon the greatest mystery of our time, did Our Lard and Savior beat his meat, or not.
And, then...oddly enough, the poster who was ticked off at me for me not adding the PS to his post, adds the following in regard to the post above.
I reckon Jesus flogged the dolphin. My guess would be that if Jesus-El-Savior-Christ even existed he wrestled the one-eyed champion.
You hear what I'm saying FTK? I reckon Jesus beat his meat, yanked his crank, relaxed in a gentleman's way, choked the chicken, said hello to Mrs Palm and her five lovely daughters (also works in French btw), vixen, se bronler, whacked off, throttled the banana, tugged the tummy truncheon, threw the spam javelin, went to see Palmela Handerson, made out with his fingered fiancee, flogged the log, stroked the cat, waxed the weasel, bashed the bishop, had a bout of hand to gland combat, performed a solo on the belly banjo, strummed his one string man guitar, beat the blue veined champion, wrestled the purple headed womb ferret, teased John Thomas, did hand pressups on his solo gym until he coughed his filthy yoghurt, went to his special place, cracked one off, knocked one out, treated himself to dinner and a movie, had a Jodrell Bank, a J Arthur Rank, a Barclays, and quite possibly a Sherman Tank, he waxed his pink surfboard of love, he played a private song on his iWang, he played one handed pocket billiards with his man's best friend until man fat erupted from his Herman Gelmet, he spanked the monkey up to the point where chopper custard flew in ropey strings from the hog's eye in his bell end, basically put, with no equivocation whatsoever, if Jesus existed he masturbated. Probably over Mary Magdalene's tits.*
Good enough for you?
Louis
*Apologies. These are all I could remember at short notice. Please help me with any I have forgotten.
There are endless examples of religion bashing I could share, so I don’t know why they are accusing me of being dishonest.
Our Children still need the "Traditional Family"
Children Who Have An Active Father Figure Have Fewer Psychological And Behavioral Problems
.
.
Our detailed 20-year review shows that overall, children reap positive benefits if they have active and regular engagement with a father figure" says Dr Anna Sarkadi from the Department of Women's and Children's Health at Uppsala University, Sweden.
"For example, we found various studies that showed that children who had positively involved father figures were less likely to smoke and get into trouble with the police, achieved better levels of education and developed good friendships with children of both sexes.
"Long-term benefits included women who had better relationships with partners and a greater sense of mental and physical well-being at the age of 33 if they had a good relationship with their father at 16."
Misleading articles...frustrating
WARNING....
I try not to rant when I read articles like this, but I'm afraid that may be where this particular post is heading.
Marshall Helmberger, editor of Timberjay Newpapers has a few things to say about "Creationists" resorting to "deception". Let's consider this "deception" while pointing out either his ignorance or dishonesty. I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt and consider that he just may not have all the facts.
He writes:
Ugh...bets are on that the author of this article has never even glanced at this, this, or this.
Does he even realize that Judge Jones "borrowed" 90.9% (or 5,458 words) of his 6,004-word section on intelligent design as science from the ACLU’s proposed “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law” which had been submitted to Judge Jones nearly a month before his ruling? Does the fact that he had to borrow so much of what has been deemed as "his" decision indicate that he actually understood the science that he was considering? Did he have the scientific expertise to understand the issues well enough to deem them "patently flawed"? If he did, why would it be necessary to copy virtually verbatim from another document when putting together the section of his ruling on intelligent design as science?? And, why did he even choose to go so far as to decide whether ID is science or not?
The Dover school board had voted to have a statement read in the science classes before the unit on evolution was to be taught. That's it!! That's what the case was supposed to be about. Yes, there were very colorful and outspoken players on both sides of the Dover fiasco, and I don't doubt for a second that a few of the board members initially would have liked to have seen creation science addressed in some form. But, in the end, that is *not* what they decided to let pass, it had nothing to do with why they were being sued, and it had nothing to do with the court case. The case should have merely decided whether this statement....
...would be read in the Dover schools.
But, DARWIN FORBID!!... We must not have our students doubting Darwinian evolution in any way, shape or form!!! Apparently these 4 short paragraphs were perceived as such a threat to the theory of evolution that all hell broke loose. So, not only did the Judge decide whether that statement could be read, but he went on to decide whether ID is science or not! The man is a court judge, not a scientist. It sounds to me like he was on a mission rather than being someone who was "sympathetic" to ID. Perks came along with this decision as well. Notoriety...he was featured in Time magazine as one of the most influential people of the year. He was also voted by Wired magazine as one of the “10 sexiest geeks”, and was asked to speak at several graduation commencements. He also hit the lecture circuit and appeared on national television several times. It sounds like his life was pretty exciting after the Dover trial.
Helmberger continues:
The author of this article has the *audacity* to accuse ID supporters of "deception and distortion" all the while throwing out misleading information like the paragraph above. He should have to make a retraction in regard to this article due to the fact that the Dover school board did not pass anything remotely similar to "teach[ing] creationism's newest incarnation, dubbed "intelligent design"". First of all, the theories (creation science & ID) are completely different from one another other than they both ultimately infer a designer. This indicates that he apparently is not very familiar with either ID or creation science. Second, the board did *NOT* pass *anything* remotely close to "forcing science teachers to *teach* ID".
Reading those four paragraphs before the teachers taught the unit on evolution is certainly *not* "teaching" intelligent design!!!! Helmberger's statement in this regard is dripping with "deception". I could possibly choose to consider that perhaps he was merely ignorant of the facts, but he stated that he followed the trial, so he should know better.
He goes on:
LOL...I wonder if the man has ever spent any time in "science" forums or blogs. There is certainly a direct link between atheism and Darwinian evolution. The vast majority of Darwinian activists I've run across on line are hard core atheists. He should spend a little time surfing atheist blogs, science blogs and forums, and humanist websites. The first thing you encounter is their overwhelming awe for science and their acknowledgement that evolution supports their atheism. You'll also find endless examples of religion bashing. Here's just a little example I ran across just today:
I run across this stuff all the time in "science" forums. Religion bashing is just par for the course with these people, and atheism is certainly connected with Darwinian evolution. After all, Richard Dawkins says that "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist". So, let's not be coy and act as if there is no connection whatsoever.
Helmberger continues:
The author is from Minnesota...perhaps he's familiar with the University of MN's biology professor and militant proselytzing atheist, PZ Myers. Maybe he should ask Myers whether the theory of evolution suggests that life was created in a simpler form by a Creator. Better yet, ask the majority of Professors at our Universities whether they believe there was a Creator and you're likely to get a "Nay". Because...
The ToE does not address abiogenesis, but it certainly implies that there is no need for a designer because *any* consideration of design is banned from the classroom...that leaves only one consideration...naturalism. The ToE gets off easy because it's advocates merely wave away the massive problems between the connection as to how the mechanisms of evolution got started on that first simple cell (wherever it came from). WE MUST SIMPLY IGNORE THOSE MASSIVE PROBLEMS, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT PART OF DARWIN'S THEORY!! But, that doesn't stop them from telling us that their theory is a "FACT". So, we are to consider the theory already fully functioning to the point where much of nature is already well established. Then we add millions upon millions of years, and WHALA!...it works like a charm (or so they tell us). Darwinists simply can't be bothered with all those complex problems regarding how their theory originated. Nor can they explain why we have no empirical evidence supporting these supposed macroevolutionary changes. The entire concept of common descent is based on inference and common *design*. So which is it?
Hmmm....As his theory evolved, Darwin's Christian faith also evolved...to blatant agnosticism. But, let's not burst the author's bubble about that one. So, unless this author is selling agnosticism, Darwin is not a good example to point to in regard to suggestions that life was created in a simpler form by a Creator unless he's considering comments made by Darwin in his early years....before "reality"[sic] and full blown agnosticism set in.
I do so abhor these type of articles primarily due to the fact that the author has set out to deem "creationists" as dishonest, deceptive, and guilty of distorting facts. The thing is, that when I read through their accusations, their blatant hypocrisy leaps from the page. It really makes you wonder whether they even have a clue that they are relaying horrifically misleading information to the public.`
Post Note.
I try not to rant when I read articles like this, but I'm afraid that may be where this particular post is heading.
Marshall Helmberger, editor of Timberjay Newpapers has a few things to say about "Creationists" resorting to "deception". Let's consider this "deception" while pointing out either his ignorance or dishonesty. I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt and consider that he just may not have all the facts.
He writes:
What’s most sad, is that this campaign against evolution has been waged largely through deception and distortion. Indeed, the purveyors of creationism were criticized for their “disingenuous” tactics by Judge John Jones III, who ruled in the Dover, Pennsylvania, case. Jones, by the way, was a religious conservative, appointed by President Bush on the recommendation of fundamentalist former Senator Rick Santorum.
Creationist advocates clearly had a sympathetic judge in the Dover case. They had their day in court, but their arguments were so patently flawed that the judge’s 139-page finding of fact was ultimately scathing. He even recommended some of the pro-creationism school board members be investigated for perjury.
Ugh...bets are on that the author of this article has never even glanced at this, this, or this.
Does he even realize that Judge Jones "borrowed" 90.9% (or 5,458 words) of his 6,004-word section on intelligent design as science from the ACLU’s proposed “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law” which had been submitted to Judge Jones nearly a month before his ruling? Does the fact that he had to borrow so much of what has been deemed as "his" decision indicate that he actually understood the science that he was considering? Did he have the scientific expertise to understand the issues well enough to deem them "patently flawed"? If he did, why would it be necessary to copy virtually verbatim from another document when putting together the section of his ruling on intelligent design as science?? And, why did he even choose to go so far as to decide whether ID is science or not?
The Dover school board had voted to have a statement read in the science classes before the unit on evolution was to be taught. That's it!! That's what the case was supposed to be about. Yes, there were very colorful and outspoken players on both sides of the Dover fiasco, and I don't doubt for a second that a few of the board members initially would have liked to have seen creation science addressed in some form. But, in the end, that is *not* what they decided to let pass, it had nothing to do with why they were being sued, and it had nothing to do with the court case. The case should have merely decided whether this statement....
The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.
Because Darwin’s Theory is a theory, it is still being tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.
Intelligent design is an explanation of the Origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves.
With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of Origins of Life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses up on preparing students to achieve proficiency on Standards-based assessments.
...would be read in the Dover schools.
But, DARWIN FORBID!!... We must not have our students doubting Darwinian evolution in any way, shape or form!!! Apparently these 4 short paragraphs were perceived as such a threat to the theory of evolution that all hell broke loose. So, not only did the Judge decide whether that statement could be read, but he went on to decide whether ID is science or not! The man is a court judge, not a scientist. It sounds to me like he was on a mission rather than being someone who was "sympathetic" to ID. Perks came along with this decision as well. Notoriety...he was featured in Time magazine as one of the most influential people of the year. He was also voted by Wired magazine as one of the “10 sexiest geeks”, and was asked to speak at several graduation commencements. He also hit the lecture circuit and appeared on national television several times. It sounds like his life was pretty exciting after the Dover trial.
Helmberger continues:
Where I draw the line is when such individuals try to force their unscientific and insupportable beliefs into the science curriculum of our public schools. While many of us followed the recent ruling in the Dover, Pennsylvania, case, where the school board was successfully sued for forcing science teachers to teach creationism’s newest incarnation, dubbed “intelligent design,” we should take little solace from the fact that sound science prevailed.
The author of this article has the *audacity* to accuse ID supporters of "deception and distortion" all the while throwing out misleading information like the paragraph above. He should have to make a retraction in regard to this article due to the fact that the Dover school board did not pass anything remotely similar to "teach[ing] creationism's newest incarnation, dubbed "intelligent design"". First of all, the theories (creation science & ID) are completely different from one another other than they both ultimately infer a designer. This indicates that he apparently is not very familiar with either ID or creation science. Second, the board did *NOT* pass *anything* remotely close to "forcing science teachers to *teach* ID".
Reading those four paragraphs before the teachers taught the unit on evolution is certainly *not* "teaching" intelligent design!!!! Helmberger's statement in this regard is dripping with "deception". I could possibly choose to consider that perhaps he was merely ignorant of the facts, but he stated that he followed the trial, so he should know better.
He goes on:
I’ve seen plenty of this kind of truth-twisting closer to home. Just as they advocate in other parts of the country, local creationists routinely attempt to falsely equate evolution with atheism, in hopes that the devout will choose religion over science. It’s a false choice, of course, since there is absolutely no contradiction between religious beliefs and an acceptance of evolution.
LOL...I wonder if the man has ever spent any time in "science" forums or blogs. There is certainly a direct link between atheism and Darwinian evolution. The vast majority of Darwinian activists I've run across on line are hard core atheists. He should spend a little time surfing atheist blogs, science blogs and forums, and humanist websites. The first thing you encounter is their overwhelming awe for science and their acknowledgement that evolution supports their atheism. You'll also find endless examples of religion bashing. Here's just a little example I ran across just today:
Scientology is an obvious piece of fraudulence and (to take an example at {cough} randomn) the foundational religion behind a series of diverse sects pretty much all of whom believe that the eternal intelligent entity, who supposedly created the entire awesome expanse of the universe and every creature in it, sent one part of his threefold yet singular self disguised as an ape to this insignificant planet in a "remote" part of the galaxy to be born to a female ape who'd never had sex, and for who's species there was little to no evidence of parthenogenesis, live like a tit and die nailed to a bit of dead tree two-ish thousand years ago just so some apes could feel good about cornholing their neighbour's wife and coveting a golden calf ISN'T an obvious piece of fraudulence?
Add the "send me your money" organisations and you have the greatest scam ever sold! Tom Cruise would cream his oh-so-heterosexual shorts for their budget.
Don't get me started on non-existent global floods, winged fiery chariots, the evils of shellfish, reincarnation, anti-reason, paedophile prophets, wee-wee chopping, the universe being formed out of some milk, a deity for every hobby, human sacrifice, fucking unicorns, and the Dream Time. The amount of starkly obvious bollocks devised by those people professing religion of one type or another is hardly subtle or small.
I run across this stuff all the time in "science" forums. Religion bashing is just par for the course with these people, and atheism is certainly connected with Darwinian evolution. After all, Richard Dawkins says that "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist". So, let's not be coy and act as if there is no connection whatsoever.
Helmberger continues:
In addition, creationists falsely claim that Darwin’s theory suggests life began on Earth on its own.
The author is from Minnesota...perhaps he's familiar with the University of MN's biology professor and militant proselytzing atheist, PZ Myers. Maybe he should ask Myers whether the theory of evolution suggests that life was created in a simpler form by a Creator. Better yet, ask the majority of Professors at our Universities whether they believe there was a Creator and you're likely to get a "Nay". Because...
The fact is that a professor at an elite university is as likely to be
an atheist as a suicide bomber is to be Muslim; a 2006 paper by Neil Gross of Harvard and Solon Simmons of George Mason University reported that 72.9 percent of the professors they polled described the Bible as “an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts,” compared to 17.5 percent of the general population. In the same paper, 34 percent of all university professors described themselves as “not religious” and 31.2 percent specified “none” when asked about their current religious preference. -The Irrational Atheist/pg. 15
The ToE does not address abiogenesis, but it certainly implies that there is no need for a designer because *any* consideration of design is banned from the classroom...that leaves only one consideration...naturalism. The ToE gets off easy because it's advocates merely wave away the massive problems between the connection as to how the mechanisms of evolution got started on that first simple cell (wherever it came from). WE MUST SIMPLY IGNORE THOSE MASSIVE PROBLEMS, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT PART OF DARWIN'S THEORY!! But, that doesn't stop them from telling us that their theory is a "FACT". So, we are to consider the theory already fully functioning to the point where much of nature is already well established. Then we add millions upon millions of years, and WHALA!...it works like a charm (or so they tell us). Darwinists simply can't be bothered with all those complex problems regarding how their theory originated. Nor can they explain why we have no empirical evidence supporting these supposed macroevolutionary changes. The entire concept of common descent is based on inference and common *design*. So which is it?
Darwin, in fact, suggested that life was created in simpler form by a Creator, but that evolution has led to the remarkable diversity we see today. That’s a view that’s held today by many scientists, and many non-scientists, who are also individuals of faith.
Hmmm....As his theory evolved, Darwin's Christian faith also evolved...to blatant agnosticism. But, let's not burst the author's bubble about that one. So, unless this author is selling agnosticism, Darwin is not a good example to point to in regard to suggestions that life was created in a simpler form by a Creator unless he's considering comments made by Darwin in his early years....before "reality"[sic] and full blown agnosticism set in.
I do so abhor these type of articles primarily due to the fact that the author has set out to deem "creationists" as dishonest, deceptive, and guilty of distorting facts. The thing is, that when I read through their accusations, their blatant hypocrisy leaps from the page. It really makes you wonder whether they even have a clue that they are relaying horrifically misleading information to the public.`
Post Note.
Do as I say...not as I do
Yup, Darwinists only support the separation of church and state if their theory is being questioned, BUT they apparently have NO problem inserting religion in the science classroom if it supports Darwinism.
Un.freaking.believeable!
Listen to John West address the hypocrisy of Eugenie Scott, Ken Miller, et. al. when they suggest inserting religion into our public school science classrooms.
Where is the ACLU when you need them???! I'm serious.
Un.freaking.believeable!
Listen to John West address the hypocrisy of Eugenie Scott, Ken Miller, et. al. when they suggest inserting religion into our public school science classrooms.
Where is the ACLU when you need them???! I'm serious.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Gotta love blatant threats...
In order to ensure that Florida school board members don't allow students to question Darwinism, they're using this ploy...
Here:
Good Lord, that is simply unbelieveable. If there is even a single word that might allow students to consider the controversial issues in this debate, you'll receive an "F" on your science standards. But, hey, if you pepper the standards with evolutionary rhetoric throughout, we'll give ya an "A". Sounds like they're scared to death that the students may learn the truth about how weak their theory actually is!
Sure, "evolution" is a fact and highly regarded by even (gasp!) Creationists. But, the ridiculous extrapolations to the theory which imply that everything we observe in nature evolved from that first lucky blob, is *highly* controversial, and it's certainly questioned by people other than "Christian fundamentalists". Listen to Berlinski, who is an agnostic, slam the concept.
Let this be a lesson to you, children: Do NOT question "authority"!
Here:
Treasurer Pete Dunkelberg made excellent use of his three minutes at the podium, reminding the Florida Board of Education that they have the opportunity to change Florida’s standards score from “F” to “A” – if only they don’t mess up at the last minute by capitulating to the anti-science crowd.
Good Lord, that is simply unbelieveable. If there is even a single word that might allow students to consider the controversial issues in this debate, you'll receive an "F" on your science standards. But, hey, if you pepper the standards with evolutionary rhetoric throughout, we'll give ya an "A". Sounds like they're scared to death that the students may learn the truth about how weak their theory actually is!
Sure, "evolution" is a fact and highly regarded by even (gasp!) Creationists. But, the ridiculous extrapolations to the theory which imply that everything we observe in nature evolved from that first lucky blob, is *highly* controversial, and it's certainly questioned by people other than "Christian fundamentalists". Listen to Berlinski, who is an agnostic, slam the concept.
Let this be a lesson to you, children: Do NOT question "authority"!
Separation of Church and State?
Sure, Darwinists demand it...unless it can help promote their own faith beliefs.
From EN&V:
'Ol Eugenie is at it again. "Keep religion out of the schools...cuz, I'm an atheist, and I don't like it! But, hey, if your religion promotes my philosophical views about naturalism....go for it. Bring in your priests and have them teach a course in biology if it'll help stomp out any questions coming from those who are sympathetic to Intelligent Design."
Gag...the hypocrisy of these folks is simply off the charts....
From EN&V:
As schools and museums celebrate the 199th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birthday today, a new push is being made to inject religion into the nation’s science classrooms.
But it’s not coming from those you might think.
After years of accusing Darwin’s critics of trying to insert religion into biology classes on the sly, leading defenders of evolution are now campaigning to incorporate religion explicitly into classroom lessons on evolution.
Eugenie Scott, head of the pro-evolution National Center for Science Education, recommends having biology students read statements endorsing evolution by theologians. She further suggests assigning the students to interview ministers about their views on evolution— but not if the community is “conservative Christian,” because then the intended lesson that “Evolution is OK!” might be undermined.
According to biologist Kenneth Miller, science teachers around the nation are already using his book Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution to convince students that evolution and religious faith are compatible.
Ironically, Miller served as an expert witness in the Dover, Pennsylvania intelligent design trial, testifying on behalf of those who wanted intelligent design banished from schools because they thought it was religion in disguise. But Miller apparently has no problem with the overt use of religion in the classroom to endorse evolution.
An educational website called “Understanding Evolution,” meanwhile, encourages teachers to debunk the “misconception” among students that evolution is incompatible with religion. Funded by more than a half-million in tax dollars from the National Science Foundation, the website directs teachers to dozens of statements endorsing evolution by various religious groups, including a declaration that “modern evolutionary theory… is in no way at odds with our belief in a Creator God, or in the revelation and presence of that God in Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.”
While there are good secular reasons for teaching students about the science of evolution, taxpayers might wonder what business it is of the government to persuade their children that evolution comports with “the revelation and presence of… God in Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.”
The new efforts to use religion to promote evolution in the schools don’t even come close to following Supreme Court precedents on the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Imagine the outcry that would ensue if the critics of Darwin’s theory proposed using religion to denounce evolution in biology classes? How long would it take before the ACLU was on the scene?
Yet support for the use of religion to promote evolution in schools seems to be spreading.
Last fall, in conjunction with a highly-touted “docudrama” attacking intelligent design, PBS distributed a briefing packet to educators across the country that made a point of including statements endorsing evolution by Jewish and Christian groups.
In January, the National Academy of Sciences issued a report on evolution for teachers, school board members, and others that similarly spent several pages trying to convince readers that good religion supports evolution.
Public schools are certainly allowed to hold objective discussions of competing religious explanations in relevant courses. But that is not what the defenders of evolution are advocating. They are pushing one-sided religious propaganda with the clear intent of changing the spiritual beliefs of students.
Notably, groups like the ACLU that typically champion the separation of church and state have been AWOL when it comes to the classroom promotion of religion by evolutionists. Apparently, religious indoctrination in science classes is okay so long as religion is used to endorse Darwin’s theory.
The hypocrisy of the situation is blatant, but then again, so is the cynicism.
Many of the advocates of using religion to promote evolution in the classroom turn out to be atheists or agnostics. Eugenie Scott, for example, is a signer of a document called the “Humanist Manifesto III” that proclaims the “finality of death” and calls for “a progressive philosophy of life… without supernaturalism.” The biologists of the National Academy of Sciences hold similar views—nearly 95% of them classify themselves as atheists or agnostics according to a 1998 survey.
Even the theists among evolution proponents tend to be less friendly to traditional religion than one might think. Biologist Kenneth Miller, who is usually cited as a traditional Roman Catholic by the news media, insists that evolution is an “undirected” process and that the development of human beings was “an afterthought, a minor detail, a happenstance in a history that might just as well have left us out.”
Regardless of which religious view of evolution is correct, the question is why science classes should be dealing with this issue at all. Do we really want to turn public school science classes into a Darwinian version of Sunday School?
Evolution defenders frequently complain that Darwin’s theory is under attack from people of faith, and perhaps they feel religious instruction is a way to defuse that threat. If so, they are tone-deaf.
If they think some religious people are offended by evolution now, just wait until more teachers start proselytizing for Darwinian theology in the classroom.
We have religious liberty for a reason. Let’s hope evolution proponents recognize that fact before they inspire yet another needless round of polarization in the public schools. For more information about the Darwinists' push to inject religion in the classroom, check out chapter 10 of my new book Darwin Day in America.
'Ol Eugenie is at it again. "Keep religion out of the schools...cuz, I'm an atheist, and I don't like it! But, hey, if your religion promotes my philosophical views about naturalism....go for it. Bring in your priests and have them teach a course in biology if it'll help stomp out any questions coming from those who are sympathetic to Intelligent Design."
Gag...the hypocrisy of these folks is simply off the charts....
A Darwinian Creed for Darwin Day
[Imagine a musical accompaniment along with monkeys dancing in a ritualistic trance in the halls of our universities while the following creed is read...]
In Darwin's Name, Amen...
[More on Kevin Padian's article in Nature here.]
Humans are animals, one species of many on the planet, bound by common ancestry to all other species, part of an ages-old dance of reproduction, accommodation, survival and alteration.
It is for this vision, one that liberates humans from the conceit of special creation, that Darwin was honoured by interment in Westminster Abbey. And it is for his innumerable scientific insights, most still as valid and stimulating as the day he coined them, that we look forward to celebrating him next year.
In Darwin's Name, Amen...
[More on Kevin Padian's article in Nature here.]
Happy Darwin Day!!
Be sure to stop by your local university to give honor, praise, and glory to the Almighty Darwin. Bring along a copy of Of Pandas and People for the annual book burning event...
Heil Darwin!
The Church Burning Ebola boys, who hallow Darwin's every move, have made a beautiful cake for the occassion:
[Picture was removed. Evidently MrDNA was embarrassed that I posted his church burning cake...lol. Next time maybe he won't be so quick to show all the world what a jerk he is.]
Just pray it's not *your* church they're burning down this year!
HT: MrDNA for the lovely cake
Heil Darwin!
The Church Burning Ebola boys, who hallow Darwin's every move, have made a beautiful cake for the occassion:
[Picture was removed. Evidently MrDNA was embarrassed that I posted his church burning cake...lol. Next time maybe he won't be so quick to show all the world what a jerk he is.]
Just pray it's not *your* church they're burning down this year!
HT: MrDNA for the lovely cake
Monday, February 11, 2008
Birds, Bats, and Insects - Engineering marvels
Dang, natural selection is simply amazing! It's all powerful...it's awesome!! It's, well, capable of allowing matter to fall into place precisely enough to produce engineering feats than even the very best human designers aren't capable of producing.
From the article:
Many in the anti-ID community believe that the mechanisms of evolution are all that is needed to explain everything we observe in nature. Eugenie Scott, Barbara Forrest, Steven Weinburg, Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and the majority of scientists actively fighting ID are fighting against what they consider the supernatural boogieman, yet they have absolutely nothing better to offer in regard to the study of origins. Primordial soup is still big in the science classroom, but it's been found to be a ridiculous notion. Stanley Miller?...also a flop.
The most obvious scenario is that at the root of the massive engineering feats we observe in nature, we will find that the most obvious inference is that design implies a designer. But, unfortunately, science no longer follows the evidence where it leads in regard to origins. Unless we can infer a natural designer, the "scientific method" has ruled out other possibilities...even if they are correct.
From the article:
A Blackbird jet flying nearly 2,000 miles per hour covers 32 body lengths per second. But a common pigeon flying at 50 miles per hour covers 75. The roll rate of the aerobatic A-4 Skyhawk plane is about 720 degrees per second. The roll rate of a barn swallow exceeds 5,000 degrees per second.
Select military aircraft can withstand gravitational forces of 8-10 G. Many birds routinely experience positive G-forces greater than 10 G and up to 14 G.
“Natural flyers obviously have some highly varied mechanical properties that we really have not incorporated in engineering,” said Wei Shyy, chair of the Aerospace Engineering department and an author of the new book “The Aerodynamics of Low Reynolds Number Flyers.”
“They’re not only lighter, but also have much more adaptive structures as well as capabilities of integrating aerodynamics with wing and body shapes, which change all the time,” Shyy said. “Natural flyers have outstanding capabilities to remain airborne through wind gusts, rain, and snow.” Shyy photographs birds to help him understand their aerodynamics.
Many in the anti-ID community believe that the mechanisms of evolution are all that is needed to explain everything we observe in nature. Eugenie Scott, Barbara Forrest, Steven Weinburg, Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and the majority of scientists actively fighting ID are fighting against what they consider the supernatural boogieman, yet they have absolutely nothing better to offer in regard to the study of origins. Primordial soup is still big in the science classroom, but it's been found to be a ridiculous notion. Stanley Miller?...also a flop.
The most obvious scenario is that at the root of the massive engineering feats we observe in nature, we will find that the most obvious inference is that design implies a designer. But, unfortunately, science no longer follows the evidence where it leads in regard to origins. Unless we can infer a natural designer, the "scientific method" has ruled out other possibilities...even if they are correct.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Sunday's Message
A few weeks ago, I posted my Pastor's Sunday sermon. If you're interested, this week's message was titled "Life Rules: Life is a Gift". Just click on the first link in the green box on the right of this web page.
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Lacking Caffeine...it's causing brain damage
Okay, I didn't post my regular caffeine Friday article because I've been trying desperately to cut back.
Since that time, I've been called on several typos, posting a picture that displayed a copyright, and not paying close attention to my son's homework. So sue me.
What this tells me is that I must go back to at least one* large Monster drink daily just to stay alert. I swear I couldn't pull myself out of bed until 10:30 this morning, so evidently the caffeine is a necessity.
*possibly 2 or more
[Oh, and a big thanks to all you Darwinian Dodos out there who stalk my blog hourly searching diligently for any errors you can possibly find. You're like my own little proof readers. Bless you.]
Since that time, I've been called on several typos, posting a picture that displayed a copyright, and not paying close attention to my son's homework. So sue me.
What this tells me is that I must go back to at least one* large Monster drink daily just to stay alert. I swear I couldn't pull myself out of bed until 10:30 this morning, so evidently the caffeine is a necessity.
*possibly 2 or more
[Oh, and a big thanks to all you Darwinian Dodos out there who stalk my blog hourly searching diligently for any errors you can possibly find. You're like my own little proof readers. Bless you.]
Global Cooling?
Sigh....first it's global warming that's going to end life as we know it, and now scientists are worried about global cooling.
From here:
So, should we strip down to the bikinis or layer on the overcoats?
HT: Vox Day.
From here:
Back in 1991, before Al Gore first shouted that the Earth was in the balance, the Danish Meteorological Institute released a study using data that went back centuries that showed that global temperatures closely tracked solar cycles.
To many, those data were convincing. Now, Canadian scientists are seeking additional funding for more and better "eyes" with which to observe our sun, which has a bigger impact on Earth's climate than all the tailpipes and smokestacks on our planet combined.
And they're worried about global cooling, not warming.
So, should we strip down to the bikinis or layer on the overcoats?
HT: Vox Day.
Friday, February 08, 2008
The perfect Cinquain for a cold February
My son cracks me up. He came home today and said that his teacher really liked a Cinquain that he had written. Of course I told him I'd like to read it. He warned me before I read it that "It sounds kinda gay to me, but I guess that's what she was looking for". LOL...
Personally, I thought it was beautiful, and it makes me long for spring even more earnestly...
Fishing,
Beautiful day,
Sunshine drenching my skin,
Silver waves ripple by and by,
Night falls.
[Edit: Haiku to read Cinquain. Ever heard of that game "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?". Yeah, well evidently I'm not. I haven't written a Haiku for probably 25 years, and misunderstood my son to say that the above was a Haiku. Whoopsie! It's a Cinquain! mibad...]
Personally, I thought it was beautiful, and it makes me long for spring even more earnestly...
Fishing,
Beautiful day,
Sunshine drenching my skin,
Silver waves ripple by and by,
Night falls.
[Edit: Haiku to read Cinquain. Ever heard of that game "Are you smarter than a 5th grader?". Yeah, well evidently I'm not. I haven't written a Haiku for probably 25 years, and misunderstood my son to say that the above was a Haiku. Whoopsie! It's a Cinquain! mibad...]
Girly Men - The Media's attack on masculinity
I watched the premier of "Lipstick Jungle" last night. It looks like another one of those flicks where the power hungry liberated women do anything necessary to decimate their male counterparts. Shoot, the men these days might as well sit back and let the women take over...heck, we'll probably even elect a woman President come November.
Here's a Salvo aricle on the media's attack on masculinity.
I don't know...maybe the average man just doesn't care about wearing the pants in the family anymore...perhaps strong women turn them on, and they don't have a problem living with a dominant woman. Maybe in a couple decades or so, we'll have a bunch of stay home Dads, or worse yet, maybe men will just evolve themselves out of existence!
More Dino to Bird BS
Well, scientists are again questioning when, exactly, birds evolved from their dino ancestors.
Evidently, the fossil record and the inferences from molecular evolution are showing
"conflicting results". Of course, they attempt to explain the difference by appealing to the lack of fossils and the realization that the molecular clock is unreliable.
Ho hum...never in their wildest dreams would they question the fairy tale that lizards sprouted wings, started flying from tree to tree, and attained incredible migration and navigation capabilities by evolutionary mechanisms alone.
Since it appears likely that birds and dinos were thriving during the same time in history, I have to wonder how birds outlasted whatever it was that caused dinos to become extinct.
From the article:
Yeah, don't worry. They'll figure out how to explain it away with a few articles that include words and phrases like "perhaps", "it could be", "we might find", etc., etc.....like all of the other just-so stories we've come to know andloath love.
Related posts:
Another strike against dino to bird evolution
Early history of birds more diverse than once thought
Another interesting dino find
[HT to PNA for the photo]
Evidently, the fossil record and the inferences from molecular evolution are showing
"conflicting results". Of course, they attempt to explain the difference by appealing to the lack of fossils and the realization that the molecular clock is unreliable.
Ho hum...never in their wildest dreams would they question the fairy tale that lizards sprouted wings, started flying from tree to tree, and attained incredible migration and navigation capabilities by evolutionary mechanisms alone.
Since it appears likely that birds and dinos were thriving during the same time in history, I have to wonder how birds outlasted whatever it was that caused dinos to become extinct.
From the article:
What my colleagues and I did was apply all of these new methods to the problem of the origin of modern birds, with each method making different assumptions about how mutation rate changes across the tree," Brown said. He hoped the analysis would narrow the gap between fossil and molecular data, but in fact it only reinforced the rock-clock split by underscoring the finding that modern birds arose more than 100 million years ago.
So where does that leave the contentious camps of scientists trying to solve the puzzle of how the world's 10,000 bird species came about?
"Rather than fighting across groups, we now have the joint goal of explaining this rock-clock gap," Brown said. "Resolution of the issue will be fertile ground for future research for a while to come."
Yeah, don't worry. They'll figure out how to explain it away with a few articles that include words and phrases like "perhaps", "it could be", "we might find", etc., etc.....like all of the other just-so stories we've come to know and
Related posts:
Another strike against dino to bird evolution
Early history of birds more diverse than once thought
Another interesting dino find
[HT to PNA for the photo]
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Romney's out of the race
Well, looks like we're down to two...but, I'm assuming McCain will take the spot for the Republicans. Huckabee says he'd take the Vice President slot if it were offered.
From what I've read, it doesn't look like either one of them has a chance to take the win away from Hillary. Even Ann Coulter said she'd vote for Hillary over McCain in the November election.
Ugh...Ugh...Ugh...Ugh...
I'm not even sure I'm going to vote for the Presidential candidate in November.
With both Mr. FtK and I being self employeed, it's a little worrisome to consider new leadership. Mr. FtK has even been putting together his resume and is considering working for another company after 10 years of running his own business.
Blah...
Edit...I'm still hoping Obama has a sliver of a chance to beat Hillary....
From what I've read, it doesn't look like either one of them has a chance to take the win away from Hillary. Even Ann Coulter said she'd vote for Hillary over McCain in the November election.
Ugh...Ugh...Ugh...Ugh...
I'm not even sure I'm going to vote for the Presidential candidate in November.
With both Mr. FtK and I being self employeed, it's a little worrisome to consider new leadership. Mr. FtK has even been putting together his resume and is considering working for another company after 10 years of running his own business.
Blah...
Edit...I'm still hoping Obama has a sliver of a chance to beat Hillary....
The Obama camp now projects topping Clinton by 13 delegates, 847 to 834.
NBC News, which is projecting delegates based on the Democratic Party's complex formula, figures Obama will wind up with 840 to 849 delegates, versus 829 to 838 for Clinton.
Clinton was portrayed in many news accounts as the night’s big winner, but Obama’s campaign says he wound up with a higher total where it really counts — the delegates who will choose the party’s nominee at this summer’s Democratic convention.
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Nine Inches of Snow
I woke up to 9" of snow this morning...wasn't expecting that! The schools are all closed, and we spent the morning digging ourselves out.
The kids had a couple friends over, and they've been outside ALL DAY. I'm sure glad they're old enough to shovel snow...they did a great job of cleaning off the drive. Then we sent them next door to shovel snow from their Grandma's driveway. After that they started on the snow forts.
Here's a picture of last year's fortress...
The snow sure is pretty, but I'd prefer a warm beach setting at the moment.
Spring can't come soon enough...
The kids had a couple friends over, and they've been outside ALL DAY. I'm sure glad they're old enough to shovel snow...they did a great job of cleaning off the drive. Then we sent them next door to shovel snow from their Grandma's driveway. After that they started on the snow forts.
Here's a picture of last year's fortress...
The snow sure is pretty, but I'd prefer a warm beach setting at the moment.
Spring can't come soon enough...
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Monday, February 04, 2008
What will those silly Darwinists say next???
This is a hoot...some guy in a science forum spewed out this ridiculous comment at me today:
Pardon my name calling, but this guy is a moron.
It’s difficult to follow the logic here....of course it’s non-existent, so that would certainly explain it. He’s essentially saying that Christians can‘t be scientists. Good grief.... everyone knows that’s BS...there are even many YECs who are scientists and physicians.
He’s evidently forgetting that my children are and will continue to attend public elementary, high school and college. They’ll know everything they need to know about evolution so that they can feign the same mental illness that biologists who adhere to Darwinism have. In fact, they'll know more about evolution than the average science student because they'll have a background in ID and creationist theories as well.
Religion doesn’t stop science or research, and there have only been a few regrettable conflicts involving religion and science in the past.
From The Irrational Atheist....a list which was provided by PZ and his zoo with Vox Day's commentary...
Science, itself, has brought us many more problems to deal with than religion ever could...
Both my children love science and do very well in school. Imagine that....seeing at they're (gasp!) Christians. They know I want them to learn everything they possibly can about evolution. My hope is that they choose a career in the field of science...though I think my oldest has his heart set on engineering.
This, again, just goes to show that the underlying problem in this debate isn't that scientists have something to fear from religion, but rather it's their philosophical beliefs that are being questioned. They're not terribly fond of that...
[RB: bite me.]
I'm sure they [my children] will end up (and I'm sure, very nice) good little Christians. It's only too bad that we, as a country, won't be able to count on them to lead the way in technology, medicine or research.
Pardon my name calling, but this guy is a moron.
It’s difficult to follow the logic here....of course it’s non-existent, so that would certainly explain it. He’s essentially saying that Christians can‘t be scientists. Good grief.... everyone knows that’s BS...there are even many YECs who are scientists and physicians.
He’s evidently forgetting that my children are and will continue to attend public elementary, high school and college. They’ll know everything they need to know about evolution so that they can feign the same mental illness that biologists who adhere to Darwinism have. In fact, they'll know more about evolution than the average science student because they'll have a background in ID and creationist theories as well.
Religion doesn’t stop science or research, and there have only been a few regrettable conflicts involving religion and science in the past.
From The Irrational Atheist....a list which was provided by PZ and his zoo with Vox Day's commentary...
This was the most comprehensive list, which covered pretty much everything brought up by anyone else:
1. Galileo’s trial. (1633 a.d.)
2. The demonization of mathematics during the Dark Ages. (476 to 1000 a.d.)
3. The persecution of alchemists during the Middle Ages. (476 to 1485 a.d.)
4. The execution of Michael Servetus. (1553 a.d.)
5. Opposition to the theory of evolution.
6. The destruction of libraries and the burning of books during the fourth and fifth centuries.
7. The ban on the works of René Descartes. (1663 a.d.)
8. The imprisonment of Roger Bacon. (1277 a.d.)
9. The condemnation of Francis Bacon.29 (1621 a.d.)
10. The destruction of Islamic manuscripts by Cardinal Ximenes. (1499 a.d.)
11. The execution of Giordano Bruno. (1600 a.d.)
12. The execution of Lucilio Vanini. (1619 a.d.)
13. The murder of Hypatia. (415 a.d.)
14. The recantation of the Comte de Buffon. (1753 a.d.)
15. St. Paul’s rants against the “wisdom of the wise” in Corinthians. (First century a.d.)
16. The Byzantine emperor Justinian’s closing of Plato’s Academy in Athens.31 (529 a.d.)
17. The ecclesiastical monopoly upon lay education.
18. Martin Luther’s attacks upon reason. (1517 a.d.)
19. Rejection of modern medicine by the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other sects.
20. The excommunication of Johannes Kepler by the Catholic Church. (1612 a.d.)
Now, one can’t help but note that the most recent of these terrible sins against science took place more than 250 years ago, in 1753, except for the three that still apply today. This is not evidence of an ongoing war, it is merely a collection of historical grudges, most of them remarkably petty. By this standard, Christians would be justified in continuing to hold the Jews liable for the historical crime of murdering their Lord and Savior.32 Furthermore, five of these seven individual victims of Christian persecution were themselves Christians.
No wonder the Unholy Trinity found it difficult to come up with anything more specific than the spurious example of stem cell research.
The idea that religion is the enemy of science is a remarkably silly one when examined in scientific terms. Consider that Christian nation and the hostility to science that it supposedly harbors due to its extraordinary religiosity. And yet the United States of America accounts for more than one-third of the global scientific output despite representing only 4.5 percent of the global population. The scientific overperformance of religious America is a factor of 7.89, representing 28.7 percent more scientific output per capita than the most atheistic nation in Europe, France.33
Ironically, it is easy to provide an example of scientistry sinning against both the scientific method and the body of knowledge much more recent than most of religion’s supposed crimes. For example, Ernest Duchesne was a French military doctor who discovered the medical benefits of mold and submitted his doctoral thesis showing the result of his experiments with the therapeutic qualities of bacteria-killing molds to the Institut Pasteur, which ignored it because he was only twenty-three and had no standing in the scientific community. It would take another thirty-two years before Alexander Fleming discovered the antibiotic qualities of penicillin. As historian Daniel Boorstin notes in Cleopatra’s Nose, the chief lesson of the history of science is that it is not ignorance that menaces scientific advancement, but rather the illusion of knowledge.
Science, itself, has brought us many more problems to deal with than religion ever could...
Both my children love science and do very well in school. Imagine that....seeing at they're (gasp!) Christians. They know I want them to learn everything they possibly can about evolution. My hope is that they choose a career in the field of science...though I think my oldest has his heart set on engineering.
This, again, just goes to show that the underlying problem in this debate isn't that scientists have something to fear from religion, but rather it's their philosophical beliefs that are being questioned. They're not terribly fond of that...
[RB: bite me.]
Who said it?
"So it came about from 1860 onward that new believers [in Darwinism] became in a sense mentally ill, or, more precisely, either you became mentally ill or you quitted the subject of biology, as I had done in my early teens. The trouble for young biologists was that, with everyone around them ill, it became impossible for them to think they were well unless they were ill, which again is a situation you can read all about in the columns of Nature.”
HT: Borne at UD
HT: Borne at UD
Saturday, February 02, 2008
Illusion of Knowledge is Science's worst enemy
"As historian Daniel Boorstin notes in Cleopatra’s Nose, the chief lesson of the history of science is that it is not ignorance that menaces scientific advancement, but rather the illusion of knowledge."
-The Irrational Atheist.
Could. not. agree. more.
-The Irrational Atheist.
Could. not. agree. more.
Friday, February 01, 2008
The Irrational Atheist - Free Download
Vox Day's, The Irrational Atheist, is now available - PDF file HERE.
Thanks, Vox!!!
EDIT: Oh my goodness sakes, I'm only on pg. 7 and I'm *loving* this book already.
Vox is definitely an alpha male...
Thanks, Vox!!!
EDIT: Oh my goodness sakes, I'm only on pg. 7 and I'm *loving* this book already.
Vox is definitely an alpha male...
Wanna falsify Intelligent Design?
Go for it...
Demonstrate that living organisms can arise from non-living matter via purely non-telic processes.
Provide the scientific data which shows the transformations required can be accounted for by accumulating mutations.
Here is an easy one- tell me the specific methodology used to determine that the universe and life arose via non-telic processes.
Do those and not only will you shut me up but you would also receive a Nobel Prize! And you will have falsified ID.
Have I mentioned that I love alpha males??
Unfortunately, the feminist movement has sucked the dominance right out of our men and turned some of them into sniveling wussies. More's the pity...
Why didn't we just teach them to worship us for making them happy rather than try to whack off their balls and tell them they're inferior?
Now we've entered an age where most women have two jobs to manage because as much as we nag our men to get the household chores "done right", they simply don't always have a knack for it. Yeah, that's right...women are inherently better at domestic chores and raising children. Men are inherently better at bringing home the bacon and protecting the family. As politically incorrect as that statement is in this day and age, it's still 100% true. So, thanks a lot feminists for landing us with double duty!
Take a peek at some fairly embittered men who apparently don't think much of the feminist movement either. I'm still reserving my opinion of Vox Day and his readers as I just don't know enough about them yet to support them one way or the other, but they make some good points which are worth considering in respect to the feminist movement.
And, of course, the Grand Poobah of Atheist Fundamentalism certainly values the feminist movement because it may perhaps be one of the reasons for the decline of the church.
PZ Myer's comments along with the article he quotes from...
Unfortunately, I've had first hand experience watching a few women shove men right out of church leadership. IMHO, it is doing serious damage to the church.
On another note, did you catch the NOW (National Organization of Women) rant about the Kennedy's recent endorsement of Obama? Yeah, they were seriously ticked off because they want their *woman* in the Oval Office.
From this article...
Gag...
You can listen to a video clip of the President of the NYC NOW chapter here.
Their single reason for endorsing Hillary is to put a women in office hoping that she'll push their agenda as far as they demand, and Hillary promises to do so.
Like I said, I personally prefer strong men, and I was very blessed to find the perfect one for me. Mr. FtK teases me that it would take an alpha male to deal with me, but he's full of it. I'm a perfectly submissive wife...most of the time.
Now, look at those men. I often brag that if life as we know it blows up in our faces, Mr. FtK would manage to take care of our needs. He'd keep us safe and warm with food on the table regardless of what happened. He is ALPHA MALE...hear him roar. He worships me and I bow before him...it works.
Why didn't we just teach them to worship us for making them happy rather than try to whack off their balls and tell them they're inferior?
Now we've entered an age where most women have two jobs to manage because as much as we nag our men to get the household chores "done right", they simply don't always have a knack for it. Yeah, that's right...women are inherently better at domestic chores and raising children. Men are inherently better at bringing home the bacon and protecting the family. As politically incorrect as that statement is in this day and age, it's still 100% true. So, thanks a lot feminists for landing us with double duty!
Take a peek at some fairly embittered men who apparently don't think much of the feminist movement either. I'm still reserving my opinion of Vox Day and his readers as I just don't know enough about them yet to support them one way or the other, but they make some good points which are worth considering in respect to the feminist movement.
And, of course, the Grand Poobah of Atheist Fundamentalism certainly values the feminist movement because it may perhaps be one of the reasons for the decline of the church.
PZ Myer's comments along with the article he quotes from...
One interesting hypothesis for why it's [decline in church attendance] happening is that we can thank, in part, feminism.Women — the traditional mainstays of institutional religion — in huge numbers abruptly rejected the church's patriarchal exemplar of them as chaste, submissive "angels in the house" with all of the social and moral responsibility for community and family but none of the authority.
Unable to find acceptable religious role models or religious ideals that were not painful or oppressive, they reconstructed their identities as secular and sexual beings.
As they progressed into university graduate and professional schools and entered the work force, their horizons broadened and they discovered ways of serving that were more valuable than doing dishes and running church picnics.
I don't know how solid the data is on that claim, but it's at least intuitively attractive. Mothers are typically far more influential on their children's religious belief than fathers, at least in my experience, so anything that draws women away from the church is going to have strong effects.
Unfortunately, I've had first hand experience watching a few women shove men right out of church leadership. IMHO, it is doing serious damage to the church.
On another note, did you catch the NOW (National Organization of Women) rant about the Kennedy's recent endorsement of Obama? Yeah, they were seriously ticked off because they want their *woman* in the Oval Office.
From this article...
"Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal," NOW's New York State chapter said in a scorching rebuke. "Senator Kennedy's endorsement of Hillary Clinton's opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard."
...
"We are repaid with his abandonment!" the statement said. "He's picked the new guy over us. He's joined the list of progressive white men who can't or won't handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton."
The group said it was our obligation to "elect, unabashedly, a president that is the first woman after centuries of men who 'know what's best for us.'"
Gag...
You can listen to a video clip of the President of the NYC NOW chapter here.
Their single reason for endorsing Hillary is to put a women in office hoping that she'll push their agenda as far as they demand, and Hillary promises to do so.
Like I said, I personally prefer strong men, and I was very blessed to find the perfect one for me. Mr. FtK teases me that it would take an alpha male to deal with me, but he's full of it. I'm a perfectly submissive wife...most of the time.
Now, look at those men. I often brag that if life as we know it blows up in our faces, Mr. FtK would manage to take care of our needs. He'd keep us safe and warm with food on the table regardless of what happened. He is ALPHA MALE...hear him roar. He worships me and I bow before him...it works.
It's Friday...Yeah!
It's 8am, and I'm already sucking down my first jolt of caffeine for the day. I'm hoping to stop with two, but what the heck...it's Friday. Maybe it'll wind me up enough to finish everything that I haven't accomplished yet this week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)