Darwinist Priests can only sing in one key - Darwin's Rottweiler brought down by a flea
The Darwinism Broadcasting Network is playing 24/7 around the world. Jon Woolf and creeper and chaos engineer and those guys should be HAPPY!
But they are NOT! Instead they come to this little dumb old blog and fight me tooth and nail. Why?
Well, credit where credit is due. Guys like that have the cojones to stand up to the things that I assert and try to represent their side of the metaphysical questions of existence. They also try to stand up for their view of the scientific questions of origins and various related disciplines of science.
Good for you, Woolf and creeper and your cohorts, for at least coming here and firing back at me! Too bad your more celebrated friends will not do so in public against credentialed scientists!
What frightens Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers and Eugenie Scott and others of their ilk, according to news reports and various creationist sources?
Dialogue
Evidence
The free exchange of ideas
Nothing frightens Richard Dawkins more (apparently) than another youtube fiasco or another Ben Stein interview on a wider scale. Imagine if he had to debate Jonathan Sarfati in open debate in front of a huge audience? Imagine if he had to present facts rather than make grandiose claims that he knows he cannot support? Like the kid who brags to his friends about how he could beat up the guy who lives on the next street but skulks a block out of his way to get home without seeing the said bloke, Dawkins and Myers make scathing remarks about creationists like Sarfati but make sure they stay far away from him.
The vast majority of Darwinists are religious zealots who probably know little of what they maintain to be true, like actors reading lines to a play they do not understand. Having had the same fifty-seven lies repeated to you over and over will make them believable to you and eventually you accept them as yours and protect them like the soft underbelly of your heart. Many of you reading this will not understand why I say this, for you have not read the comment threads and been assaulted by the drumbeat of Darwinist propaganda there. But if you read things and watch things on the television and go to movies and listen to the radio you have been inundated by them anyway, perhaps not quite as clearly or as stark-naked of evidence as you read them here.
For all of you who have followed this blog for a period of time, I thank you for your interest! I sincerely am amazed that people from the six major inhabited continents regularly come to visit. I saw last night that people from far North in Ireland and Canada and Alaska and in the far South like New Zealand and Argentina and from China and Europe and across the USA and Africa and the Middle East and so on had stopped by. Of course many are one-time google hits and a few are very occasional visitors but I also know there are regulars and most of them do not make a comment. Blog research indicates:
Jakob Nielsen’s latest study finds that 90% of online community users are lurkers (read or observe without contributing) with only 9% of users contributing ‘a little’ and 1% actively contributing.
So 1% of your blog’s users are actively engaging with your blog and the rest are at best occasional contributors.
.With ease I have pointed out to the Darwinists that information has no material form and is not produced by natural processes and yet is vital to their very existence! Darwinists have fumed and sputtered but utterly failed to refute this.
Therefore the amazing amount of information found in every cell is inexplicable by atheistic naturalistic materialistic means. Information requires an intelligence to be produced and matter is not intelligent.
They have been shown that life itself cannot be defined or measured materially. They have been reminded that abiogenesis says life only comes from life and they try to talk their way around it, failing miserably.
Gradualism in geology was part and parcel to the Darwinist story, even though we know now that catastrophism is the only possible cause of the sedimentary rock layers.
Fallacies like the peppered moths and the Haeckel embryo chart and others are still being taught in the 21st century. School science teachers are literally several decades behind the findings of operational science. Children are being told a series of fairy tales,
They have been shown the Laws of Thermodynamics and they deny them by hiding behind the phrase, "open system." Hey, the entire Universe could be called an open system. But the Second Law of Thermodynamics was proposed, tested and proven here on Earth and it applies throughout the known Universe. Darwinist Evolution is the opposite of what we observe.
I have not modeled my blog after the suggestions on that particular page per se, although most of what they suggest I was already doing. But I can kind of sum up the kinds of things that are said in the blog comments thread by simply copying a typical comment!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. creeper saith: ""Scientists do not lie. Scientists do not rant. Scientists properly ask questions during a question period, briefly and clearly, and make sure others have a turn. Anti-scientists must lie because they have nothing truthful to report, and they do their best to make sure that no one else has a chance to reveal the fact that all they have to report are superstitions, frauds, and forgeries"
Well, here we are. You've been asked questions and you've been given ample opportunity to respond.
Here are the questions again, just to make sure you're clear on this:
1. What is the scientific evidence for devolution? You seem quite convinced of devolution. Is this for religious reasons, or can you cite some scientific evidence for devolution?
2. Could you explain why you offer a "$1000 Omniscient Originality Prize for two or more living things that are identical"? What do you think "two or more living things that are identical" would prove or disprove?
3. By "secondary historical evidence", did you mean the Bible and, more specifically, Genesis? Please confirm or correct. If so, how does the particular part of the Bible you have in mind count as objective evidence? The Genesis creation myth is just one of numerous creation myths. If you have an objective way of discerning this creation myth above the others, can you share it with us?
It's pretty hypocritical that a man who makes such a big deal out of other people not choosing to engage him regarding evidence is unable to come up with evidence to support his own position.
You've defaulted, Mr. Mastropaolo.
-- creeper
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually, both Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo and I have posted his Science Prize links and the information concerning them and he has specifically sent challenges to hundreds of Darwinists. The reason he does not engage in the discussion during the comments thread is that he has put up money challenging Darwinists to put their money where their mouths are and meet him in open court where only evidence, not hearsay or opinion or assumption, is allowed to be entered. The chance to win an easy ten thousand dollars is there waiting, creeper, why don't you go get it?
There used to be a saying about an alligator mouth and a butterfly...abdomen. Darwinists in general meet that criteria, from what I can tell. After all, I challenged them to give me one piece of evidence that can be observed, objective evidence for macroevolution and they failed miserably to present even one. So the following article from Creation.com should come as no surprise to those who come here often. Sarfati's book (which I have read, it really is quite brilliant) easily tears the pseudoscience of Dawkins into tatters and sets it on fire. Then he brushes the ashes into the dustpan, dumps them in the trash and goes back to his normal routine.
I am trying to remember creeper's answer to where information comes from but I think it was much like Dawkin's answer on the youtube. I do remember Jon Woolf tying himself into knots trying to prove that information was material in nature and then that DNA could not contain information if there was no intelligence to receive it. I think I answered that rather well. Well, without further ado (which is a phrase that has a very interesting genesis, by the way), may I present a paper authored by a very nice guy and a terrific scientist about a wonderful guy who is a terrific scientist and a better chess player than you are as well - by Gary Bates about Jonathan Sarfati (who had never reminded me of a flea before reading this) but then a flea is one of the strongest creatures on the planet for its size, so...the Darwinists flee the Mighty Flea!!!
Evolution’s pesky flea
Sarfati’s new book rattles the cages of the atheists
by Gary Bates, CEO, CMI–USPublished: 12 August 2010 (GMT+10)
This article first appeared in a CMI newsletter in June 2010
Nearly 500 people attended the Countering the Rise of Atheism seminar in Melbourne.
A few months ago, the Global Atheist Convention called The Rise of Atheism was being held in Melbourne, Australia. It featured heavy-hitters of the atheist/humanist movement in the world today, including scientists PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins. Some months before, our Australian office asked the organizers if they would be willing to pit the best amongst them against some of the world’s leading creationists from CMI in a creation/evolution debate. The offer was rejected in a torrent of insults and invectives, particularly from Myers and his followers, (read World atheist convention rejects Australian creationist debate challenge). So CMI decided to arrange its own conference in the same city, same weekend. Attendees in the packed auditorium were visibly excited and motivated to see that there are answers to the claims of such rabid antitheists. (See Countering the Rise of Atheism.)
CMI’s conference was also the launch of a very important book by our own Dr Jonathan Sarfati, called The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution. As you can glean from the title, it is a response to the recently released magnum opus by the Oxford professor Dawkins called The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. Dawkins’ book is touted as presenting the best evidences for evolution—and long ages—in one volume. Jonathan’s response, in the short time it has been released, is proving to be a sensation. Jonathan documents how Dawkins uses fallacious and straw man arguments in an attempt to discredit creationists. (Remember, Dawkins is the one who suggested that teaching creation was equivalent to child abuse.) But the main reason The Greatest Hoax? is making an impact is because it demonstrates that creationists have a very sound grasp of the science, despite claims to the contrary. Tony D. emailed Dr Sarfati and said (of one chapter):
“But of course you showed a consummate ease in dealing with origin of life issues. Abiogenesis is right up your alley as a chemist and it shows. Thanks once again for the many hours of hard work you must have put into this book for the benefit of the saints.”
So why the flea?
When Prof. Dawkins became aware of our response, he called it the latest ‘flea’. Dawkins is quite fond of being called ‘Darwin’s Rottweiler’ (in Darwin’s day, evolutionary promulgator Thomas Huxley was called ‘Darwin’s bulldog’). Dawkins’ self-image of being the ‘big dog’ of evolution, being pestered by no more than a flea (Sarfati) displays all the arrogance of some sort of intellectual superiority. We’ve noticed this increasingly agitated and hostile attitude towards creationists by the followers of Dawkins and Myers et al, and what followed on Dawkins’ blog was a ‘hatefest’ of spiteful comments aimed at Dr Sarfati, such as:“To his credit the one thing that Sarfati does undertand [sic] is about being stupid. He’s in a world class lead there.”In commenting about Jonathan’s world-class chess credentials, one wrote:
“Afterwards, Bonzo the chimp took on 98 creationists simultaneously and beat them all in 7 moves while the creationists were trying to figure out why there are two different colors on the board and why the bishop wasn’t in charge.”And others on his book:
“There are probably just a bunch of blank pages in there except for the first page that says, ‘God did it’. Now wasn’t that much easier than doing science?”
“If I dismiss this book without reading it then I am as closed minded as religious people who refuse to read Mr Dawkins’ book.”1
These ‘new atheist’ leaders need to be held accountable for inciting the type of hatred and anger that is being vented by their supporters.
The one ‘religion’ that is always singled out for this treatment is Christianity. Similar criticisms of Islam, for example, would simply not be tolerated.
It’s ultimately a spiritual battle—but the science is important
The point of highlighting this is because it demonstrates the crying need for informing people about origins. It’s obvious that the skeptics are criticizing what they don’t understand, often because they’ve never been exposed to alternative information before. Sometimes a well-meaning Christian friend has given them amateur/misinformed arguments for creation, which only hardens their stance. This is why your continued support is vital. It changes lives by allowing our staff to produce such excellent resources like The Greatest Hoax? (see the enclosed special sheet) and it also allows us to continue ministry outreach so we can disseminate information and overcome prejudice. Lyle L. understood this when he wrote of this new book:“I couldn’t put the jolly thing down, it was FANTASTIC. … But it’s just so WONDERFUL to see that Dawkins is rebutted so comprehensively in this book. CONGRATULATIONS and a huge thank you to everyone at CMI who put in the big effort to get this book out so quickly. I can’t tell you how much of an encouragement this is to me.”Most of all please continue to pray for all our staff, even those who answer the phones and receive similar comments to above. Thanks for standing with us.
Related articles
Further reading
Reference
-
, 15 April, 2010. Return to text.