Just a quickie. Found this video yesterday on Youtube. Nothing to do with religion, lack of religion. Just an attempt to put you in a good mood:
Ok, so maybe this has some implications. How can you be against pot after watching that video? You don't need religion to smile. That's all for now.
June 15, 2009
June 10, 2009
What Does It Take For A Creationist To Accept Evolution?
The world is full of reality denying individuals. People who reject evolution. Who look for holes, even where there aren't any, in the theory of evolution.
What does it take to "convert" these creationists to accept evolution/reality?
Let me first state that there are two type of creationists. Creationists who accept science, but add God and supernatural acts into their reality, and then there are the pathetic creationists who deny realities that do not fit in with their religious world views. The latter of course, are the creationists I am writing about now.
To many creationists, evolution is a story made up by scientists, while the bible is a story inspired or written by God. These creationists choose the story that gives them salvation over the story that doesn't. I really think it is that simple for many.
I do think the young and brainwashed, those under 30, who have never really looked into evolution, but were taught that evolution is nonsense, are probably the easiest to educate. Of course, they need to have the actual desire to learn.
The toughest to educate are the 40 plus know-it-all creationists, who have decided not to try to really understand evolution, to the point that rational thought goes out the window. They rely on frauds like Kent Hovind and Answers In Genesis to do the thinking for them.
But I've often wondered that what if these types were individually put into a room with Dr. Ken Miller, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, or Christopher Hitchens and made to watch Potholer54's Made Easy Series, able to stop and debate any point made in the videos they want. How long, if ever, would it take for the average willfully ignorant Fundy to accept reality?
The Made Easy Series For Schools:
It takes the will to investigate to find the truth, and to find out that what was assumed through religious or cultural indoctrination (like a historical Moses or Jesus) may not be true at all.
I was 40 before I was actually curious enough to investigate the historical Jesus or Moses. And I was actually startled from what I found....or what I didn't find. I think there are many believers who are in the same boat when it comes to evolution.
What does it take to "convert" these creationists to accept evolution/reality?
Let me first state that there are two type of creationists. Creationists who accept science, but add God and supernatural acts into their reality, and then there are the pathetic creationists who deny realities that do not fit in with their religious world views. The latter of course, are the creationists I am writing about now.
To many creationists, evolution is a story made up by scientists, while the bible is a story inspired or written by God. These creationists choose the story that gives them salvation over the story that doesn't. I really think it is that simple for many.
I do think the young and brainwashed, those under 30, who have never really looked into evolution, but were taught that evolution is nonsense, are probably the easiest to educate. Of course, they need to have the actual desire to learn.
The toughest to educate are the 40 plus know-it-all creationists, who have decided not to try to really understand evolution, to the point that rational thought goes out the window. They rely on frauds like Kent Hovind and Answers In Genesis to do the thinking for them.
But I've often wondered that what if these types were individually put into a room with Dr. Ken Miller, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, or Christopher Hitchens and made to watch Potholer54's Made Easy Series, able to stop and debate any point made in the videos they want. How long, if ever, would it take for the average willfully ignorant Fundy to accept reality?
The Made Easy Series For Schools:
It takes the will to investigate to find the truth, and to find out that what was assumed through religious or cultural indoctrination (like a historical Moses or Jesus) may not be true at all.
I was 40 before I was actually curious enough to investigate the historical Jesus or Moses. And I was actually startled from what I found....or what I didn't find. I think there are many believers who are in the same boat when it comes to evolution.
June 5, 2009
Troubling: Atheist Blogosphere Silent About Obama's Egypt Speech
I cringed at times listening to Barack Obama's speech yesterday. I'm sure many atheists did the same. Besides quoting/misquoting the Koran, Obama completely alienated atheists:
“Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews.”
I did a blog search on Google and I found only a few atheists that seemed bothered about the speech.
Clemens' Blog is the only one I've read who tells it like it is in his post Obama's Sermon.
Lets look at other things that Obama said in the speech:
“And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.”
Who's God is our God? Obama is saying ALL Americans aspire to love our God. Thanks Obama, for throwing atheists under the bus.
But what is troubling is that the atheist internet community has either turned a blind eye or has put their collective heads in the sand on this speech.
Why is that? Is it that Obama, being so different than Bush in his Liberalism, and his perceived pacifier status when it comes to war and conflict, gets a free pass from atheists?, or is it that the atheist community perceives Muslims collectively as a bunch of 7 year old children, who need to be completely sucked up to if it means possible reformation and peace?
I do know that if George Bush made the exact same speech as Obama yesterday, the atheist blogosphere would have been posting about it in an enraged flurry, because the second possibility wouldn't be an option, and Bush would have been looked upon just as a religious zealot talking to other religious nuts.
Of course, Obama also completely portrayed Islam and history in a very distorted and unrealistic way, and gave Islam credit where none was due. But that is just politics.
If Obama made this speech domestically prior to the election, I wonder if he would have lost atheist votes. I hope so, but I just don't know.
I'm very disappointed in my atheist brothers and sisters right now for holding back criticism of Obama. I'm also accusing the atheist community of double standards here. Had he made this type of speech at a church, he would have been slaughtered by fellow bloggers.
Don't get me wrong, I still think Obama is going in the right direction (at least the direction he is going is worth a shot), but he could have included non believers, and he should be called out for not doing so.
“Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews.”
I did a blog search on Google and I found only a few atheists that seemed bothered about the speech.
Clemens' Blog is the only one I've read who tells it like it is in his post Obama's Sermon.
Lets look at other things that Obama said in the speech:
“And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.”
Who's God is our God? Obama is saying ALL Americans aspire to love our God. Thanks Obama, for throwing atheists under the bus.
But what is troubling is that the atheist internet community has either turned a blind eye or has put their collective heads in the sand on this speech.
Why is that? Is it that Obama, being so different than Bush in his Liberalism, and his perceived pacifier status when it comes to war and conflict, gets a free pass from atheists?, or is it that the atheist community perceives Muslims collectively as a bunch of 7 year old children, who need to be completely sucked up to if it means possible reformation and peace?
I do know that if George Bush made the exact same speech as Obama yesterday, the atheist blogosphere would have been posting about it in an enraged flurry, because the second possibility wouldn't be an option, and Bush would have been looked upon just as a religious zealot talking to other religious nuts.
Of course, Obama also completely portrayed Islam and history in a very distorted and unrealistic way, and gave Islam credit where none was due. But that is just politics.
If Obama made this speech domestically prior to the election, I wonder if he would have lost atheist votes. I hope so, but I just don't know.
I'm very disappointed in my atheist brothers and sisters right now for holding back criticism of Obama. I'm also accusing the atheist community of double standards here. Had he made this type of speech at a church, he would have been slaughtered by fellow bloggers.
Don't get me wrong, I still think Obama is going in the right direction (at least the direction he is going is worth a shot), but he could have included non believers, and he should be called out for not doing so.
May 30, 2009
C'mon Creationists You Need To Watch This
Here is the hairy frogfish stalking a flounder. Just keep an eye on the fish's feet fins:
As Homer Simpson would say "Stupid Flounders."
Any way, I'd love to see Answers In Genesis explain their way out of this one since one of their biggest arguments is that fish are fish and don't have legs, etc.
Yes, the frogfish doesn't have legs, but those fins are darn close, that it doesn't take a genius to figure out that with a little time, fish can evolve into amphibians if water and food sources started to dry up in a certain ecosystem.
Why would God put such fish on this earth? It only makes creationists look silly and makes evolution look pretty good.
Neil Shuban, author of Your Inner Fish, explains the process of evolving from a water dweller to a land animal:
Creationists are just so fricken sad.
As Homer Simpson would say "Stupid Flounders."
Any way, I'd love to see Answers In Genesis explain their way out of this one since one of their biggest arguments is that fish are fish and don't have legs, etc.
Yes, the frogfish doesn't have legs, but those fins are darn close, that it doesn't take a genius to figure out that with a little time, fish can evolve into amphibians if water and food sources started to dry up in a certain ecosystem.
Why would God put such fish on this earth? It only makes creationists look silly and makes evolution look pretty good.
Neil Shuban, author of Your Inner Fish, explains the process of evolving from a water dweller to a land animal:
Creationists are just so fricken sad.
May 23, 2009
God Is A Weirdo Or Evolution Is Fact
There is a lot of weird stuff that goes on in nature. It makes no sense that God would create animals to behave in ways like this:
The male wasp spider leaves the female a tip after mating. And I don't mean like in money. Four out of five times, the male will plug up the female's genitalia with a piece of his genitalia.
Why does he do it? To try to make sure that they will be the fathers. It isn't like they can go on the Springer Show to prove the paternity of the baby spiders, because most of the time, they wind up being killed by the female regardless.
Evolution works innately on two levels. One is the survival of the species. It is why there are species today. For example, why mother crocodiles transport their young from land to water and back in their mouths without chowing down on the youngsters. The other level is the innate need for most animals to be ones directly responsible for the next generation, especially among non social male animals.
Back to the spiders, there has been a bit of an evolutionary race going on between the spiders genitals becoming able to deal with many suitors so the best sperm wins out versus the male spiders genitals evolving to make sure the mommy isn't such a slut.
Of course, the other explanation is that God is one sick mofo with too much time on his hands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)