Bartlet 08
Popularity: unranked [?]
Archive for category Creationists
I love the West Wing
Jul 5
Quick Update
Apr 13
This update is mainly to show that I haven’t died from alcohol poisoning, brain collapse from too many fundie quotes, or been struck down by God. I still sit here, and I bring new links to keep you all busy.
First, if you don’t have anything to do over the summer this year I’ve got a proposal for you….. SUPERCAMP!! That’s right you too can attend the Creation Supercamp run by Creation Ministries International (the Australian branch of Answers in Genesis) and learn about how the entire scientific community and body of evidence is wrong.
They’re even good enough to allow time in their schedule for devotions (weee morning AND evening!) and even some free time. You can read their itinerary for yourself and judge if you want to go, all I know is that I’m glad I don’t need to choose between supercamp and Defcon, because that would be an impossible choice. Oh and if you go, don’t forget the requried readings.
The other exciting link is unbelief.org which is all about the religious right in Australia. Before I talk further about this site, it is important to remember the Commonwealth Constitution. In particular, section 116
116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
That is the quick response to anyone who says that this country was founded on Judo-Christian values and that we should do insane things like outlaw Islam because of that.
While unbelief hasn’t been updated so far this year, it seems to be a good resource if you want to know more about the Fundamentalist movement in Australia. And if it inspires you, ask to contribute. Or just start your own blog, and post freedom.
Popularity: unranked [?]
Following up from the last post, the list of quotes here could actually bring on full blown alcoholism due to the fact that these people are serious.
I’m well aware that most people, and even probably most fundamentalists don’t hold themselves to their views as some people express here. But the fact that these people are able to use our wonderful communication network of the Internet and then use it to damn technology, science, facts, and reality for not agreeing with their holy book… It’s mindboggling.
A quick selection
A sun denier:
One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn’t possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it. [emphasis added]
A gravity denier:
Gravity: Doesn’t exist. If items of mass had any impact of others, then mountains should have people orbiting them. Or the space shuttle in space should have the astronauts orbiting it. Of course, that’s just the tip of the gravity myth. Think about it. Scientists want us to believe that the sun has a gravitation pull strong enough to keep a planet like neptune or pluto in orbit, but then it’s not strong enough to keep the moon in orbit? Why is that? What I believe is going on here is this: These objects in space have yet to receive mans touch, and thus have no sin to weigh them down. This isn’t the case for earth, where we see the impact of transfered sin to material objects. The more sin, the heavier something is.
Someone who simply can’t put 2 and 2 together
I am a bit troubled. I believe my son has a girlfriend, because she left a dirty magazine with men in it under his bed. My son is only 16 and I really don’t think he’s ready to date yet. What’s worse is that he’s sneaking some girl to his room behind my back. I need help, God! I want my son to stop being so secretive!
More counting errors
I can sum it all up in three words: Evolution is a lie
Someone with undeniable rebuttal of evolutionary theory
[Replying to 'as for not seeing evolution it takes several million years... incase you missed that memo...']
several million years for a monkey to turn into a man. oh wait thats right. monkeys dont live several million years.
And the reality deniers
“Make sure your answer uses Scripture, not logic.”
Jesus is not a Jew. Jesus was Jewish.
And the scary
so you think if no one believed in any religion there would be no wars or fighting? i think it would be worse. i know if i didn’t fear god’s judgement i would have killed many many times.
And this is just some of them in the top 100…..
For April so far, they’re up to 7 pages. We’re not even half way through the month yet.
I fear that even the sweet nectar of liquor won’t calm my mind having read through so many of these quotes.
Popularity: unranked [?]
Reasons why I drink…
Apr 9
This is of course only one reason why I drink… Alcohol being the delicious substance that it is is another reason …. Others will be added to new blog posts and the UST Hitlist in due time…
Figure 1: Fucking stupidity
Popularity: 1% [?]
So another post on creationism/creation-science/ID/sudden emergence. I’m beginning to wonder how efficient their process is? In terms of scientific research it could be very considered fairly straight forward. God/Sky Fairy/Wizard did it. They don’t need to use scientific method, inquire into facts about anything, they can just kick back to the conclusion that they’re not meant to understand it.
However to pretend that their argument has a scientific basis and not a religious one, we should realise that this is a difficult task indeed.
This is because evidence that a wizard did in fact create the world has not been forthcoming in great volume, despite the seemingly large number of “great” minds on a the topic (as they love to claim). In fact there is a large amount of evidence to the contrary. If the controversy was so raging then there would be a large number of articles forthcoming, fuelled by scientific curiosity.
In thinking about how difficult this can be for the proponents of ID we must consider however the amount of work it takes to actively ignore evidence.We can assume this is great for those who have been in the educational system long enough to gain PhD’s. We ignores the effort that has to be gone into to research a field, ignore evidence that doesn’t support your case, find the evidence that does, and then also find the current gaps in evidence (not theory) that exist, quote mine prominent scientists, then create a poorly written mess of “evidence” and “logic”. Then this needs to be passed down to the various parroting individuals and organisations for further dissemination in the various media formats they seek to conquer.
The effort of all this is so great that they cannot apparently update and re-write their creationist textbook, Pandas (creation/ID/sudden emergence), instead they just do a find/replace method, while ignoring criticisms of the content. Commentary on the Dover Trial by Eugeine Scott and Ed Brayton illustrate this in extensive and entertaining detail.
The effort is so great that they cannot work in their “trained” academic fields, and must subsist on the meagre payouts from their Discovery Institute overlords, though those DI overlords are apparently squandering it.
This effort is in fact so great that some do not have time to defend their ideas in court at the Dover Trial, and find it easier to simply change the name as they have done before, despite always wanting to take this to trial.
In fact, some of those involved on the science side of the Science v. Creation debate put forward the proposition that the efforts of the Discovery Institute et al. are in fact slowing down the progress of humanity. This is by wasting the valuable time of prominent scientists, dumbing down the next generation of scientists through indoctrination into the philosophy of “You’re too dumb to understand it”, and by slowing down the rate of scientific discovery by changing the defintion of science!
In conclusion, I can safely say that ID etc. is inefficient for the scientific community and society at large, but also for the scientists involved. Seeing as they are continually shut down in the court (Edwards v. Aguillard, the various Arkansas cases, Cobb County, and Dover), as well as scientifically (just the one reference, you can find the rest) and finally in the recent condemnation in the cultural arena over the Expelled film.
Finally, you will have noticed the masses of links to all kinds of sources. I hope that you’re at least considering trying to research this topic more heavily, but the ones I have included are not exhaustive.
This is partially due to the method my informal research into this topic (tabs + search engine + links == chaos), but I can recommend talkorigins.org as a good place to start on the science of it all, and PZ Meyers, Eugenie Scott, Ed Brayton, Barbara Forrest, the NCSE and Panda’s Thumb as some of the people who discuss the evolution of creationism. However being able to use a search engine and follow links you should be able to find even more anti-creation resources (there are a lot of them after all).
Popularity: 1% [?]
Popularity: 1% [?]