Monday, April 28, 2008


OMG...Mother Goose and Hen Mallard are in imminent danger.

We woke up last night at 3AM to the sound of the geese freaking out of their minds. They were honking and hissing like you cannot believe. I sat up in bed in a daze, and my husband jumped up and opened the sliding door to the back deck. There was a freaking fox making it's way across the bridge to the island where the two were nesting, and the Daddy Goose was flapping his wings and honking so loud it was heart wrenching.

My husband barked at the fox and he ran off, but he will no doubt be back tonight.

Poor little things...

Mr. FtK is devising a plan...and it better be a good one. I can't bear to wake up to the sight of nothing other than broken egg shells along with duck and goose feathers.


Reminds me of the time we bought some guinea hens for the kids to raise, and after a few months, a fox got two of them one night and a few days later he got the others.


It's hard to stop a hungry fox.

**tears welling up again...reaches for a Kleenex**

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Design vs. Darwin

From Here...

Complex Ankle Puts Bounce in Your Step 04/25/2008

April 25, 2008 — “The ankle is incredibly efficient at working so the amount of energy you burn with the ankle is much lower than what would be predicted with just isolated muscle studies.” That’s what kinesiologist Daniel Ferris (U of Michigan) said in an article on Science Daily. His team measured the efficiency of the muscles and tendons of the ankle by designing a prosthetic boot containing a “bionic ankle,” connected to the nervous system with electrodes.

The Achilles tendon is able to store and release energy at just the right rates for both walking and sprinting. Scientists have helped amputees with prosthetic devices that can work for one or the other, but only the real ankle is optimized for both. During walking, the article said, the muscle and tendon act like a catapult to put a spring in your step – delivering about three times the energy that could be stored in an isolated muscle.

Does anyone see Darwin in this picture? The article had no use for that hypothesis. These scientists approached the human foot and ankle as if it were engineered, and advanced science accordingly. Ferris is in a Department of Biomedical Engineering. How would one even begin an evolutionary study of the human foot? How many lucky mutations would it take to get this “incredibly efficient” system by accident? Don’t expect adding a few more millions of years into the mix to help.

Most of the real footwork in science is done with a presumption of intelligent design. When mentioned at all, evolution is merely an afterthought in such studies. The scientists might say something like, “Isn’t it amazing what evolution produced.” Bosh; this was a design study from start to finish. Give credit where it is due. Intelligent Design promises much more productive knowledge and discovery than evolutionary theory ever did. Junk the just-so stories and let’s race to understand design in nature, because it’s not just apparent; it’s real.

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

For those of you new to the debate over Intelligent Design

Be sure to check in daily at EVOLUTION NEWS AND VIEWS. They've covered every aspect of this debate and have articles that will answer all your questions in regard to Intelligent Design as well as the documentary Expelled: No Intelligent Allowed. Be sure to take advantage of their archives.

Also, note that the Frequently asked Questions section of my blog provides many links and articles about ID for your convenience.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed / A Review of Sorts

[Very lengthy post much so that it‘s probably unreadable as a blog entry, but nevertheless I‘m posting it.]

It was a busy weekend, but I managed to get my family rounded up and through the doors of the movie theatre for the 4:25pm showing of Expelled Saturday afternoon. My son turned 13 on the 18th so we took him to his favorite restaurant that evening, and on Saturday, baseball season began for both my boys. It was a long day at the ball park, but the plan was to go home after the games, change, and head out to the movie theatre to hit one of the matinee times.

My two boys were pretty worn out after their games, and I wasn’t sure whether I should take them along because they were complaining a bit about seeing a “documentary”. They were pretty convinced it would be “boring“, and after reading all the negative articles from liberal reviewers regarding the film, I was feeling a bit apprehensive about seeing it myself. I wasn’t sure what to expect at this point, and after all the hype the past few months, I didn’t want to be disappointed. In the end, the boys decided to go with us because they were remotely curious about what their Mom’s been carrying on about for months.

I figured there wouldn’t be much of a crowd at the 4:25 show, so we didn’t rush, and we walked into the theatre just a couple minutes before the previews were shown. I was pleasantly surprised upon arrival....I counted 92 people in attendance, so that was nice to see. Luckily, my parents arrived early and saved us four seats in a good location.

I really wanted to consider the film from the opposition’s perspective because I know how upset they’ve been about it, though I knew that was going to be difficult. I’ve become very jaded over the past 5 years due to my involvement in the Internet debates on these issues. I’ve experienced so much of the blatant unrelenting sheer rage toward ID from the scientific community, and I’ve learned enough about the scientific issues to realize that they simply don’t have the data to back their claims in regard to Darwinian “facts”.

I enjoyed the interviews with those scientists supporting ID. While the film did an outstanding job of presenting the obvious...that there has to be a source of intellect for our existence, I would have liked to have seen even more of the scientific arguments that support ID addressed. This will be an important topic over the years to come, and although I do not see Darwinism fading into the abyss, I strongly believe that the inference of ID will flourish as the years progress.

It was interesting to see the relatively small office space at the Discovery Institute. I’d previously seen the DI in a you tube clip, but there was a bit more footage in this film. It really makes you appreciate all the more what they’ve accomplished over the years.

The responses from the supporters of Darwinism were very telling, but certainly no surprise to me. As an active supporter of ID and having had endless conversations with Darwinists, I’m quite familiar with how adamantly the scientific “elite” vehemently oppose ID...making the straw man argument that it is religion and then tearing into religious thought with as much fury as they can muster.

I found Will Provine’s words disturbing and profoundly sad. His claim that ID is “boring, boring, boring” was mind boggling. For me, the issues in this debate opened up a flood of questions, curiosity and unquenchable interest about nature, science, and yes, even God. I’ve learned so much over the past few years that I’d had little interest in in the past. I also found it so sad to hear him say that *ultimately* life really has no purpose or meaning, and that if his cancer returns (which it has since his interview) he plans to take his own life at some point rather than live with the illness. I suppose euthanasia would be an acceptable choice for many, and as long as others are *never* pressured to make the same choice, I suppose our understanding of free will allows for him to make that type of decision. It would break my heart to have a relative take their life, and I would personally rather live with pain and suffering than to put my children through that type of pain, but to each his own. Will assures us that his atheism was an enlightenment for him, and he is anything but unhappy about his outlook on life.

Michael Ruse....what can I say. After the flick, we were talking about the film in the parking lot on the way to the car. My oldest pipes up... “life arose on the back of” *Ahem*....first I choked down laughter, and then I popped him for dropping the F bomb (kids these days....sheesh!). Honestly, I’d have to say I’m with him on this one. Ruse makes you wonder how supposed “rational” scientists can carry on in excitement about molecules originating or “piggybacking” and evolving on crystals yet shudder at the much more reasonable concepts of, say, design in nature, IC, and the anthropic principle. (See Ruse on youtube here).

PZ Myers...goodness, he was so calm and mild mannered, no? Certainly not the guy we know from Pharyngula. But, nevertheless, his comments comparing religion to knitting and his want to make religion a “side dish” rather than the “main course” brought out the PZ that we all know and love. I would describe PZ’s performance as arrogant and chilling.

Richard Dawkins came across as a sputtering buffoon. There were giggles throughout the theatre during his interview with Stein. For a man who prides himself as “reasonable” and “rational”, he certainly has never come across that way when discussing ID or the origin of life.

Enough about the Darwin supporters....let’s move on to David Berlinksi. He was certainly a shining star in this documentary. His credentials are impressive and his reasoning behind his questioning Darwinian evolution certainly cannot be described as religiously motivated as he is an agnostic. Here is a clip of Berlinski in action though it’s not from the documentary.

Much of the rage against this film that is coming from the Darwinist camp is due to the Eugenics/Nazi connection to natural selection. I have tried very hard to understand their anger, but I still think it’s misdirected. I initially thought perhaps it would have been best to leave the topic out of the film altogether merely because of the anger it ignites, but if they’d eliminated the connection from the film, the Darwinists would find something else to complain about, and social Darwinism is an important issue.

The Darwin camp acts as if the film damns Darwin, himself, for causing the Holocaust, and that is *not* what I came away with. Both Berlinski and Stein mentioned that Darwinism doesn’t by any means lead to Nazism or that Darwin himself would support what Hitler did, but rather that Hitler used the concept of natural selection to support his idea of a master race. He worked to maintain the purity of his race through eugenics programs and compulsory sterilization of the mentally ill and the mentally deficient. That is just part of history and something that we shouldn’t hide under the rug. People should be aware that social Darwinism has implications about the sanctity of life, and Will Provine provided a good example of that. Taking one’s own life due to illness or for whatever reason wouldn’t *necessarily* be morally wrong for someone with a Darwinian worldview. One has to be careful how far some of these ideas are taken, and it’s wasn’t out of place to bring the topic up in the documentary. Evolution does not imply eugenics, euthanasia, abortion etc., but natural selection can be used to support these practices. This isn’t an attack on Darwin and his theory, but rather a warning that evil people can and have used the theory to support their actions in the past. The same thing applies to religious thought, and several pro-Darwinism scientists and authors have covered this thoroughly in books and articles. Dawkins even did his own documentary titled The Root of all Evil which suggested that the world would be better off without religion because of the way some people use it to support their heinous acts.

I was really curious what my husband thought about this connection as he’s somewhat of a history freak. He told me after the movie that he has stood in front of Darwin’s statue in the The National History Museum just as Stein had in the movie. He’d taken a history course in college that offered a class trip to London for those interested. I asked him if he thought the Hitter/eugenics connection seemed out of place in the movie, and I explained to him that Darwinists were pretty upset about this segment of the flick. Bear in mind that my husband has little interest in this debate and is far from your every Sunday, regular church going fundamentalist. Anyway, he stated that anyone who tries to tell you that there was no connection between Nazism and Darwinism simply doesn’t know their history. He was quick to say that natural selection wasn’t the only factor in the extermination of the Jews, and that even Christianity factored into the equation. Martin Luther wrote some very anti-Semitic passages about his want to be rid of the Jews. Hitler was looking for anything to support his want to create a perfect race of people. My husband thought it was appropriate in the film because it shows what can happen when people blindly follow the establishment, authority figures, or “the majority“. This is an important issue to contemplate in both science and religion as well as politics.

My parents understood the connection as well, but likewise didn’t come away from the movie thinking that Darwin was personally to blame for the Holocaust. Of course, they are both college educated, know their history, are both of German ancestry as well as lifetime Lutherans. So, they know all about Martin Luther and his anti-Semitic rhetoric which played a part in Hitler‘s way of thinking as well. Again, I just don’t get the rage over the Holocaust connection.

Both my boys really enjoyed the film, and my oldest nudged me during the movie a few times asking questions and making comments. Once he leaned over and said that it was much better than he thought it was going to be, and another time he started giggling hysterically. I asked him what the heck was so funny because it was during a segment when Eugenie was standing in front of a map of the US that was covered with different colored thumb tacks pinpointing where they needed to put out “Creationist” fires. He said he was laughing because “that is the woman in that rapping youtube video, isn’t it? I just can‘t take anything she says seriously after seeing that.” LOL... He also thought it was funny that Topeka had a big red tack on it. I didn’t even notice that, but all three of my guys did. They poked fun of me and said that Eugenie put that big red tack there because that’s where the dreaded FtK lives. Whatever.

I asked my oldest what part he enjoyed the most, and he said that he really liked the cell animation. He thought it was very cool. He also stated that he couldn’t believe that Dawkins thinks there is the possibility of design and that the designer could be an alien, but not God. Hubby and both boys were floored by Dawkins interview, and they were quite positive that something horrific happened to him at some point in his life to hold what seemed like a seething hatred for the God of scripture. I told them it wasn’t likely, and that there are many people out there who I’ve talked with that would probably give you the same description. I’ve been assured by them that nothing other than “reason” is to blame for their rejection and extreme distaste for the concept of God. They mentioned the segment where Dawkins read from The God Delusion quoting his own description of the Old Testament God. It went like this...

Offering this excerpt from his book, Dawkins declared with disdain, “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

I guess that does sound like hatred, but of course Dawkins can’t hate something that he doesn’t think exists, so it’s merely a hatred for the *idea* of the God of scripture. Dawkins didn’t bother my guys much because he came across as he always does...angry and contradictory. He’s too amusing to be offending. OTOH, PZ’s “knitting” and “side dish” comments pissed them off...all three of them.

After I quizzed my kids about what they thought of the documentary (they said they were really glad they went) they both returned the question. I told them that I enjoyed it, but it was more serious than I had expected...which is not necessarily a bad thing. But, I’ve grown to take some of these issues a little too much to heart over the years, and many times the debate just makes me sad, and I told them I felt the same way about the film. What we are experiencing in this debate is a war of worldviews. Scientists from both sides of the debate see the same evidence and walk away with different interpretations of that data they are researching. Because of the religious *implications* on both sides of the debate, it’s turned into something really ugly, and there is no way to stop it, IMHO. Philosophical naturalists are not going to relent and allow freedom of inquiry in the science classroom. If anything implies design in nature, it will be have to be interpreted under the guise of the “scientific method” or methodological naturalism. So, whether the ID folks are right or not, ID simply can’t be considered...the truth may never be acknowledged because of the naturalistic gatekeeper that guards the lab.

As far as academic freedom is concerned, it’s ridiculous for Darwinists to claim that ID proponents aren’t discriminated against because of their involvement in the ID community. One only has to hang out with the Sciencebloggers for a while to know that that is exactly what happens. Shoot, they even turn on each other in a heartbeat if they perceive that anything written gives any credence to ID whatsoever. It’s an ugly reality, though you’ll never, *ever* get them to admit that. No need really...just do some surfing through the science and atheist blogs and forums. They provide proof of discrimination against ID and it’s supporters quite frequently. One must also look at this from the Dawinists side of the debate as there have been teachers who have been discriminated against in their schools because of their support of Darwinian evolution. This type of discrimination usually comes from individual school boards or other teachers or parents within the schools, not from the scientific establishment, although this doesn’t make it any less wrong. *Both* sides of this debate should be heard...the more education the better.

Eugenie and NCSE have been very busy making claims that the movie is full of lies, and I’ve read through many of their accusations and remain stunned. I found no “lies” in the movie whatsoever. That’s where the insanity of this debate lies. It’s unfathomable for proponents on both sides of the debate to conceive that their opposition actually believes what they put forth. I read the NCSE site and simply cannot believe the spin they put on the issues surrounding this debate, yet it’s apparent that they believe they are being completely honest. As I’ve said before, this is one of the strangest aspects of the ID/evolution debate.

All that said, I think the documentary was excellent and there was a lot of applause at the end of the showing that I attended. My hope is that the hysterics will eventually ease and that scientists from both ends of the spectrum will come to acknowledge that worldviews play a huge factor in the debate on origins and Darwinian evolution. We should all be trying to work together rather than tearing each other apart, but I won’t hold my breath waiting to see this happen. I do think that the Beware of the Believers video helped a bit in this regard. That little animation was pure genius, and it shows how ridiculous we’ve all become and how we can view the same things and come away with completely different interpretations.

Monday, April 21, 2008

Friday, April 18, 2008


I'm not surprised...

More Expelled Teasers

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

The documentary hits the big screen TODAY.

GO SEE IT!!!!!

It was a Hoax...

....thank God.

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - A Yale University art student duped the student newspaper with a story about inducing repeated abortions on herself and using the blood for her senior art project, the school said Thursday.

The story about Aliza Shvarts' project, published Thursday in the Yale Daily News, swept across blogs and media outlets - including the Drudge Report, Fox News and The Washington Post - before Yale issued a statement saying it investigated and found it all to be a hoax that was Shvarts' idea of elaborate "performance art."

"The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman's body," said Yale spokeswoman Helaine Klasky.

Shvarts'"performance art" included visual representations, a news release and other narrative materials, Klasky said. When confronted by three senior Yale officials, including two deans, Shvarts acknowledged that she did not seek any abortions.

EDIT: 4/18

Or, maybe it wasn't a hoax....guess we'll never know for sure. We do know, however, that this is one sick chick either way.

Thursday, April 17, 2008

The Day the Internet Stood Still

Oh the family would freak, and I'd experience horrific Internet withrawal symptoms. It happened when our electricity went out for a couple days this winter. It was painful.

The relationship between art and the human body

This is one of the more perverse things I've read...

Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project [at Yale], a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.


"I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity," Shvarts said. "I think that I'm creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be."

The display of Schvarts' project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts' self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.

Killing your children one by one for artistic purposes and putting their remains on display...I think I'm going to be physically ill.


What's that in the sky?

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

On a Winter's Day...


Hilarious Expelled Trailer...

HT Davescot

Chilling quote for the day...

In regard to ID proponents...

"We just need to make sure that we do all that we can to bottle them up; they will never go away, but we can lessen their impact."

That's what it's all about for these folks..."bottle them up / lessen their impact".

That's going to be pretty hard to do as it appears that ID proponents are out smarting these folks attempts to "bottle them up" at every turn lately. The public is waking up and taking notice of their nonsense. You may recall the words in my previous post...

While bullying tactics may work against some individuals who are trying to explore the origins of life, it will not work against us. We certainly will not allow a small group of self-appointed gatekeepers to infringe our rights of free speech and our obligation to expose them for what they are – namely, intellectual thugs unwilling to accept any dissent from Darwinian orthodoxy.”

Ben Stein, the star of the movie, also makes it clear that no one will shut him up. “I came to this project unsure what I would find. I am now amazed at the intolerance of many academic elites. I feel that it is my mission to speak out on behalf of targeted dissenters and fight for their freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry.”

Expelled Producers Set the Record Straight

As I mentioned in a previous post, Darwinists have been trying to find some way in which to delay the release date of the film or find something in the film for which they can press legal charges against the producers.

Their latest claim has been one regarding copyright infringement. As this is a very significant accusation that has been spread throughout Internet circles, action has been taken against the claims. This evening, I received the following email:

April 15, 2008

EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed Producers File Lawsuit and Expose Other Efforts to Suppress Free Speech

Movie to Open in over 1,000 theaters This Friday

Premise Media is ready to challenge the unfounded copyright infringement claims asserted recently by representatives of XVIVO, LLC concerning original animation Premise Media created for the documentary, EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed.

On April 14, 2008, Premise Media filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas seeking declaratory judgment that there is no copyright or other infringement. Premise Media also seeks its attorneys’ fees in responding to the XVIVO claims.

The suit results from unfounded claims recently made by representatives of XVIVO. These claims have received wide distribution as part of an ongoing campaign attempting to discredit the film and its producers.

Premise Media has also learned of grass root efforts that are underway to try to influence the ranking of internet searches regarding Expelled by those wanting to learn about the film. Their stated goal is an attempt to counter-site those searchers to other websites that criticize the themes in the movie.

“We are not surprised that opponents of our film are attempting to interfere with its important message. As the movie documents, similar tactics are being used across the country against many of the researchers, scientists, and professors who want to engage in free debate within science but have inadequate resources to challenge the Establishment. However, we do have the platform to confront the ‘thought police,’ and we will work tirelessly to open the doors of free speech and inquiry,” said Executive Producer and Premise Chairman Logan Craft.

Executive Producer Walt Ruloff noted that, “EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed opens in over 1,000 theaters nationwide this Friday, April 18th. It is interesting that these efforts are made less than ten days before the movie debuts and involve those who continually seek to thwart open debate. While bullying tactics may work against some individuals who are trying to explore the origins of life, it will not work against us. We certainly will not allow a small group of self-appointed gatekeepers to infringe our rights of free speech and our obligation to expose them for what they are – namely, intellectual thugs unwilling to accept any dissent from Darwinian orthodoxy.”

Ben Stein, the star of the movie, also makes it clear that no one will shut him up. “I came to this project unsure what I would find. I am now amazed at the intolerance of many academic elites. I feel that it is my mission to speak out on behalf of targeted dissenters and fight for their freedom of speech and freedom of inquiry.”

You can find more information regarding these charges at Uncommon Descent.

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

More on "Expelled Exposed"

John West provides us with more information regarding the website set up by the NCSE.

'Ol Genie Scott, who runs the show over at the NCSE has been a busy, busy girl what with having to do the best spinning of her career. There is a lot at stake with the release of this movie....

Given that the NCSE is part of the very evolution lobby that is seeking to suppress intelligent design, its effort to further malign the victims of Darwinist intolerance is rather tacky. But tackiness doesn’t stop the NCSE from trying to depict its director Eugenie Scott as a veritable Mother Teresa, selectively quoting from her emails to make it appear that she was trying to protect evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg from persecution at the Smithsonian! Yeah, right. This is the same person who circulated “talking points” to Smithsonian officials to guide them in their campaign against Sternberg. This also is the same person who was asked to spy on Sternberg’s outside activities by a Smithsonian official in order to find a way to get rid of Sternberg. And this is the same caring person who when asked about Sternberg’s plight by The Washington Post, seemed to suggest that Sternberg was lucky more wasn’t done to get rid of him: “If this was a corporation, and an employee did something that really embarrassed the administration, really blew it, how long do you think that person would be employed?” Fortunately, if you want to find out what really happened to Sternberg at the Smithsonian, you don’t have to depend on the NCSE’s highly selective rendition of the facts. You can read for yourself the results of two separate federal investigations into the matter, here and here.

The Darwinian propagandists are in high gear!!

Spin, Genie, spin.....!!

Just FYI...

Ben Stein will be on Larry King Live today.

The "Tree Man" has 4 lbs. of warts removed

Oh. my. goodness.

Y.u.c.k....poor guy!

Monday, April 14, 2008

Nature is taking it's course...

Our Hen Mallard and Mother Goose seem to have worked things out. They are nesting peacefully approximately six yards from each other. Now our only worry is the Muskrat that keeps swimming by them. We'd love to see some cute little babies this spring....hopefully, they'll make it this year.

Here are some pictures I took this morning...

The little island where they are nesting:

The Hen Mallard...if you can spot her:

Mother Goose with Daddy close by:

They're so fun to watch.

The Dawn of Designer Babies

That's right folks...step right up and design the child you've always dreamed of...

A new form of cloning has been developed that is easier to carry out than the technique used to create Dolly the sheep, raising fears that it may one day be used on human embryos to produce "designer" babies.

Scientists who used the procedure to create baby mice from the skin cells of adult animals have found it to be far more efficient than the Dolly technique, with fewer side effects, which makes it more acceptable for human use.

The mice were made by inserting skin cells of an adult animal into early embryos produced by in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). Some of the resulting offspring were partial clones but some were full clones – just like Dolly.

Unlike the Dolly technique, however, the procedure is so simple and efficient that it has raised fears that it will be seized on by IVF doctors to help infertile couples who are eager to have their own biological children.

One scientist said this weekend that a maverick attempt to perform the technique on humans is now too real to ignore. "It's unethical and unsafe, but someone may be doing it today," said Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of American biotechnology company Advanced Cell Technology.


"In addition to the great therapeutic promise demonstrated by this technology, the same technology opens a whole new can of worms," Dr Lanza said.

"At this point there are no laws or regulations for this kind of thing and the bizarre thing is that the Catholic Church and other traditional stem-cell opponents think this technology is great when in reality it could in the end become one of their biggest nightmares," he said. "It is quite possible that the real legacy of this whole new programming technology is that it will be introducing the era of designer babies.

"So for instance if we had a few skin cells from Albert Einstein, or anyone else in the world, you could have a child that is say 10 per cent or 70 per cent Albert Einstein by just injecting a few of their cells into an embryo," he said.

Can you imagine the conversations at the PTA meetings?

"We cloned little Billy after Shaquille O'Neal...his Daddy wanted a basketball player. Who is little Sally cloned after?"

"Well, we opted for brains, so we went for the "Scientist Package", but we're not sure it took...she seems a little slow. How about your little Timmy, Martha?"

"Unfortunately, we didn't have the cash to design little Timmy....sigh."

"Expelled Exposed"--Exposed

Thanks for the great article, Rob...

The folks at the National Center for Science Education have set up a website to attack the film Expelled before it ever gets into movie theaters. It undoubtedly will be a resource for those already organized to damn the film as quickly and thoroughly as possible. This is the ideology of the NCSE, which, after all, is not what it sounds like, but a lobby for Darwinian evolution.

Most of the material is pure diatribe and misrepresentation. The film’s main theme is that those scientists who support intelligent design, or even question Darwinian evolution, are coming under vicious personal and professional attack. Much of it (the interviews in the film show) is motivated by atheist ideology.

But that is not a theme that Eugenie Scott and colleagues want to discuss. Instead they are eager to do whatever they can to create other controversies that they do want to discuss. As usual, that involves creating a straw man and then vigorously knocking it down.


Saturday, April 12, 2008

Framing, framing, framing..blah, blah, blah

Sometimes it's extremely difficult to tell whether those in the Scienceblogs community are framing science or framing atheism or whether they even realize there is a difference.

Matt Nesbit at "Framing Science" writes...

Ask yourself: What's the best way you can promote atheism in your community or on your campus?

The majority of Sciencebloggers are atheists and it certainly comes across on their blogs. Politics, religion, framing and religion bashing are found in many of their articles.

It seems to me that to anyone reading their blogs on a daily basis it would become highly obvious that, regardless of how much "framing" they do, most of them do equate science with atheism.

They just aren't all as willing to go to the lengths that PZ has gone with his blatant prosetylizing.

Wouldn't it be interesting to take a course from many of these scienceblogs professors? You have to wonder how long it might be before the ACLU will be taking more cases like this one.

Hopefully, after Expelled shines a light on the nonsense going on in the scientific community, more students will question the "facts" they are being spoon fed them.

World Magazine Inteviews Ben Stein


Friday, April 11, 2008

Oh, this is priceless....


The humor in this debate is never ending.

Excellent Interview with Stein

HT: William Dembski at UD

Be Sure to Spend Your Money on Ben Stein’s New Movie: My Recent Conversation with Ben Stein

By Jerry Newcombe, 4/3/08

[From email sent to [William Dembski] by Coral Ridge Ministries]

At this time, Ben Stein is unleashing his excellent film on the issue of origins—EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed. This motion picture (an entertaining documentary with theatrical release) could cause a sea change on this issue. Ben Stein shows repeatedly that well-qualified scientists are losing their jobs because of their views on origins. If they teach creationism, gone! If they introduce students to the concept that some people believe in Intelligent Design, next! But even if they just believe in Intelligent Design or creation and this becomes known, then these scientists or science teachers get expelled from the Academy. Furthermore, even if they question Darwinism, they can lose their jobs. I have seen a director’s cut of the film (Release: April 18, 2008), and I think it is excellent!

I had the privilege of sitting down with Ben and having a conversation for Coral Ridge Ministries-television. Please, look for him on upcoming editions of the Coral Ridge Hour. Here are some of the highlights or our conversation:

Jerry: What’s a nice Jewish boy like you doing in a nice Christian film like this?

Ben: What’s a nice Jewish boy like me doing in a “Christian” film like this? It’s a film for people who believe in freedom of speech. It’s a film for people who believe that worship of God and the worship of God as the author and creator of the universe is a legitimate belief and legitimately able to be spoken about. It’s a film for Muslims who believe in that. It’s a film for Hindus who believe in that. It’s a film for people who believe in God or believe in freedom of speech or believe in the idea that academic discourse in America’s colleges and universities should not be shut down. It’s a film for people who believe in what Thomas Jefferson thought of as his vision of America. It’s not a proselytizing film for Christians or Muslims or Jews or Hindus. It’s a film for people who want to believe and who do believe that there is a God, an Intelligent Designer, and you know something, it’s even a film for people who don’t believe in that, but they believe in freedom of speech for everyone anyway.

Jerry: Why did you personally agree to participate in the film?

Ben: Because I had always had very serious anger about Darwinism, because I think Darwinism led to the Holocaust. I think this belief that there are superior and inferior races, and that the superior races had a moral duty to eliminate the inferior races was one of the main building blocks of Nazism and the Holocaust, and I never thought that had gotten out enough. I had always thought there were enormous gaps in Darwinism, and I never realized quite how big those gaps were. But once we started talking to the scientists that we interviewed for this movie, I realized the gaps were enormous. How did the cell get so complicated? How did life begin? One day there was no life, the next day there was life, how did that start? How come nobody’s ever been able to replicate in the laboratory? How did the laws of physics get created? How come the planets don’t fall on top of each other? Where did gravity come from? Where did thermodynamics come from? Where did any of the basic governing principles of the universe come from? And Darwinism says nothing about those things, and we would like to say, open your mind to the possibility that there is an Intelligent Designer who created the governing principles of the universe, who created the incredibly complex cell, who created life where there was no life. The Darwinists say one day there was nothing (claps hands) bang, the next day there was something. Where’d that come from? Explain to us how you get something out of nothing. And if you can explain it to us, we’d like to hear about it. But let us talk too.

Jerry: One of the most amazing aspects of your film is that even the people who deny Intelligent Design or creation or whatever actually do in a sense affirm Intelligent Design, only it has nothing to do with God; it’s spacemen or something like that.

Ben: Right. It was amazing to interview Richard Dawkins, a huge power in the atheistic materialism movement, huge power, very successful author from a British university—Oxford. And he actually was much more forthcoming on the idea that maybe there was an Intelligent Designer. But his idea was that maybe people had visited earth from outer space and started earth going and started. But then, where did gravity come from? Where did thermodynamics come from? Where did the basic laws of physics come from? Where did those things come from? There has to have been some overall Intelligent Designer, some organizing force in the universe. Dawkins doesn’t know what it was. He thinks maybe there are a quadrillion bazillion parallel universes that don’t work, and we’re the only one that does work. That seems a bit far fetched. You know, it’s interesting, the anti-God, pro-Darwinist people ask us to believe things that are a heck of a lot more far fetched than what we ask people to believe in. And they ask us to believe that just by random chance we have this earth and all the incredible complexity of the universe. And we say, “Well, what if there was an organizing force?” And I don’t think our position is anywhere near as far fetched as theirs….[The universe is] so much more complex than the mind of man can understand that it’s like a dog trying to understand Newton. And you know who said that? Darwin. Darwin said it’s all so complex that for a human brain to try to understand it is like a dog trying to understand Newton’s physics.

Jerry: What would you say to Eugenie Scott [ardent evolutionist, Director of National Center for Science Education] types, who would basically say, Science is what the scientists say it is…the scientists say that Creation and Intelligent Design—that kind of idea is not scientific, and the people who believe that are akin to members of the flat earth society?

Ben: I would say to Eugenie Scott, Yes, you are right; in reality, science is what the scientists say it is. That is the reality of the situation, but it’s not a good reality. It’s not a reality that advances knowledge. It’s not a reality that advances the frontiers of man’s understanding of the universe or even of the human body. Eugenie Scott, you’re right, in the sense that you say, “We’re the boss, do what we say.” And that is usually how life operates; the boss gets to decide what’s right and what’s wrong. As Bob Dylan said, “The princes make the rules for the wise men and the fools.” And in this world, big science are the princes. We’re asking for a world where there aren’t princes and kings. We’re asking for Thomas Jefferson’s world, where there is freedom of speech for everyone, where people can say, “Look, you have no proof of this. You’ve never seen a single mammalian species evolve into a separate species. It’s never been seen. So why don’t you give us a chance to give our explanation? You’ve never seen how a cell got to have a million moving parts. Let us give our explanation. You’ve never seen how the laws of gravity got created. Let us give our explanation. You’re right, Eugenie Scott, you’ve got all the power right now. We agree, you’ve got the power. We’re just little dinky nothings, just asking for what Thomas Jefferson asked the King of England for—freedom of speech, freedom of representation, freedom to make our points. We’re just little dinky nothings, but we have truth on our side.” Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “The arc of history is long, but it inclines towards truth.”

Jerry: Did it surprise you to learn as you got into this whole project how many credentialed, excellent scientists, well-published, etc. were being expelled because of their views and only their views?

Ben: It surprised me that so many scientists were being expelled, punished, having their grants taken away, humiliated, belittled, mocked, because they believed that there was an Intelligent Designer, or even the possibility of an Intelligent Designer. But what surprised me even more, as we traveled and made our journey all around the world, was that there were so many highly credentialed scientists who did believe in the possibility of Intelligent Design, and who did severely question Darwinism. We drove through hellacious traffic between Paris and Brussels to interview a very famous Polish geneticist, who was in Brussels with the European Parliament. He made a point so brilliant, I’ve never heard anyone even come close to repeating this point. He said, “In random mutation and natural selection, genetic material is destroyed. But to advance and make a more sophisticated human being, you have to add to genetic material. So, how can you both destroy genetic material by random mutation and natural selection and have a more advanced creature by the addition of DNA?” So, nobody’s ever answered that even remotely. And so what we say is, “Look, if we’ve got questions by intelligent, extremely well credentialed, well respected scientists like that, answer our questions. We’ll go away. You tell us the answers to those questions, we’ll go back to our holes somewhere. Tell us the answer to those questions. Tell us how life began, tell us how physics began, tell us how gravity began. We’ll go back to our holes back there in West Tennessee and you can keep running Harvard and Yale and Princeton. But you don’t have the answers. The truth is: Dr. [Richard] Dawkins,[1] Dr. [Daniel] Dennett,[2] Dr. Scott, you don’t have the answers and you know it, and that’s why you’re so defensive about it.”

This last point reminds me of an argument the late Dr. D. James Kennedy (founding president of Coral Ridge Ministries) once made on the same subject. He said the evolutionists are so vociferous in their opposition to anything that smacks of the creationist view because their own arguments are scientifically crumbling. Their shrillness was akin to the janitor finding a minister’s pulpit notes on Monday morning. The pastor had scribbled in the margin: “Argument weak—pound pulpit here!”

At the very end of our very pleasant discussion, Ben added (with a twinkle in his eye): “By the way, I’m not a nice Jewish boy.” Well, I think he is. So does everyone who has met him that I have talked to.

It has been said that when a boss gets fired, he gets fired by the people below him. The people above him just deliver the news. Using that generality as a model, perhaps the time will come soon—thanks in large part to Ben Stein’s new film—that the tables will be turned on the Darwinist bullies who keep down bonafide scientists and science teachers because they dare question Darwinian dogma. In short, perhaps the day will come soon when true academic freedom will extend to those who refuse to bow at the altar of Darwinism.

I highly recommend that everyone go out and see Ben Stein’s movie. We can help make it a big success if we pack the theatres, especially the opening weekend (scheduled: April 18, 2008). Hope to see you there!

Ben Stein gets it...

We "IDiots" are told time and time again that we never ask questions, we're ignoring reality, we blindly follow our faith beliefs and close our eyes to scientific "facts". Yet, I've been asking these same questions Stein addresses of Darwinists for five years and they have no answers other than to assure me that although we see design in nature, it most certainly is not due to an intelligent source.


Thursday, April 10, 2008

Oh my...

I've already mentioned the Expelled gate crashing incident which involved PZ Myers & Dick to the Dawk, but I certainly wondered about the dialogue that took place in the theatre between Dawkins and producer Mark Mathis after the showing of the film.

Mathis gives us a birds eye view of the incident here.

Wow...a must read. Dawkins reign is coming to an end, IMHO. Most of his claims in his latest book, The God Delusion, have been utterly destroyed by Vox Day, and now he not only looks extremely foolish in this flick, but also gets called on his dishonesty during the Q&A that took place after this particular private showing of the film.

Goodness would seem that this militant "New Atheism" is seeing it's demise.

It's really a shame that these two consider themselves the voice of the scientific community. They're giving scientists all over the country a bad name.

The major meltdown before the big bang

More on Expelled:

On April 18, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," will boast the largest U.S. opening of any documentary film ever.

Scheduled for release in 1,000 theatres, "Expelled" will be hotter than "Farenheit 9/11," which debuted on 868 screens, and much more convenient to see than "An Inconvenient Truth," which I was surprised to find opened on only four screens nationwide despite all the hype, peaking at 587 before its appeal melted.


On March 20, two Darwinian defenders, who accepted payment to talk like buffoons on the film, tried to bust into a private screening in Minnesota.

"PZ" Myers, a University of Minnesota biology professor and proprietor of the popular atheist blog Pharyngula, was quickly expelled, much as he condones expelling professors who deviate from the monkey line, as he wrote on The Panda's Thumb blog:

The only appropriate responses [to Intelligent Design proponents] should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing and humiliation of some teachers, many school board members, and vast numbers of sleazy far-right politicians." ~ Comment #35130, PZ Myers, June 14, 2005

Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist at Oxford who wrote the book "The God Delusion," gained entry only by foregoing his evolved surname for the formal, Clinton.

Myers then disrupted an "Expelled" conference call with reporters the next day.

These uncivilized spectacles caused a liberal mass meltdown. According to an "Expelled" press release, the "Expelled" controversy held the No. 1 slot in the blogosphere all day March 24, as registered by Nielson's BlogPulse, and garnered over 800 Technorati results.

If we are seeing this meltdown on the left even before "Expelled" officially opens, expect a Big Bang on April 18.

A meltdown indeed. The Darwinoid club members are falling all over themselves trying to discredit this film. I've watched as they've tried to advance several angles in which to sue the producers of the film as well. If you want to know more about their gripes, google...I'm not giving their idiocy publicity. Start with PZ Myers, atheist extraordinaire. They are *not* happy campers.

The truth hurts...

Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Evolution News and Views

There are some great articles this week over at Evolution News and Views.

Be sure to read them:

Is ID Falsifiable? Of Course It Is. It's Falsification is Darwinism.

What about evolution is random and what is not?

And, as a special treat, you can listen to Dr. David Berlinski's recent talk in Washington D.C..

Teacher attacked by students caught on film

If you thought the teen beating was bad, here's a clip of a teacher getting attacked by her students *in class*.

Mercy...something has to be done about the violence our kids are displaying. It's time to junk the video games and televisions...seriously.

Are Scientists Ritalin Junkies??!

Well, I'll be learn something new every day:

Twenty percent of scientists admit to using performance-enhancing prescription drugs for non-medical reasons, according to a survey released Wednesday by Nature, Britain's top science journal.
The overwhelming majority of these med-taking brainiacs said they indulged in order to "improve concentration," and 60 percent said they did so on a daily or weekly basis.


Almost 70 percent of 1,258 respondents who answered the question said they would be willing to risk mild side effects in order to "boost your brain power" by taking cognitive-enhancing drugs.

Half of the drug-takers reported such effects, including headaches, jitteriness, anxiety and sleeplessness.

Wilson of the NIDA expressed surprise at the rate of substance abuse shown, but cautioned that the survey did not meet rigorous scientific standards.

"This is a volunteer poll of people responding to an Internet survey. There might be an over-representation," he said.

But previous research has shown that, as the boundary between treating illness and enhancing wellbeing continues to blur, taking performance-boosting products continues to gain in cultural acceptance.

Spring has Sprung

Our home is located right next to a small pond, and every year about this time, we discover that there is a nest of eggs from either a pair of ducks or geese that always settle on our pond in the spring.

Last year, a pair of Mallards claimed the prized spot and unfortunately after watching them for a few weeks, something got to the eggs and the pair disappeared. We were so disappointed.

This year, we have a new dilemma. A pair of geese *and* a pair of Mallards have both laid eggs on the small island on the edge of the pond. The geese evidently didn't notice the Mallard nest for a couple days because the hen laid so low in the grass, but it didn't take long for both mamas to realize that they weren't nesting alone. The geese have been real stinkers to the poor hen Mallard. They won't let her up on her nest unless they are away from the island.

Well, my husband and boys have been rattled by this drama, and in turn are creating quite a drama of their own. Yesterday, from the time my oldest got off the bus until night fall, he was just furious with those geese who wouldn't let the Mallard to her nest of eggs. He tried every trick he could think of to coax the Mallards off the island so the hen could return. I tried to tell him time and time again that he's only making matters worse because the geese certainly aren't going to leave the island when he's causing so much commotion. They're protecting their own eggs.

He tried to be patient, but finally couldn't stand it any longer. My husband and younger son were involved at this point, and it was entertaining to watch, but made me question their sanity. They decided that if they shot their BB guns at the geese, it wouldn't hurt them from far range, but it might get them off the island without scaring the duck away so she could get back on her nest. Of course, I was thinking that this attempt is only going to be a temporary fix, but whatever. They were *determined* to get that hen back on her nest.

I can't paint a clear enough picture with words to portray how hilarious their "plan" looked as they carried it out. The three of them were armed with BB the house, mind you. They were trying to find the best vantage point to scare off the geese without hurting them and at the same time trying not to scare the Mallard. So they attempted a few shots from the upper deck, then my oldest went up stairs and started shooting from his bedroom window. A few minutes later, he was back downstairs shooting from the living room window. I swear I felt like I was in the middle of a war and they were defending the fort....BB guns were pointing out of windows all over the house as they scampered about trying to carry out the "plan".

They were a tad put off with me as I sat rolling my eyes at them as they'd pass by while reiterating my initial suggestion to just let nature takes it's course. They knew I was right, but they simply couldn't leave well enough alone.

The duck did finally get back on her nest, but I noticed the same drama is going on today as well. It will be interesting to see how this all turns out in the end.

Oh, and I saw what I think must have been some kind of Egret on the pond yesterday. But, it was huge...every bit as large as the Great Blue Herons that often visit. I swear it looked like a Great White Egret, but I don't think you spot many of those in Kansas.

[PNA, if you're out there, maybe you can clue me in as to what I was looking at.]

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

Youtube Beatings and Teen Disrepect

I've heard many stories like this one lately. Between the Internet rumor mill and the videoed beatings, you sometimes wonder if kids having access to the Internet does more harm than good.

When we lived in our last house, we had two neighbors who each had a teenage daughter. The two teens (and their mothers) had been friends for years, but when the girls got to the age where they started Internet chatting and gossiping, they became bitter enemies, and it caused quite a rift between the parents as well. There were threats of violence (via Internet) and all kinds of mischief going on.

One day I was mowing the lawn and happened to glance down the street to see one of the girls with a bunch of friends throwing stones at the house of the other teen and yelling in effort to coax her out of the house (they knew she was home alone). I chased them off and made sure the parents knew what had transpired while they were away. It put me in a weird spot because I was friends with both of them.

The violence that occurred in this latest video was pretty severe:
The sheriff says the victim was first beaten unconscious in a bedroom. When she awoke, she was on a couch in the living room, where the screaming and beatings continued.

"It is disgusting that the attackers find it funny and want to post something on the Internet showing someone nearly beaten to death," says the victim's mother.

Sheriff Judd is calling it one of the most disturbing videos he has seen in a long time and he hopes all those arrested will be tried as adults. They face charges ranging from felony battery, false imprisonment to kidnapping. The sheriff says the attackers "were relentless."

What's even worse is that the attackers seemed to show no remorse whatsoever:

Even though those involved could face prison time, Judd says the teens showed no remorse after their arrests.

"When they were in a holding cell, they were all laughing," Judd says. "One of the teens arrested, who is a cheerleader, asked, 'Does this mean I'm going to miss cheerleading practice tomorrow?' The others were cutting up and said, 'It looks like we won't be going to the beach this weekend.'"

Really sad.

The problem with the Internet, as most of us in this debate are all too aware of, is that we say things that we would never say to someone in person. I can imagine how kids might tear each other up on-line making it all that much harder to live with each other in the real world.

Parents certainly have to share the blame for their child's lack of respect for others. So many parents seem to blame their child's poor behavior on their peers or teachers rather than consider whether their kid is actually the problem.

And, then we've had the ultra liberal wackos telling us for years not to hurt our poor child's feelings by laying into them when they screw up. Or, how about the "no-spanking" bill being introduced in California? Good grief...discipline your child and end up in jail.

Of course, some of the blame can be cast upon the schools as well. Discipline there is not what it used to be, though that's probably due to the ultra liberals as well.

The parents of the daughter who was on the receiving end of the beating were on the news this morning, and the girl's Father mentioned his concern for our students and the sad fact that prayer and religion has been ripped from the halls of education. The moral fiber is gone.

Oh, and here's something just nifty keen that one school is doing for prom this year...they're distributing handy dandy "prom bags" complete with a supply of condoms for the evening's affair.

Have we lost our ever loving minds? Truly, that is the #1 stupidest thing I have *ever* heard of. "Hey kids, here's a treat bag of condoms for the prom. We didn't raise enough cash this year to rent out hotel rooms for y'all so you wouldn't have to be so uncomfortable screwing your date in the back seat of your car, but next year, we're going to try to at least reserve enough rooms for the seniors!!"

Simply insane...

My oldest becomes a teen next Friday. I'm sure we've probably screwed him up royally over the past 13's difficult being a parent and knowing exactly how to best raise your children, but at least both of my boys show respect for their peers and their far anyway.

Have you ever heard of achondroplasia?

Check out this cute little gal...

At just 1ft 11 in tall, she is dwarfed by her neighbour's baby, but Jyoti Amge is 15 years old.

Achondroplasia is a result of an autosomal dominant mutation in the fibroblast growth factor receptor gene 3 (FGFR3), which causes an abnormality of cartilage formation. FGFR3 normally has a negative regulatory effect on bone growth. In achondroplasia, the mutated form of the receptor is constitutively active and this leads to severely shortened bones.

YES!!!!!! KU wins the Final Four!


What a game!!! 75-68

I think I've lost my voice, I hyperventilated twice, and now I need a sleeping pill to take the edge off so I can try to get some sleep.


I think I'm hyperventilating....

Monday, April 07, 2008

Rock Chalk Jayhawk!!!

My cousin's grandson is all ready for the big game tonight...

What a cutie!!

credit: NYP

Ahem...I'm not sure it gets any weirder than this...

Tell me something....does looking at a picnic table get you hot and bothered?

Yeah, me neither. But apparently, this guy has had an ongoing affair with one.


More Excerpts from Expelled

Isn't this fun?! Expelled is everywhere!

Only 10 more days until it hits the theatres...

Ben Stein on Glenn Beck's Show

The Bear Rub

This video is hilarious.

Darwin's Kool-Aid Drinkers

Great article about

As the movie masterfully illustrates, we live in a cultural climate where secular elitists in academia, the media and the courts chew up and spit out anyone who dares to question the gospel according to Charles Darwin. They're absolutely terrified to follow the scientific evidence wherever it may lead.


Consequently, it's no wonder "Expelled" has Darwin's disciples scurrying for the shadows. Those secular humanist one-trick-ponies in the media, throughout academia, on the blogosphere and elsewhere are in full damage control. They're doing everything possible to discredit the film before it even opens. It's even been reported that two major networks are refusing to cover the movie. (Gotta love that journalistic objectivity.)

So, if you happen to be one of those evolutionary fundamentalists who were "randomly selected" to evolve with a built-in blindfold and earplugs, and you're comfy with your very limited worldview, be afraid of this film – be very afraid. However, if you're willing to have your eyes opened and are interested in looking at all the evidence, then suck it up, wipe away that Darwinian Kool-Aid mustache and hang out with Ben Stein for a night. What do you have to lose?

Sunday, April 06, 2008

84 to 66 - Thank you God

They did it. KU takes North Carolina 84-66.

In Kansas' first meeting with former coach Roy Williams, the Jayhawks powered to an early lead and held on for a 84-66 win over North Carolina in the night cap of the Final Four of the NCAA Tournament. The Jayhawks will play Memphis for the national title at 8:21 p.m. Monday.

The Jayhawks were up by as many as 32 points in the first half. They had a 44-27 lead at halftime. North Carolina surged back with a couple of runs in the second. The Tar Heels pulled within four points, but Kansas surged back for the win.

When North Carolina made that come back, I damn near had to send one of my kids to fish out the defibrillator kit. I haven't pulled that thing out of the closet since I finished reading Monkey Girl.

Anywhoooo.....Yeah KU! Good luck Monday night!!!

Man, it's bizarre cheering for KU...doesn't feel quite right somehow.... I feel much better.

Friday, April 04, 2008

He had been a gorgeous she!

Remember the pregnant He/She I I told you about?

Check out this article that shows pictures of him when he was a she.

Holy cow, she was absolutely stunning, and in beauty pagents no less.

That's . just . crazy.!!

Today it's Sobe Adrenaline Rush. It's pretty good, but way toooo much sugar (33g). I usually go for the sugarless energy drinks, but Mr. FtK picked this one up for me the other day. Not a bad choice!

I want

I've always wanted a Maltese, and I saw the cutest one the other day. But, I'm not sure it would be a good idea to introduce a tiny Maltese to our rough and tumble household. Next to my three men, a lab and a golden retriever, the poor little thing would probably never survive.

I'll wait until the boys are grown and on their own before I actually consider getting one. It might be a good cure for empty nest syndrome.

Moran or Moron??

Stuff like this is what drives me to blog, blog, blog, and blog some more about the crap going on in academia.

It's obvious why Moran, Myers et. al. ridicule, blast and belittle anyone who questions their "theory". If they didn't, their ideology would fold because students would actually educate their peers as to the reasons *why* Darwinism is highly controversial whenever you contemplate evolutionary changes beyond the micro level. Mutiny would occur....can't have that! Ridicule is their *only* device to keep the truth from slipping into the classroom....for the moment.

Things will change.

Huckabee Endorses Expelled

Well, he can kiss his hopes for the Vice Presidency goodbye.

Interview with Producer of Expelled

Video interview with Logan Craft can be seen HERE.

Listen to the video...share it...spread the word!

The documentary hits the theatres in 14 days!!!

Thursday, April 03, 2008

Intelligent Design 101

Want to know more about Intelligent Design? This book looks promising.

Another Expelled review

Find it here:

Stein, giving the Darwinists he interviews plenty of time to make their case, is particularly effective in his conversation with Richard Dawkins, atheistic author of the best-selling The God Delusion. Dawkins astoundingly admits that life on earth could be the result of ID, as long as the designer was a being from outer space who was himself the product of atheistic evolution. No God allowed!

Expelled's showing of the connection between evolutionary doctrine and Nazi eugenics has already infuriated some in academia and the media: University of Minnesota professor P.Z. Myers blasted Expelled as "ludicrous in its dishonesty," and Orlando Sentinel reviewer Roger Moore raged about "loaded images, loaded rhetoric." But since a movie is not a dissertation, films show linkages by juxtaposing clips rather than pages of footnoted type. The real question is: Did Darwinism bulwark Hitlerian hatred by providing a scientific rationale for killing those considered less fit in the struggle for survival?

The answer to that question is an unambiguous yes. When I stalked the stacks of the Library of Congress in the early 1990s, I saw and scanned shelf upon shelf of racist and anti-Semitic journals from the first several decades of the last century, with articles frequently citing and applying Darwin. If you read an anti-Expelled review that dodges the issue of substance by concentrating merely on style, you'll be seeing another sign of closed minds.

April 18 will bring an interesting test of whether Expelled, or any other documentary so conceived and so dedicated, can endure in movie theaters past the first weekend. Michael Moore's fatuous documentaries have done good box office with the help of sympathetic reviewers and network news producers. Ben Stein's excellent one might rely on evangelicals and others who are tired of being ridiculed by the closed minds of the Evolution Establishment.

My little troll is crying out for attention

I think I've been neglecting my troll...

His comments of late seem to be getting more feverish and fanatic. Poor little guy. This post is just for you!!! See? I even posted your picture. I love you, but you're getting a little scary with the nasty language and the blatant hate filled messages.

The thing is that you live a little too close for comfort trolly one. So, calm yourself and try to lower your obsessive, relentless, nonsensical comments from around 15 a day to perhaps just a couple. I'm sorry that I raise your blood pressure might consider a visit to your physician...preferably he/she has a degree in psychology.

Deep breath, luv. I'm not the monster you make me out to be...

Global warming to cause 'mass cannibalism'

Yup...Ted Turner's predicting we'll be eating each other by 2040...

The year 2040 will find the world's crops dead, most of the people in a similar state of decay, and those few left alive will be cannibals, according to a prediction from Ted Turner, founder of Turner Broadcasting and CNN.


Turner also said the population is another problem that must be handled.

"We've got to stabilize the population," he said.

Rose asked what is wrong with the population.

"We're too many people. That's why we have global warming. We have global warming, because too many people are using too much stuff. If there were less people, they'd be using less stuff," he said.

Okay...let's just hope that Ted Turner doesn't team up with Dr. Eric R. Pianka, world-renowned ecologist, and decide to take it upon themselves to do something about that "over population" issue. Pianka, at one time, endorsed airborne Ebola as an efficient means for eliminating 90 percent of the world's population.


Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Please......tell me this is an April Fool's Joke

He was a she, now she's a pregnant he.

EDIT: Evidently the story is absolutely true. He/she is going to be on Oprah tommorow...just saw the show advertised on TV.

Finding out what makes kids happy

From Here:

Spirituality -- defined as an inner belief system -- accounted for eight to 17 per cent of the average child's sense of happiness, the study showed.

By contrast, money, the marital status of parents and the child's gender didn't even register one per cent.

"It's a whopping big effect," said Holder, especially since spirituality only accounts for four to five per cent of an adult's happiness.

HT: Telic Thoughts

Water is Life - The Colbert Report

Gave me a giggle...especially the part about the Grand Canyon.

Thanks for emailing this to me Maci. I like the new look of your blog!!