Search This Blog

Friday, January 21, 2011

The failure of evolution...the unmasking of atheism...a glimpse of Haiti

In past weeks the subject of the effects of Darwinism on society have been discussed.  Social Darwinism, Fascism, Eugenics, Socialism, Communism...all come from the same source:  Atheism.   And Atheism cannot stand without being propped up by Darwinism, or the belief in macroevolution.   The very idea that the Universe made itself and everything and every facet of existence is rather silly, is it not?


The failure of evolutionary orthodoxy

Published: 20 January 2011 (GMT+10)
Photo stock.xchng
A correspondent sent in a newspaper perspective by a Dr. H. Bruce Rinker entitled “An Unfortunate, Untimely Failure of Orthodoxy.”1

The basic argument of this article is that religion has fueled the anthropocentric view of nature which has led people to consume unsustainably, leading to the extinction of other species, and that it has failed to promote a good view of the environment. He argues that such “orthodoxy” must be abandoned in favor of belief systems that foster a healthier relationship with the environment.

Rinker criticizes humanity for using 32% of earth’s land-based productivity though we only represent 0.05% of the biomass. But isn’t his statement inconsistent with his evolutionary worldview? Such a worldview would make us the great winners in the “survival of the fittest” orthodoxy that underpins the evolutionary mechanism. In other words, the reason that humans claim such a disproportionate share of earth’s resources is because we are perfectly adapted and are at the top of the evolutionary tree or foodchain. He says that “we can never excuse the deliberate extinction of any species or ecosystem on Earth, no matter how diminutive or seemingly useless to human values”.

In an evolutionary view, we’re all in competition, not only inter-species, but intra-species, in an endless struggle for genetic dominance.
But this is precisely the opposite of what evolution should preach. In an evolutionary view, we’re all in competition, not only inter-species, but intra-species, in an endless struggle for genetic dominance. If our over-consumption causes the ice caps to melt and all the polar bears to die, then it should be good for us and so much the worse for them!

Really, Rinker’s article and my caricature of the other evolutionary viewpoint coincides well with G.K. Chesterton’s point about the Darwinist view of nature:
“Darwinism can be used to back up two mad moralities, but it cannot be used to back up a single sane one. The kinship and competition of all living creatures can be used as a reason for being insanely cruel or insanely sentimental; but not for a healthy love of animals … That you and a tiger are one may be a reason for being tender to a tiger. Or it may be a reason for being cruel as the tiger. It is one way to train the tiger to imitate you, it is a shorter way to imitate the tiger. But in neither case does evolution tell you how to treat a tiger reasonably, that is, to admire his stripes while avoiding his claws.”2
But the Christian view of the environment is that humans, in an important sense, are not simply another species of animal, because we are created in the image of God. That, and the dominion mandate proclaimed by God (Genesis 1:28), gives us a place of primacy over the rest of the created order, and the right to use the creation for our benefit and enjoyment, but also responsibility to care for it as God’s stewards. See our article Fouling the nest.

Rinker’s article also endorses a view of stewardship, but unlike the creationist view, his has no basis in his own worldview. If we are simply a part of nature, only another species of animal, isn’t it actually arrogant to presume that we can have such a role in the world? Who are we to claim to be better potential stewards than marmosets or dachshunds? In short, an evolutionary worldview cannot logically provide an answer as to why one should care for other creatures or even each other. Such “morality” is derived from a Christian worldview, which comes from the Scriptures and in particular the teachings of Christ (the Creator—Colossians 1:15–17)

Rinker asks:
“Where are our priests, rabbis, pastors, and imams when old-growth forests disappear from the Pacific Northwest or Amazonia? Where are they when whales and dolphins are haplessly slaughtered in Asia or when environmental toxins bioaccumulate in loons and songbirds in New England and in Central America? Where are they when giant icebergs break off from Antarctic glaciers because of the planet’s rising temperature? Where are they when inconsiderate citizens throw their trash and cigarette butts out of car windows along our highways?”
Christians can and should be at the forefront of responsible environmental stewardship, but the difference between the Christian’s motivation and the evolutionist’s should be that the Christian cares for the environment because he worships God who created the world and put mankind in charge of it.
While I can’t answer for the clergy of other faiths, I would hope that most Christians would see human tragedies such as starvation and exploitation in third-world countries, the modern-day slave trade, and the crisis of women’s rights in Muslim countries as far more important than Antarctic glaciers or old trees. We are not saying that evolutionists or atheists can’t be moral and do “good” things, but their motivational call for other to assist those disadvantaged by the terrible Haitian earthquake was shown to be very shallow (see the quote by Michael Shermer at the bottom of our article Haiti’s horrendous earthquake disaster).

Although some Christians may act inconsistently with their own worldview, a stewardship principle is consistent with a biblically derived worldview. Christians should regard the environment as important—a correct theology of stewardship recognizes that we will be held accountable for how we’ve utilized God’s resources—and the Bible makes it clear that all resources ultimately belong to God. So, in one sense, when Rinker accuses Christians of not being good stewards he is actually creating a straw man argument.
G.K. Chesterton continued his comment above, illustrating the proper view of nature:
“If you want to treat a tiger reasonably, you must go back to the garden of Eden. For the obstinate reminder continues to recur: only the supernaturalist has taken a sane view of Nature. The essence of all pantheism, evolutionism and modern cosmic religion is really in this proposition: that Nature is our mother. Unfortunately, if you regard Nature as a mother, you discover that she is a stepmother. The main point of Christianity was this: that Nature is not our mother: Nature is our sister. We can be proud of her beauty, since we have the same father; but she has no authority over us; we have to admire, but not to imitate.”
Christians can and should be at the forefront of responsible environmental stewardship, but the difference between the Christian’s motivation and the evolutionist’s should be that the Christian cares for the environment because he worships God who created the world and put mankind in charge of it. The evolutionist ultimately cares for the environment because he engages in what we could call “geolatry” (earth-worship, from gē, earth, and latreuo, to worship). As such, he is just as religious as those he bemoans. Scripture is clear about his condition too, because he “worships the creation rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:25).

Related articles


  1. H. Bruce Rinker, “An Unfortunate, Untimely Failure of Orthodoxy,” The Roanoke Star-Sentinel 8 October 2010, p. 4. Available online at . Return to text.
  2. G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy, John Lane, London, pp. 204–205, 1927. Return to text.

Actually, the Rinkers of this world have done their best to keep the third world countries from developing and also done their best to wall off dictatorships from criticism and blame.  The United Nations proudly supports the very worst governments imaginable and lives large on stealing dollars meant for the poor and victimized.  I would cast the UN off of US soil and immediately form a United Nations of Liberty, a union of nations that believe in giving the common man the vote and a means of self-governance.  From the New Scientist:

Collapsing buildings caused catastrophic loss of life in Haiti (Image: Ariana Cubillos/AP/PA)

Did corruption raise Haiti's death toll?

"Corruption kills. That's the message from a controversial analysis of fatalities from building collapse in earthquakes, published on the first anniversary of Haiti's devastating quake.

It is well known that quake death tolls are not primarily determined by the violence of the Earth's movement, but by urban population density and the quality of building construction. This explains why Haiti suffered so badly in January 2010, while the much more powerful earthquake that hit Chile the following month caused just 562 deaths.

Now Roger Bilham of the University of Colorado at Boulder and Nicholas Ambraseys of Imperial College London have concluded that the problem is not just poverty, but corruption. This, they argue, allows developers to disregard building codes.

Smoking gun

Using the Corruption Perceptions Index maintained by Transparency International, based in Berlin, Germany, the researchers recorded the extent to which each of 148 countries was more or less corrupt than anticipated, given its wealth.

They found that 83 per cent of the deaths from building collapse in earthquakes over the past three decades occurred in countries with anomalously high scores for corruption. "It's a smoking gun," says Bilham.
However, John Mutter, a geophysicist at Columbia University in New York, points out that it is difficult to produce meaningful estimates of wealth or corruption in poor countries, where a high proportion of business activity occurs outside of the formal economy.

He remains unconvinced that corruption is as important as Bilham and Ambraseys suggest. "The stronger predictor, most analyses will show, is poverty," Mutter says.

Donor deterrent

Brian Tucker, president of Geohazards International in Palo Alto, California, which works to promote safe yet affordable building practices in developing countries, fears that the study's focus on corruption may deter donors from investing in such efforts.

Tucker applauds the researchers' attempt to bring statistical rigour to the study of earthquake fatalities, but he suggests that the analysis misses a crucial factor – the value of education to counter the fatalism about earthquakes that is often pervasive in poor countries.
"Inform people and they'll be motivated," Tucker argues.
Journal reference: Nature (vol 469, p 153)

Actually the muttering of Mutter is an attempt at political correctness and cover-up of the truth.   Bad governments keep the money and let the people suffer.   They care nothing of building codes and public safety.   The team from our church that went down to Haiti to help after the earthquake had to hide the arrival of supplies from local authorities and thieves in order to get food, water and clothing to the people in the streets.   It was somewhat touch-and-go.   Haiti is a disastrous government!   But then Atheism and Secular Humanism really doesn't give a rip.

Example, we give Vox Day a chance to allow readers to see the real face of atheism.   It ain't pretty!

Friday, January 21, 2011

A fascinating defense

PZ Myers makes a remarkable "argument from inhuman sociopathy" in defense of abortion:
[T]he standard bullying tactics of waving bloody fetuses might cow the squeamish, but I'm a biologist. I've guillotined rats. I've held eyeballs in my hand and peeled them apart with a pair of scissors. I've used a wet-vac to clean up a lake of half-clotted blood from an exsanguinated dog. I've opened bodies and watched the intestines do their slow writhing dance, I've been elbow deep in blood, I've split open cats and stabbed them in the heart with a perfusion needle. I've extracted the brains of mice…with a pair of pliers. I've scooped brains out of buckets, I've counted dendrites in slices cut from the brains of dead babies.

You want to make me back down by trying to inspire revulsion with dead baby pictures? I look at them unflinchingly and see meat. And meat does not frighten me.
It's probably a good thing he is an atheist without any moral standards, otherwise he might demonstrate at least a modicum of conscience for the bloody acts in which he appears to take such pride. And if he happened to take any sexual gratification from them as well, who can say it is wrong from his perspective, given his total lack of any moral or ethical code. If he feels no revulsion at looking at the pictures of butchered babies, then he likely feels no revulsion and sees only meat when looking at pictures of dead Jews and murdered Ukrainians as well. The awful thing is not that the pictures do not frighten him; they do not frighten me either. The awful thing is that he does not find them revolting like any normal human being with even a minimal amount of empathy would.

This is the naked face of atheism, ladies and gentlemen. Look on it well and remember it, because it usually doesn't dare to show its disgusting and anti-human nature so openly. 



I will not leave you with that...that awful Picture of Dorian Gray that is the atheist.   Here are some pictures from our youth group when they went down to help Haitians after the earthquake.   A tent is a house to be valued right now and even having an empty roof to sleep on is luxury.  People sleep in wreckage, cars, alleys, and often spend all day foraging for food and seeking for water.   The government tends to steal much of what is sent in, so our team had a delivery come at night and quite fortunately during a cloudburst so the bad guys didn't see it arrive:

 a fortunate family with a tent
 see the pregnant young woman, who lives there?
 This family (and all their possessions) getting some sleep
 Kids lit up when our teens came to bring stuff and hang out with them
 Kids hungry for knowledge and not just for food
 This is the local pastor's 'house'!
 Who doesn't want to clown for the camera?
Who doesn't need a hug sometimes?
 It looks like this all over...
Yes, people are living in the wreckage.

Haiti's people are still worth helping but the government is evil.  The joyous faces of children and adults meeting with our team as they brought help and hope inspired the team.   One of our group found herself wanting to adopt one of the orphans and has plans to try to reunite later on, but for now a Cholera epidemic has chased volunteer helpers away.   Haiti needs your prayers, as do all people repressed by their governments.  Atheists need your prayers as well.   Only an atheist can help an atheist by recognizing and acknowledging the Creator God.   

PS:  More concerning Haiti, repressive governments and disasters:

Earthquakes Don’t Kill: Corrupt Leaders Do     01/17/2011    
Jan 17, 2011 — “A new assessment of global earthquake fatalities over the past three decades indicates that 83 percent of all deaths caused by the collapse of buildings during earthquakes occurred in countries considered to be unusually corrupt.”  That’s the opening statement of an entry in Science Daily.

    Of course, no one can predict where a stone will fall when an earthquake hits, but the casualty numbers could be drastically reduced if it were not for corruption, a study published in Nature found.1  “The six-digit death toll from last year’s Haiti earthquake compared with the absence of any fatalities in New Zealand’s identical magnitude (7) earthquake was a stark reminder that poor building practices are largely to blame for turning moderate earthquakes into major disasters,” Ambraseys and Bilham said.

    “Earthquake-resistant construction depends on responsible governance, but its implementation can be undermined by corruption,” or by poverty, use of substandard materials or poor siting – often consequences of bad government.  The researchers knew that poverty often tracks with corruption, but they teased apart the major factors and called corrupt leaders “geology’s accomplices” in mass death from natural disasters.  “Of all earthquake fatalities attributable to building collapse in the past three decades, 82.6% occur in societies that are anomalously corrupt,” their graph showed.  Chile and New Zealand, for example, are “less corrupt than might be expected from their per capita income, and have low earthquake fatalities.”  Japan was an outlier; its devastating Kobe earthquake could be attributed to “collapse of older structures in Kobe that predate the adoption of a code of earthquake-resistant building.”  Their ending paragraph was depressing:
But our analyses suggest that international and national funds set aside for earthquake resistance in countries where corruption is endemic are especially prone to being siphoned off.  The structural integrity of a building is no stronger than the social integrity of the builder, and each nation has a responsibility to its citizens to ensure adequate inspection.  In particular, nations with a history of significant earthquakes and known corruption issues should stand reminded that an unregulated construction industry is a potential killer.
On a related political note, New Scientist reported that independence for South Sudan could have a healthy spin-off: the eradication of the guinea worm parasite.  Decades of civil war inhibited opportunities to clean up water supplies where the worm eggs infest humans.  Though in ruins, the cessation of conflict might allow the new independent country a chance to bring the world a “peace dividend” – “the second human disease – after smallpox – to be eradicated.”

1.  Ambraseys and Bilham, “Corruption kills,” Nature 469, pp 153–155, 13 January 2011, doi:10.1038/469153a.
It would be an interesting study to examine how many deaths due to “natural disasters” are severely aggravated by human sin.  Imagine yourself outside in nature in a severe earthquake.  Sure, you might get hit by a tsunami or landslide, but chances are, you would be fine after the shaking stops – even in Haiti outside the city.  But experience the same quake in a shanty town of low-quality buildings thrown up by poverty-stricken people who cannot rise out of their poverty due to corrupt leaders, and the results can be, and were (a year ago), appallingly tragic.  Los Angeles is due for a big one.  The last two major quakes killed 57 in 1994 and 65 in 1971.  Compare that with 230,000 deaths in Haiti for a similar magnitude.

    If Haiti had liberty and justice for all, and a Protestant work ethic that encouraged entrepreneurship regulated by righteous leaders and judges, the cities would have been built on the proper sites, with safe materials and reinforcements.  The citizens would be trained in disaster preparation and response.  Undoubtedly many would still have died in last year’s quake: perhaps a few hundred, but not 230,000.  To add major insult to major injury, the cholera epidemic that broke out and killed thousands more in Haiti was likely also caused by corruption and carelessness of the UN aid workers who came to “help” the victims.  When the people protested, the UN workers fired on them!  Read the JSF-Post blog about this and weep.  A reader submitted the following anecdote:
Regarding your entry “Earthquakes Don’t Kill: Corrupt Leaders Do”, I thought you might like another comparison for the Haiti earthquake: the 2010 Christchurch earthquake.  It measured 7.1 on the Richter scale (as big as the Haiti quake), but there were zero fatalities directly linked to the earthquake.  There were two serious injuries, and one person died of a heart attack during the quake, but nobody was directly killed by the quake or debris.  The quake’s epicentre was on 40km (24mi) west of Christchurch, and Christchurch is New Zealand’s second largest city, with about 375,000 people, so the potential for a catastrophe was huge.  But mainly due to New Zealand’s strict building codes, and that people evidently adhered to them, Christchurch escaped with was it in comparison to Haiti a few minor grazes.
    Solomon said, “An unplowed field produces food for the poor, but injustice sweeps it away” (Proverbs 13:23).  A prosperous society built on liberty and justice for all generates prosperity, funds science, punishes evil, produces civic stability that promotes commerce, and many other social benefits.  Constitutionally-protected liberty, as America’s founders established, is built on the Biblical values they espoused.  Knowing man’s tendency to evil, they constructed branches of government that provided checks and balances on power, to forestall corruption and to allow free people to pursue prosperity with their Creator-endowed rights of life and liberty.  That freedom had an unprecedented peace dividend for the world.

    How scientific institutions can continue to support leftist policies (12/05/2010, 10/14/2010) that have produced the worst corrupt dictatorships of the 20th century is senseless.  Big government breeds ambition and corruption.  Don’t they realize that the leftist trend in America has led to financial ruin that threatens their own funding?  If they understood fallen human nature as taught by the Bible, they would realize that the founding American system is the best one to promote scientific research and education, because it works human nature against its evil tendencies: ambition is turned toward service, greed toward healthy competition, and selfishness toward excellence.  The Bible promotes hard work to serve others; it rewards responsibility and charity.  It doesn’t work for a society that has no regard for these values, because bribery that is unpunished undermines the safety inspections instituted to protect the poor.

    The study authors said, “The structural integrity of a building is no stronger than the social integrity of the builder.”  Where does social integrity come from?  Evolution?  Ha!  Get real.  Integrity is a Biblical value right out of the Ten Commandments.  Corrupt governments, that violate the Biblical commands against stealing and bearing false witness, that do not love God with all their hearts and minds nor their neighbors as themselves, where power gets concentrated in a few individuals, have the worst track records on human rights and scientific achievement.  Nature News recently had to admit that Venezuela’s dictator, Hugo Chavez, a liberal darling and bosom buddy of fellow despots Ahmadinejad and Castro, is putting the squeeze on the country’s scientists.  Surprised?

    Let these articles be a lesson to scientific institutions.  Supporting a return to America’s founding ideals and values would be the best investment they could ever make.  For the poor, it’s a matter of life and death.
Next headline on:  Politics and EthicsHealth

Daniel 12:10 - "Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand." 


Anonymous said...

Demonizing atheism. Classy.

1. What exactly do you imagine the connection between corruption in Haiti and atheism to be?

2. "Social Darwinism, Fascism, Eugenics, Socialism, Communism...all come from the same source: Atheism."

How do you figure that? You're sounding simply incoherent here. Hitler, the fascist dictator, was a deranged Christian who agreed with microevolution but didn't care for Darwin's theory of evolution at all (sound familiar?) and even Jesus taught principles that could be construed as socialist or communist.

Anonymous said...

This whole abortion thing is a canard, if you actually believed it was the same thing as murdering a human being, you'd behave in an entirely different fashion.

If someone is murdering people down the block, you don't wait for laws to change. You stop them.

Yet you don't. Telling, that.

Anonymous said...

The question isn't what is the connection between atheism and corruption the question is how can an atheist have moral standards at all? How can an atheist pass judgment on anything anybody does in their own self interest?

Haiti is a corrupt society that turned its back on Christianity long ago and made up their own religion (Voodoo) based on African animism with corrupt Catholicism. The only hope for Haiti is to turn to Jesus Christ. The Haitian leaders don't think they are doing anything wrong, the people gave them the power to do what they want.

Jesus did not teach socialist principals, when he told some individuals to sell all they have and give to the poor and follow him, he was showing them that they were not truly as devoted to God as they claimed.

I blame Christians in this country for allowing the legalization of abortion because many Churches taught that it is wrong to be involved in politics and it had become a political issue. Just like Christians sat back and accepted slavery because it was legal. But eventually Christians rose up against slavery and we are rising up against abortion. But this time not with a bloody civil war but by trying to change hearts. Most people have some kind of reaction to pictures of aborted fetuses. The pro-abortion side gets angry because the truth of what an abortion is gets exposed. The pro-life side may sway the uninformed and public opinion is starting to shift. I wouldn't expect P.Z. Myers to be moved but I wonder what it was that made him comment at all?


radar said...

I do not need help demonizing atheism. It should be demonized, it is demonized, it boils down to worshipping yourself above God, which is precisely what demons would advise you to do (see "The Screwtape Letters" for a somewhat whimsical treatment of what is actually a serious subject). Most atheists do not become axe murderers or ruthless dictators. I do not demonize atheists who do not act out in evil ways. Everyone is God's creature and can be redeemed as long as breath remains.

Marx, Nietsche, Russell, Darwin and etc? Their philosophies all start with the determination that there is no God. Then their evil is disseminated.

Hitler was no Christian. You sound like some of the deluded folks I have heard that claimed Darwin was a Christian. Neither of them were Christians. Darwin had a church-going wife and gave lip service from time to time to her activities to keep peace in the family and be "respectable" in society. Hitler threw a few sops to the Catholics and other church leaders while he consolidated power, at which time he either used them or ignored them or had them thrown into camps. Church services were replaced with indoctrination activities as the Hitler Youth were formed.

radar said...

This whole abortion thing is a canard, if you actually believed it was the same thing as murdering a human being, you'd behave in an entirely different fashion.

If someone is murdering people down the block, you don't wait for laws to change. You stop them.

Yet you don't. Telling, that.

Jesus taught us to overcome evil with good. Therefore we vote for pro-life candidates, we have marched around an abortion clinic to point out what it does to the surrounding community and to pray for it to run out of clients. We support Right To Life and Abort73 as another way to help educate the public and provide counseling to mothers considering whether or not to kill their child. I make blog posts pointing out the truth, that babies are being murdered, in hopes the public will become more energized to legally end the practice.

If I walked down to an abortion clinic and shot the staff, I would be guilty of murder in the eyes of God and the law. The abortionists are guilty of murder in the eyes of God. But you see I am not God and I am not appointed to be their judge. Therefore I only work to stop abortion by legal means.

You apparently believe in vigilante justice and the rule of the gun over the rule of law. I do not. I know justice will be had in the courts of God even if not in a court of law now.

radar said...

Funny how atheists/Darwinists hate being associated with Hitler and Eugenics when there is no doubt whatsoever that Hitler did believe in evolution. What they do not tell you is that he did not want the process to proceed naturally (of course it never would, it is a canard) but he rather wanted to be the one who ruled the process by killing off non-Aryans. Hitler figured that evolution might well put the Aryans on top of the heap eventually but he wanted it to happen within his lifetime.

Really, it is a shame that people in general just accept what they are taught and go on their unthinking ways. I wish all non-math school textbooks were tossed into a recycle bin and teachers had to use actual history source books, scientific abstracts, novels and treatises in order to help teach young people to think critically rather than be propagandized.

What would a person do if he read Darwin and Dawkins and Behe and Sarfati? Required reading for addition to technical papers published on reproduction and genetics and so on. Minds would be stimulated to think, perhaps?

It is sad to say that the great Library of Alexandria is lost, for with the writings now lost of the early history of mankind Darwinism never would have gotten started. Men like Gascoigne and Cooper have compiled work from Cory's Fragments and a few sources I will be discussing in future posts, such as Berosus, and as they have worked for literally decades trying to sort out other documentation what becomes clear is that the Bible is the only reliable source of the history of mankind. Before the era of Darwin and Marx, the Bible was the most important book taught in schools and Universities. The historical information was taken as factual and the concept that a Logical Mind created all things gave science a basis for the study thereof. The Descent of Man. Darwin had one thing right in a title. We are devolving, all creatures are devolving. Mutations build up within the genome and despite the built-in contingencies and redundancies and self-repair systems that God designed to maintain an ecosystem to support mankind, things are going downhill. Some commenters have no respect or understanding of the laws of thermodynamics but in fact we will obey them, like it or not. Only the intervention of God can trump natural laws...which is why self-creating Universes are preposterous, why non-material life and information cannot be found in nature. Scientists can barely agree on a definition of life, let alone grasp ahold of it.

Anonymous said...

"If I walked down to an abortion clinic and shot the staff"

So the only way to stop a murder from happening is to murder the murderer? Really? You can't think of any other way?

This from the mind of a supposed Christian.

That's telling.
And neither you nor 'Deb' are acting like murder is happening down the street. Deep down, you might still disagree with abortion, but your actions tell everyone that it's not the same as murder.

Jon Woolf said...

"Really, it is a shame that people in general just accept what they are taught and go on their unthinking ways."


Anonymous whatsit said...

"there is no doubt whatsoever that Hitler did believe in evolution. "

Hitler believed in evolution the same way you believe in evolution:

• You both take on board microevolution, as is observable in, say, animal husbandry

• You both hate Darwinian evolution as it clashes with your beliefs.

• You both want to see Darwinian evolution stamped out.

• You both profess to believe in God.

• You both despise atheism.

Anonymous whatsit said...

"Some commenters have no respect or understanding of the laws of thermodynamics but in fact we will obey them, like it or not."

Sigh. It's not a matter of us obeying them, it's nature being subject to them, including us. It's not like these are laws we have to respect as if they were rules laid down by some authority. The fact that they're called laws seems to be causing some confusion here.

"Only the intervention of God can trump natural laws..."

Idle speculation.

"which is why self-creating Universes are preposterous,"

As are God-created universes. Good thing nobody's proposing self-creating universes then, right?

"why non-material life and information cannot be found in nature."

Now you're going off the deep end. Who do you think is proposing non-material life? Other than yourself, that is. You have the most uncanny knack for projection...

And of course information is non-material. It's an abstract concept. And of course information can be found in nature. In abundance.

Anonymous said...

What a disgusting post. The earthquake in Haiti was a message from god? Taking a page out of Jerry Fallwell's playbook are we? All those childen that were orphaned or killed deserved it because "their society turned its back on christianity long ago"?!?! Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Or how truly babrbaric that makes your "god" look? This "awesome god" of yours killed, injured and orphaned thousands of innocent children - making them suffer horribly - because people they never knew did something they had no control over? How dare you try to lecture others on morality or hold your "morals" above any group, especially Atheists. If any of the BS you wrote were tru the prison systems would be filled with Atheists. Unfortunately for you, and your ridiculous opinions on non-believers, we are actually under represented in jails.

You've been schooled on Hitlers Christianity in the past, so I'm not going to waste my breath.

Anyway, another embarrasing display of mind numbing arrorance and stunning bigotry from Mr. and Mrs. Binder. You two should be ashamed of eachother.

- Canucklehead.

Jon Woolf said...

Canucklehead: "Or how truly barbaric that makes your "god" look?"

Actually, he probably does, and doesn't see anything wrong with it. It's perfectly appropriate to the brutal, cruel, vengeful, jealous god of the Old Testament.

One of the many things I've never understood about Christianity is the schizophrenic nature of its god. In the Old Testament, YHWH already seems oddly two-faced; try to add the 'just and loving God' of the New Testament to that, and the resulting entity is, by any normal standard, hopelessly insane. It shouldn't surprise you that reasoning based on irrational premises leads to irrational results.

Captain Stubing said...

Uh-oh, Jon, now you've done it. Highboy will be here any moment now to rant at you...