February 28, 2007

History As I Know It

My fourth Youtube video. This one is a bit different, because I actually spent time finding pictures and then I put them to music (well more of a narration piece), and then I did lots of editing (about 3 hours worth, which is more than one hour for each one minute of video), using Windows Movie Maker.
I hope it is enjoyable at least:

The narration is from the animated movie, "The Point." I remember watching it in the early 70's a few times. Why it isn't on frequently, or at all anymore, is sort of mind boggling. It is really one of those cartoons that makes a pre-teen or an early teen think. Maybe that is why.

From Wikipedia: The Point! is a fable by American songwriter and musician Harry Nilsson about a boy named Oblio, the only round-headed person in the Land of Point, where by law everyone and everything had to have a point.

"I was on acid and I looked at the trees and I realized that they all came to points, and the little branches came to points, and the houses came to point. I thought, 'Oh! Everything has a point, and if it doesn't, then there's a point to it.'" -- Harry Nilsson

I figured the narration I selected was obscure enough and unique enough to give my video production a real artsy fartsy touch.

Youtube took away the science and technology category (to piss off secularists perhaps?), so I had to file the above video under "entertainment."

Oh, and I said that this was my fourth Youtube video. I haven't posted my third one on my blog yet, so I might as well now. Just a short video of my doggie:

Daisy is such a good girl:)

February 26, 2007

Youtube Muslims Blatantly Unite To Censor The Truth

From Digg News:
Muslims on YouTube have formed several groups where users and videos that criticize Islam (which they define as "Hate Speech") are listed and mass-flagged as abuse. YouTube seems to remove videos and sometimes even ban users automatically. Muslims claim that they only flag videos that have violated YouTube's TOS, but this has been been proven false

A group on Youtube called United Muslims put up a hit list of Youtube members they wanted to ban. The thing is, that they can't handle the truth. Sure, some of the videos go overboard, but so do many anti-Christian, anti-Israel, etc. videos that don't get banned by agenda. And as far as I'm concerned, shouldn't get banned. I've even seen Holocaust denying videos on Youtube. I'm all for free speech, and as I've said before, the nuts (like the YECs) will find that the internet is their worst enemy.

I think Youtube should stop allowing members to control comments. If someone wants to refute a message, they should be allowed to do so. Many of these sites simply delete comments that debunk the videos in question.

It is funny that the Muslims perceive their biggest enemies on Youtube to be the Youtube Atheists. Generally very politically liberal, I find it refreshing that so many Atheists are making videos exposing the Koran and Radical Islam.

Most Atheist videos are pretty much anti-religion, and mostly mock Christian belief, but that is because most Atheists are ex-Christians.

Here is the video that got Nick Gisburne, Youtube Atheist, banned. In case you haven't seen it, it is just verses from the Koran set to music:

I'm glad this flew back in the faces of the banning Muslims. Many Atheists simply uploaded it and posted it on their own sites. If Muslims want to debunk these Koran phrases, I say let em. But banning videos like this isn't the answer.

UPDATE: New post written May 14th, 2007

My friend at Eye on the World has had his account banned a few times on Youtube. He puts together many of his own videos, including one last year, that I co-wrote with Elder of Ziyon (who did most of the writing). I did the singing (I'll never make it on Idol):

February 24, 2007

Youtube Atheists

They let me in without a background check. Don't they know that I'm really a Fundy who is working undercover?

Over 250 members and counting. Check out the videos. Even Hellbound Alleee has joined up.

Oh, and you God damn Atheists who are not members yet, join Deep Thought's Atheist Blogroll. Just email Mojoey and he will add you.

February 22, 2007


The Rabid Ape does an excellent job explaining what evolution is and how it works. Even most Fundies will be able to understand it, but they will do the hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil thingy upon viewing it:

The one thing I didn't like is that he stated there is no such thing as micro evolution and macro evolution, there is only evolution. I would have stated it different, because the terms do exist: Macro evolution is just loads and loads of micro evolution.

Pharyngula has linked another video that explains evolution in laymen terms, but it was done in German (ooh the Germans). Thankfully it has English subtitles.

On another note, I have no idea why Googlebot has started to diss me. Is it because I'm an Atheist or is it because I am not very happy with Islam? It can't be because I'm a Jew. Maybe it is a combination, but I used to get 50-100 hits a day from random Google searches; in the last week I been getting next to zero. Even a search of my blog name doesn't link to my blog anymore, at least on the first page of results. How am I going to get my message out to those who search things like "evil Atheist Jews?"

What does Google have against me? I used to rank up at the top when it came to many "Atheist blank" searches, and almost every "Atheist Jew blank" searches. I don't appear until the second page now. And only once.:

But Blog Search Has KO'D Me BLOG SEARCH ATHEIST JEW Note: Rickey's The Atheist Jew Slug is linked as is The Atheist Jew (a dormant blog that has no connection with me)

February 20, 2007

Trouble With Atheism: Yeah, Dolts Don't Know What Atheism Is

This is long, but it is worth watching ONCE.

'Rod Liddle argues against those who turn to atheism for a rational and moderate approach to today's problems, and says that atheism has high priests and dogmatic beliefs, just like fundamentalist religion.'

First off, very few suggest that Atheism will solve today's problems. Many problems will disappear if magically everyone became Atheist tomorrow though, and yes, some could be created depending on the political leanings of the leaders.
As far as having high priests and dogmatic beliefs go. Well, I'm gonna watch the video for a second time, before I tell you why that is nothing but horse manure. I'll just make points as I see fit, while watching. Ok?

0:35 Atheism at its worst? You mean when an Atheist is like Stalin? How often does that happen?
0:40 Atheism is a conclusion. Nobody says that Atheism in itself is the answer to everyone's prayers.
3:13 Dawkins does not hate God. You can't hate something that doesn't exist. He doesn't think that belief in God is necessary, and in fact, believes that belief in God, causes much of the violence in the world, and stagnates intellectual growth and education. He is right.
4:10 "Atheists have become dogmatic in their contention that there is no God." Bullshit. Atheists just do not have any reason to consider God exists. We are sure that there is no evidence that God exists, and that none is likely to ever appear. We have no rules. And no, not everyone who believes in God is a deluded and dangerous fool. But many are both, some are one and not the other. Many are neither. And many are wilfully ignorant due to evolved insecurities. I am certain we have evolved a brain that readily accepts the concept of God and other supernatural beings. It is a fight not to be superstitious, for example.
4:38 "Atheism is becoming a religion of its own...they have gurus and sacred texts"
More bullshit. I've never read any sacred texts to do with Atheism. And the Origin of the Species is not a sacred text, it is a science book. A bible is full of unprovable myths. A science text is full of falsifiable theories and facts. We have representatives that are trying to explain that religion is crapola. If you want to call those who rely on facts and the scientific method to be my gurus, fine.
4:50 "Unknowable truths." This dude is starting to sound awfully wilfully ignorant now.
5:10 "Atheist regime." Soviet Russia was a political regime where the leader tried to force his country not to have faith in God. Sorry, but that doesn't happen much. No Atheists that I know want to ban prayer in church or home, or churches for that matter. And I know very few communists, if any, within the Atheist community.
5:26 "Atheism is a belief in a disbelief" Ok, I've had enough. I'm not watching anymore of this over. I watched it once, and thought it was fair, but now I'm just getting mad.

Hat tip: Educational Television Blog via TikkunGer

I had a lot more to say, but I'll let the following bloggers speak for me on this travesty of a documentary. They are all negative, and I wasn't looking for any bias whatsoever, but it is impossible after seeing it a second time not to be negative:

Rosio Pavoris
Rank Atheism

And for all you Agnostic bloggers who state that the points made in this video is why you can't be an Atheist, check out this great post at Rank Atheism for common errors made theists and Agnostics when it comes to
Misleading premises in arguments: Propositional Logic

February 19, 2007

Difference Between Joanna Francis and a Bucket of Feces: The Bucket

A friend of Assmonkey Supreme, Mark Glenn, Joanna Francis is feces personified. Bear with me, let me explain.
Yesterday I got a hit on my blog from an old post made about me by a raving Jew hater. The Ugly Truth article was just a bunch of my replies to a retard (he didn't bother posting his ignorant crap), but one of the two comments caught my eye yesterday:

joannafrancis on November 10th, 2006

“You have kids. Hopefully they didn’t inherit your self loathing and inferiority and low IQ. If they did they did and think like you, they should have been aborted.”

Definitely a Jew. Only a Jew would write something like that. They love abortion. For us, that is. And they wonder why people don’t like them?

I decided to further investigate this Joanna Francis. Such a lovely non assuming name and all. Well, it linked to a Jooooo paranoid hate site, No Peace Without Justice.

Check out her site. 80%+ of her posts blame Jews for everything from Anna Nicoles burial place to abortion being a Jewish conspiracy to murder Christian babies worldwide. HAHAHAHAHA

Classic: Jews Murder Christian Babies At Sea

"Jews have been the driving force behind legalizing abortion in (formerly) Christian countries, such as the United States, France, England, Canada, et al. But in some Western nations, the people still have a modicum of common sense, and refuse to allow Jews to get rich performing their favorite pastime: Jewish ritual killing of Christian babies.

The Jews were obviously frustrated by their inability to practice infanticide in every country of the West. However, the people who invented the word chutzpah were not going to let quaint things like laws, morals, or respect for life get in the way of their fun. As expected, they came up with the perfect solution to satisfy their infanticidal needs: abortion ships that dock in countries where abortion is illegal. Kind of like riverboat casinos anchored permanently on the Mississippi, circumventing anti-gambling laws in the surrounding states."

And of course, this has to be pinned on the Jews because Rebecca Gomperts, the founder of Women on Waves, has a Jewish sounding name. Her proof she is a Jew is this link. Yes, there have been many Jews with the last name Gomperz (who cares about the spelling, close enough).
Such horrible Jews too:
Benjamin Gompertz the mathematician; Lewis Gompertz, founder of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to animals; Samuel Gompers founder and president of the American Federation of Labor and the statue in Washington commemorating his life unveiled by President Roosevelt; and many gravestones and their inscriptions from the cemetery at Emmerich.

She apparently researched this article, Killing Us Left and Right, for 3 years.

There is speculation that Joanna Francis had an abortion early in life, and now she blames the Joooooos for making abortions so readily available to her. She now is overwhelmed with guilt that she had that abortion, as she can't conceive now, and now is childless, well past menopause. Instead of blaming herself, she found a scapegoat, as many self-loathers do.

I wonder how much research she put into Benedict XVI: Zionist Double Agent: "The Christian people in the United States are just as much enslaved to the Zionists as the Palestinians are. The only difference is that the Americans are mental slaves, i.e., brainwashed by the Jewish-owned media."

And this was well researched too, I'm sure: Israeli Snipers Killing US Troops In Iraq? At least she put a question mark in there. Rense didn't care about the question mark, they used her piece anyway.


I'm sure Catholic Friends of Israel won't mind me copying this blog post:


Priest Ejects Group with Anti-Jewish Links, by Alex Easton. NorthernStar.com Nov. 25, 2006:

'A LISMORE priest has distanced his parish from a local extremist group of Catholics who back claims of a Jewish conspiracy of genocide against Christians.

St Carthage’s Cathedral rector Father Dennis Carroll this week took the unusual step of censuring the anti-abortion group Apostles for Life in his parish bulletin.

Fr Carroll told parishioners the group had lost his support and had been discontinued as a parish group. He warned parishioners ‘to be wary of the anti-Jewish views expressed’ on the group’s website.

Those views included an article by anti-Semitic writer Joanna Francis, which says abortion-on-demand ‘for American Jews signified the beginning of their Messianic age, wherein they could now freely practice genocide against their ancient enemies, the Christians, with impunity’.

In other articles, Ms Francis has also claimed Pope Benedict XVI was a Zionist double agent and that Israeli snipers were killing US soldiers in Iraq.

When contacted by The Northern Star, Fr Carroll said he stripped Apostles for Life of its status as a Parish group early this year ‘because they have spun off into the crazy right wing of Catholicism’.

The group's homepage proclaims that its members gather "to promote the truth and beauty of Church teaching, especially the Gospel of Life, and the sanctity of all human life." But I would think any organization whose website promotes articles asserting:

. . . What remains unspoken by these groups, however, is that abortion was always intended to be practiced on us goyim (cattle), as a means to reduce the numbers of their enemies. What better way to cull the herd than by preventing our births altogether? (Jews quietly lament the fact that some Jewish babies have fallen into the trap set for us goyim.). . . ("Killing Us Left and Right", by Joanna Francis 4/2/2006)

without thinking twice has fallen far afield of its original purpose, losing its moorings in the truth of the Catholic faith.'

Joanna Francis isn't even an accepted Catholic anymore it seems.

February 17, 2007

More Proof That The Internet Will Kill The YEC Movement

Youtube's popularity is growing exponentially. A great place to give your personal viewpoint too, well, as long as you aren't telling the truth about Islam that is.

One thing Youtube won't ban, for lies or distortions, are the wild claims made by Young Earth Creationists (YECs). But the thing these YECs don't get, is that if you start putting your nutjob ideas and beliefs out there like this, they are going to get destroyed.

There are two nutjobs that have a series of idiotic videos on Youtube: Truthmakesfree, who could be John Pendleton, has a series of Pendleton videos. A chemist nutjob who has zero understanding of earth sciences it seems. The other guy is a young Fundy who uses the ID VenomFangX. The guy reminds me of Eric Foreman on the 70's show. The Foreman lookalike actually emailed me a few days ago and asked me to check out his garbage. I did reply, but it looks like someone else decided to destroy him and Pendleton on Youtube. Check out the new Actual series posted by akg41470:

And finally this one humiliates Pendleton:

Here is my Youtube email exchange I had with VenomFangX:

Hey there. It's nice to see a fellow youtuber posting video blogs about who they are and what they believe. I myself am doing the same thing, and want you to come check out my vids and tell me what you think.


What I thought:
Dude, I checked your video on the age of the earth and left a comment. If the age of the earth was only 6000 years old, science would be able to prove it using science. Especially a Christian scientist would become very famous if he could use scientific method to prove a young earth. The fact is that if the earth was young, there would be loads of evidence to support it. There is none. All you did was present faulty assumptions, that have been debunked. Quit denying reality. Science is not a conspiracy theory. Read this:

I'm sorry, I can't watch any more of your videos. You are obviously brainwashed and hopefully one day you will wake up.

His response:
Scientists can and have proven the age of the Earth to be 6000 years old, just like scientists have proven that evolution is a hoax. However, The Bible says satan is the ruler of this world, and satan doesn't want that info getting out. More over, people don't want to acknowledge The Bible is correct, because that means God is real and judges all unrepentant sinners, who do not receive the gift of salvation through Jesus Christ.
If you want to see a real scientist proving the age of the Earth, check this out.

Me again:
Actually, just point me to actual scientific research that has been published by scientific journals confirming your lies that evolution has been proven to be a hoax and the age of the earth is 6000 years old.

You are in deep denial. It is very sad.

Fundy replies once more:
You don't get it. Evolutionist journals will plug evolution. Creationist journals will plug creation. One shows why the other is a lie, and the battle is waging even to this day. You just need to use common sense.
Every 'claim' an evolutionist has ever made has been based on leaps of logic so huge they would make superman's leaps and bounds look like a drop in the bucket.
Radio-carbon dating doesn't work. If all of creation came into existence at the same point in time, which the big bang theory speculates, then all matter should date to the same exact same age. The fact that evolutionists claim they can tell how old something is by radioactive decay is a complete contradiction to the fact that all things in the universe are exactly the same age. The matter in your body was created at the beginning of creation, along with everything else. One can not date the age of something by radioactive decay, because in order to do that, you must make the leap of logic in assuming that the radioactive decay has been consistant, and that all things obsorb and have been exposed to the same levels of radiation, which is impossible.
Scientists who believe in evolution carbon dated living snails and found them to be thousands of years old. Impossible, don't you think?
Moving right along. Scientists look at all the buried animals who has fossilized and believe that over millions or billions of years, mud and earth covered these dead animals/plant and they fossilized. I want you to do an experiment. Order a BBQ chicken from swiss chalet or something, and place it in your backyard, tied down firmly to the ground with an unbreakable metal chain, begged 5 feet into the earth. So, if an animal comes along to steal the deal chicken, they won't be able to. As the months go by, that chicken is going to decompose, and animals will come and pick at it's bones. Rain, snow, and wind will eventually cause the bones to dislocate and be sent far away from the corpse. Eventually, in only a matter of weeks, there will be nothing but your metal chain and giant steak into the ground. The chicken will be gone.
Indeed, the only way for something to fossilize with it's entire skeleton structure intact is to be buried instantly. The reason we are finding creatures all over the world fossilized indicates that something on a world wide level buried these creatures. That is where the historical story of Noah's Ark and the flood come in, which happened about 4400 years ago, to which this is plenty of proof. I have made a video about the Ark, which they found exactly where The Bible said it would be, matching the exact size and scale of the historical Ark.

My turn:
No, you are in denial. I asked you to show a scientific study that proves the earth is young, or a scientific study that debunks, refutes, or even runs contrary to evolution.
You obviously do not understand science at all, nor do you want to. You are quite the delusional speciman.
You are right now what I call wilfully ignorant, looking for excuses to make your book written by man for man, somehow literal, which it isn't.
You won't even come close to change my mind without scientific studies...real ones. In the meantime, I know where there is a lot of non believers you can try to convert. I started a thread for you:


Good luck. And Happy Converting.

He wasn't through yet:
All I have to say to you is this:

Moi once more:
Dude, you are in denial. Again, you have nothing. Not one scientific study. Wake up and smell the roses, you are missing out on all of natures wonders. Don't bother replying to this, right now you are wilfully ignorant until you really start to think for yourself. You've been brainwashed, and you don't know it.

And his last desperate response:
I used to believe in evolution, I really did. Now I feel sorry for everyone who does.

Of course, I had to have the last word before I blocked him from wasting anymore of my time:
I used to believe in God, but then I started asking questions and the answers made me realize that God was man made, but even when I believed in God, I never put my head in the sand and denied science. You might as well be a heroin addict, because you are completely denying reality. Notice how you can't find one scientific study that I asked for. Science is not a conspiracy theory out to prove your bible wrong by the way. That is just a cop out. The internet will destroy you YECs, you should stay within your flock, because you dudes get destroyed when you try to compete with people who have at least half a brain.

Was I too hard on the dude, or was I too lenient?

February 15, 2007

How To Deal With Iran, Iraq, The Palestinians, and Islam In General

This may sound insensitive, cold, and heartless, but why sugarcoat reality? Islam is the biggest threat to humanity facing our planet today. The only hope mankind has is time for Islamic reform, but time is a double edged sword because of Muslim breeding habits.

Islam today is collectively run by blood thirsty, intolerant, Western hating Muslim leaders. The so-called moderate Muslims may be the silent majority, but their silence is deafening. Whatever it is that holds the moderates back from taking over leadership of Islam worldwide, whether it is fear of the radicals, or complacency, or not committing "the sin" of dissing a fellow Muslim, isn't important right now. The moderate Muslims aren't even close to being in control, to the point that they are perceived as a tiny minority by many.

America gave Islam too much credit when it came to the Iraq war. They thought like far Left Liberals; that if you rid a country of a tyrant's regime, the country will appreciate it and start to build and grow. The common perception that everyone wants to be part of a Western culture with Western goals gets thrown out the door when you are dealing with Muslim countries.

The collective Muslim leadership today wants an ignorant world where there are only three groups: Muslims, Dhimmis, and the dead.

Islamic countries are a crematorium for common sense, intelligence, and free thinking. "...the Islamic countries are considered the greatest crematorium for books and the greatest slaughterhouse for freethinkers in history, and we see that the majority of freethinkers in Arab and Islamic countries are either expatriates or have chosen to keep silent in order to remain safe."

Islamic countries are breeding intelligence out of their gene pools, and perhaps they been doing this for 14 hundred years.

I noticed a phenomenon when Muslims were interviewed regularly during the Lebanon war: Muslim leaders don't answer simple yes/no questions, where they know the simple answer exposes them and their ideologies. This recent interview illustrates my observations well:

OK, so what does all this have to do with dealing with Iran, Iraq, The Palestinians, and Islam in general?

Well, I've taken all the above into consideration, and I've concluded that the only way to deal with Islam it to use evolution to our advantage. This means wiping out the radical elements whenever we can, and periodically bombing Islam into the 21st Century.

Iraq: I support Western troops whole heartedly, but the reality of the situation is that it is a lost cause to put anymore Western lives at danger. The Muslims have proved that they will keep attacking and attacking. The best way to deal with this problem, is to leave, let the Iraqis deal with things by themselves. If a group emerges that poses a threat to the future of our homo sapien species, then tactical bombs should be launched. If it pisses off the Muslims...........too bad. If it isn't tactical bombs that pisses them off, it is cartoons.
Also, I want to make it clear that the soldiers who have died in Iraq have not died for no reason. Their deaths have paved the way to give humanity a chance to keep going. Fighting this war against Islam, trial and error had to be employed. The Muslims have proved they are not ready to enter the 21st Century yet. America tried the quick route, it has all but failed, but now they know what needs to be done.

Iran: Tactical bombs. Negotiations. More tactical bombs. Repeat until they wave a white flag. Forget about Israel for a minute, even Saudi Arabia doesn't want this mental case regime to have nukes. The Islam mentality isn't the Communist Cold War mentality. Islamists don't mind dying for Allah. They can't have nukes, no way, no how.

Palestinians: I'll repeat this; If the Arabs dropped their arms, there would be peace. Israel needs to define continuous final borders that surround most of their existing settlements in the West Bank.
The Arabs are gonna whine and attack regardless of where they are. The "Green-Line" was a non issue to them, and they voted in a leadership that isn't after a state that lies next to a Jewish state, but one that has a goal of eliminating the Jewish state.
Draw the final borders, build a giant wall. The attacks won't stop, but Israel will have carte blanche to use tactical bombs until whenever the bombing stop. The Palestinians can call the land on their side of the wall whatever the hell they want to call it, but they will be responsible for whatever bombs are launched from their side of the fence too.

Islam in general: The average non Muslim couple in Europe now have less than 2 children each. Muslims have over 4 or 5 kids per couple. Over population is a concern for our species as is. I see nothing wrong with putting a heavy tax on anyone who has more than two children in the West.
Also, I am all for racial profiling. My rights mean squat when we are dead.
Muslims are exactly why the West must maintain a huge separation of church and state. No praying in school gyms for example, and quit fighting reality when it comes to evolution in the classroom. Muslims don't believe in evolution for the most part. Teach them evolution and make every child take science classes(facts need to be taught, this is not an ideological issue), and then Muslims will see their bible is not to be taken literally. Believers who don't take their bible literally have a far greater chance to become tolerant of mankind as a whole.

I'm tolerant of those who don't want to force their ideology on me and/or want to change my way of life. I'm not tolerant today of what Islam is all about today.

February 13, 2007

My Response To CNN's Segments On Atheism

This winging it is tough. I missed making some good points. Oh what the heck. I'll get better at this. I wanted to touch on the fact that Atheists are grossly under represented in jails and that contrary to what Dawkins says, not all Atheists are peaceful and gentle. I think he forgets that we come in all shapes and sizes and we all have different political ideologies.
I wanted to talk about the so called Godless Lifestyle that Preacher Man was talkin bout. An Atheists lifestyle is the same as a Fundies except we don't waste our time praying to an invisible sky fairy, or wasting our Saturdays and Sundays worshipping an invisible man made myth.
And another obvious point about morality is that if a Christian didn't have God or the bible to guide him, would he run around raping, stealing and murdering everyone around him? Are Christians insane without their bibles and God? I don't think so, many Atheists are ex-Christians, and they don't rape, steal, and murder very much.

Here is the CNN segment from last night that I was pretty much responding to:


Since it is Valentines Day, I took it upon myself to shovel the driveway. The snow was deep, and it took me quite a while to finish. I think I went temporarily insane, because the next thing I knew, I carved out a giant heart in the snow facing my front window:

I know it isn't a perfect heart, but there is no such thing as a perfect marriage either.

I showed it to my wife, and she got a sappy grin on her face. Somebody is gonna get his rocks off tonight:)

February 12, 2007

Happy Darwin Day: Human Evolution Quiz

I found this while doing a search to help me bitch slap the Fundidiots I have been attracting lately. Get a pen and paper. Take a shot. Note: Answers not provided.

______1. The position of mammals in evolution is best described as
a) they dominated life in the sea
b) they were among the first animals to live on land and their variety outstrips all living things
c) they arose from mammal like reptiles in the Triassic but remained small and insignificant while dinosaurs dominated the land
d) mammal gave rise to birds
e) All of the above are correct.

______2. All of the following are characteristics of primates Except the
a) five long dexterous digits on hands and feet
b) three dimensional binocular vision
c) well developed brain
d) opposable thumb
e) rapid postnatal maturation

______3. Which reflect(s) general trends in primate evolution
a) selection for greater ability to detect odors
b) rotation of eyes sideways to cover a wider field of view
c) shortening of gestation time to produce mature young sooner
d) increase in forebrain development, and large proportions for vision, hearing and touch
e) All of the above are correct.

______4. Anthropoids include all Except
a) apes b) humans c) lemurs d) monkeys

______5. The group thought to be ancestral to both apes and humans is
a) Australopithecus afarensis b) Australopithecus afaricanus c) Proconsul d) Homo habilis e) Homo erectus

______6. Sometimes biologists are alleged to have said that "man comes from monkeys or apes." The correct
way for a modern biologists to explain the apparent sequence of human evolution is
a) monkeys have evolved less than humans
b) humans and monkeys share a common ancestor
c) humans and monkeys are biologically identical
d) evolution leads toward more perfect forms and humans therefore came after modern monkeys

______7. Frequently used in psychological experiments, the most humanlike of the apes is the
a) gibbon b) gorilla c) baboon d) chimpanzee e) orangutan

______8. The fossil called Lucy is a member of the species _____, which lived about 3.18 million years ago.
a) Australopithecus afarensis b) Australopithecus afaricanus c) Proconsul d) Homo habilis e) Homo erectus

______9. When different body parts evolve at different rates, the process is called
a) stasis b) catastrophism c) gradualism d) mosaic evolution e) punctuated equilibrium

______10. From the following group, the most recent ancestor of modern humans is thought to be
a) Australopithecus afarensis b) Australopithecus afaricanus c) Proconsul d) Homo habilis e) Homo erectus

______11. The main features that place Homo habilis in the genus Homo rather than Australopithecus are
a) human facial appearance and lack of hair
b) advanced use of language and total carnivorous diet
c) brain size, posture and dentition
d) care of young and altruistic behavior
e) hand grip, extensive use of tools, and house building

______12. The first archaic humans absolutely known to have produce stone tools are
a) Australopithecus afarensis b) Australopithecus afaricanus c) Proconsul d) Homo habilis e) Homo erectus

______13. The study of the extent to which humans have similar DNA in their mitochondria is a study
a) of "mitochondrial Eve," and suggests a common ancestry in Africa or the out of Africa hypothesis.
b) by DNA probe, and apes and humans are so different they had to have split over 33 million years ago.
c) by DNA hybridization, and apes and humans are similar enough to have split only six million years ago.
d) by DNA hybridization, and chimpanzees and humans are essentially identical and probably split only one million years ago.
e) by DNA hybridization, and African apes and humans are similar enough to have split only six million years ago.

______14. The stone tools and the dentition of Homo habilis indicate that early humans were
a) strictly herbivores c) strictly carnivores
b) strictly scavengers d) omnivores that could either scavenge or hunt for meat

______15. Which of these is Not considered and archaic human?
a) Homo habilis b) Neanderthal man c) Homo erectus d) Cro-Magnon man

______16. All of these humans are believed to have evolved in Africa Except
a) Homo erectus b) Homo habilis c) Cro-Magnon man d) Neanderthal man

______17. Previously the many fossils of Homo erectus found between 1.9 and 0.3 MYA were all considered
Homo erectus. Now they are divided into
a) Homo erectus and Homo habilis
b) Homo erectus and Homo ergaster
c) Homo erectus and Homo sapiens
d) Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis
e) Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens

______18. In contrast to the out of Africa hypothesis, the multiregional continuity hypothesis contends that
Homo erectus migrated to many continents as many as one million years ago, and all populations evolved into modern humans because
a) no further evolutionary changes occurred.
b) there was sufficient gene flow between populations to maintain one species.
c) constant warfare allowed one or another lineage to dominate.
d) hybrids between different lineages were superior and replaced their ancestors.
e) all lineages changed but in response to the same evolutionary pressures so they changed independently in the same way.

______19. Meaningful speech is thought to have perhaps develop in
a) Homo erectus b) Homo habilis c) Cro-Magnon man d) Neanderthal man

______20. Lucy's skeleton revealed that she was bipedal. This means that she
a) walked using all four limbs c) lived in trees
b) walked on two legs d) crawled along the jungle floor

______21. The first primates to appear were
a) australopithecines b) prosimians c) gorillas d) bonobos

______22. Two distinct features of all primates are
a) binocular vision and grasping hands c) grasping hands and feet
b) binocular vision and a large skull d) large eye sockets and binocular vision

______23. Since DNA sequence in humans and chimpanzees are very similar,
a) humans must have evolved from chimpanzees
b) chimpanzees must have a single stranded DNA
c) humans and chimpanzees must have a common ancestor in recent geologic history
d) humans and chimpanzees are the same species

______24. Most early hominid fossils have been found in
a) South America b) Africa c) North America d) Australia e) Asia

______25. Most scientists agree that the oldest known hominid was
a) Homo habilis b) Australopithecus afarensis c) Australopithecus boisei d) Home erectus

______26. Homo habilis
a) is known for its large brain c) used crude stone tools
b) lived in Africa d) All of the above.

______27. The first member of the genus Homo was
a) Homo sapiens b) Homo erectus c) Homo habilis d) Homo hominid

______28. Evidence of intelligence of Homo erectus includes
a) their large eye sockets they had c) the written messages they left on cave walls
b) tools found that they made d) the signs of primitive agriculture

______29. Homo erectus had a
a) pair of large eyes c) lighter skeleton than other hominids
b) written language d) brain almost as large as that of modern humans

______30. Homo erectus evolved into
a) Homo habilis b) Australopithecus c)Homo sapiens d) the genus Homo e) Lucy

______31. Prosimians were the first primates and were successful for two reasons. One reason was that they
possessed grasping fingers and toes. The other was
a) homeothermy
b) ability to walk on two legs
c) monogamous mating
d) binocular vision
e) omnivorous diet

More quizzes can be found here at the AP Biology Home page

Note: I can't find a link to the answers. Everyone is on their own. If someone has the answers or wants to take a shot, just leave it in the comment section.

I like tests like this, because I'll take a shot at the answers and then do internet searches to see if I'm right. I admit I'm not a biologist, but thank science, I'm not a creationist retard either. Lots of learning to be had.

February 9, 2007

Atheism As A Theory

Fundies often say that evolution is just a theory. Well, anyone who has honestly investigated the theory of evolution knows that evolution is a theory and a fact.

What about Atheism? Atheism can be a conclusion and/or a theory. Fundies like to say it is a faith or religion, and then reinvent the definitions of faith or religion to suit their purposes.

Atheism as a conclusion:

Based on the analysis of the evidence both scientifical and even philosophical, there is no reason to include God or any supernatural entity into the equation of life or the history of the universe. This is coupled with the fact that there is absolutely no evidence God, or any other supernatural entity has ever existed.

Based on the evidence that there are over 3400 different Gods that have been worshipped by various cultures and religions (all having slightly different or extremely different WORDS OF GOD), we can safely conclude that at least every God, except for possibly one, does NOT exist and therefore they were created by man. And there is absolutely no evidence that any of the over 3400 Gods exist.

In fact, there is as much evidence that the Tooth Fairy exists as there is that any of the Gods exist. If someone states the Tooth Fairy exists, it is up to the person making the statement to give proof that he or she exists...the same goes for God.

There is evidence that MAN makes up Gods. All Gods can't be right. Is Thor the right God?, the Sun?, the Hebrew God, where Jesus was just another guy? The Christian God? The Muslim God, where Mohammed was a prophet?, Jim Jones God?, Joe Smith's God?, how about the Buddhist God?, or Hubbard's God? The Jehovah Witness God? The Zoroastrian God?

It is logical that they all can't be right. And it is logical that every God, except for possibly one of them, do not have the story right. Almost certainly, all of them are made up, since there is no evidence that any God has ever existed. But there is lots of evidence that man has made up, and continues to make up Gods.

So the only rational conclusion to make here is that since we know at least 3400 Gods were created by man, if you state God exists, you must prove he or she exists. An Atheist is simply a person who concludes that no evidence for any God exists, just like no evidence for the Tooth Fairy exists so why should one even consider the Tooth Fairy or any God exists? Especially with the knowledge that man invented the Tooth Fairy and has invented at least all but one of the possible Gods.

Atheism as a theory:

My theory of Atheism states that everything everywhere, throughout the history of time, can be explained scientifically either now, or will be explained scientifically, in the future. Also, the theory states, that absolutely no supernatural event has ever happened or will ever happen, and that supernatural entities do not exist.

Since Atheism theory is supported by scientific evidence and observational facts, Atheism, like evolution, is both theory and fact as well.

If a supernatural event occurs, or if proof that such an event ever happened, or if there is proof that a supernatural entity exists or has ever existed, then Atheism theory will be destroyed.

Since the Paula Zahn farce is pretty fresh, and some people may be doing some web searches to find out for themselves what Atheism is all about, I think it is a good time to clear the air a bit.


Myth 1 : "Atheists are all the same"

You can understand why theists believe this, after being told this over and over by their preachers. This belief is reinforced by the fact that believers must be bound by
much more than a simple belief in God. For example, Catholics must also have the same stances on abortion, contraception, and homosexuality in order to be called a "good Catholic." It only goes to follow that atheism must be similar.

However, atheism is not a religion, rather the absence of religion. As such, we are bound only by our atheism. We are republicans and democrats, men and women, gays and straights, blacks and whites. We accept every person as they are as equals, and delight in our diversity (not many religions can say that). We disagree with each
other on many issues, and discussion is encouraged and common. Above all, atheists demand the right to disagree, even if it means with each other.

Myth 2 : "Atheists have no morals, since they don't believe in God"

What a sad world it is when people can seriously say that humans need to fear eternal damnation in order to do good. It is the one statement which at the same time stirs both anger and pity in most atheists; anger because it is a bigoted, prejudicial statement which serves no purpose except to promote intolerance, and pity because it highlights the speaker's ignorance and willingness to accept such crap without question.

At the risk of validating the question, a reply needs to be made in order to expose the speaker to the idea that what they've heard is wrong on so many dimensions. It must not be answered with anger, but with compassion.

Humans have the idea of right and wrong imbedded in them by their own brains, as well as their upbringing and society. Atheists do good, not out of fear of reprisal, but because it's the right thing to do. We value family, society, culture, and, of course, freedom. Many of us will - and have - defend these values with our lives. Examples:

1) Many Catholics make judgement calls on moral decisions against their church. For example, some use birth control or have abortions, despite what their church preaches. If these people can make moral decisions despite what their church preaches, then atheists can make similar choices without a church altogether.

2) Slavery was not only acceptable 200 years ago, it was considered a good deed by many, and defended using the bible. The bible was also used to justify the Holocaust, the Crusades, and the Spanish Inquisition.

Why is this relevant? Because it shows that the bible can be used to defend even the most immoral and unethical ideals, and is therefore not an adequate yardstick to
measure moral or ethical behavior.

3) Finally, mention bad religious people. Remember that Hitler was a religious Catholic, and that Jeffrey Dahmer said grace before he ate his victims. Mention also that one need only open a newspaper to find yet another story about allegations against priests for sexual misconduct, often with children. Don't forget our good friends Jim Baker (who swindled millions from his flock) and Jimmy Swaggart (asked for forgiveness only after being caught using prostitutes).

4) Always couple these statements with the fact that, while atheists make up 8-10% of the population at large, we only make up 1% of the population in prison. I mean, think of it, what if 8-10% of the population (on top of all the religious criminals) decided it was OK to steal, rape, and murder? We'd have chaos! These will serve to prove
that religion and ethical behavior are not even slightly related.

Expect these statements to piss off the theists, and this is where you must mention that what you said is verifiable and that their statement is openly prejudicial against 25
million people. This is the opportunity to open their eyes to the fact that just because we're different from them doesn't make us inherently bad.

Myth 3 : "Atheists believe in evolution, but that doesn't answer as many
questions as creationism"

Atheism is not a scientific theory, rather a lack of religion. We do believe in science, and that all questions will eventually be answered with science if they are not answered today. It's gone well so far, giving theories regarding evolution, geological
movement, and the Big Bang, all supported by evidence, but not necessarily endorsed by all atheists.

Creationism does not give all the answers, either. Furthermore, it goes so far as to choose which questions to answer, and discourages the asking of the rest. Believers are loath to discuss where God came from, or what he was doing before the creation. They refuse to give good answers for the many biblical inconsistencies or for the terrible injustices in the world, because they know that no such answers exist. They merely answer with "there are things which we mere humans cannot fully understand" or "the Lord works in mysterious ways". In the end, religion doesn't answer as many questions as it raises.

Myth 4 : "Atheists cannot know there is no God, since you cannot prove he doesn't exist"

Again, this is a two sided coin, but the theists are loathe to admit the other side. Atheists don't need to prove the non-existence of God, any more we need to prove the nonexistence of Zeus or Jupiter. Can theists prove God over any alternatives? Of course not. Nobody can prove God exists, yet they will stand on their heads saying they're sure. Well, if they can be sure despite evidence to the contrary, we can be sure in light of evidence in support of atheism.

Myth 5 : "Atheists seek to remove religion from society, and to force all
people to be atheists"

Absolutely wrong. We seek only the freedom for people to make their choice on their own, free of intervention from the government or public school system. We seek the freedom not to support religion through taxes, forced participation, or special privileges of any kind.

That being said, your thoughts are your rights, and none of our business. Wear your jewelry, celebrate your holidays, and pray in your house, church, or in public if you like. Just don't force your religion on other people. That's what we're all about.

This is in direct contrast to many of the world's religions, including Christianity, which include worldwide expansion as one of their central objectives. Isn't it amazing that they falsely accuse us of doing what they do openly, only with atheism it's evil?

To try to force atheism would by hypocritical, since we would be placing pressure from the state on people to believe a certain way. But let me give a good analogy to our objectives and at the same time answer this charge using the money we use every day.

"In God We Trust," is the government actively promoting religion.

"In God We Do Not Trust," would be the government promoting atheism.

We advocate the complete omission of the statement thereby rendering the money neutral.

We feel the same way about the rest of the government. It should be the "Switzerland of the religious debate," while at the same time being the protectorate of the individual.

Myth 6 : "Atheists are so closed-minded, they can't see that miracles
happen every day!"

Some people look for miracles where none exist (they never do). Allow me to put things in perspective: Someone's cancer going into remission is no miracle, but we can talk when disease suddenly disappears from the face of the earth overnight without help from medical science. Food getting through to a hungry village: human perseverance. Starvation vanishing from earth without a reason overnight: Miracle. One more time: A child is born - science; The spontaneous end of birth defects - Miracle. Got it?

Note: only good things are miracles, so volcanoes, tornadoes, and hurricanes don't count.

Myth 7 : "Atheists are pushing a negative sentiment, and have a dreary

Wrong. We are "pushing" a very positive statement: that living without dependence on a false deity is easy, fulfilling, and positive. We strive to be a positive influence in the world, and think each person can - and must - find their own meaning of life. We are thinkers, philosophers, and we thrive on discussion and diversity. We are proud, happy, and most of all, free. Compare that to original sin and Hell.

Myth 8 : " If atheists are right, then religious people are wasting their time, but at least they're happy. No harm in that! If religious people are right, then atheists are going to hell. It seems logical that atheists should become religious just to be safe."

I like getting this question. I sense another list coming :

1) Drug addicts go through life happy, so would theists suggest we all use drugs and stay home? We would be happy, and not hurting anybody, so where's the harm?
The harm is the same for believers. They go through life happy, but it's a false, wasteful happiness. Atheists get happiness from family, contribution to society, charity, and truth.

2) Religious people should not be lumped into one category for this question. Remember, religions are also biased against each other (Jews vs. Catholics Vs.
Protestants, etc), so no matter what religion the speaker follows, most of the world thinks they're going to hell (or other punishment), just like atheists. Ask them which religion has the worst punishment, and whether they would convert to that religion on that one factor, just in case they're right. When they tell you how absurd that question is, remind them that they asked it first.

3) To convert and practice a specific religion just to ingratiate yourself with God and avoid going to hell is pure, self-serving greed, which is one of the seven deadly
sins. Therefore, by their own thinking, even if they are right and I do convert, I'd go to hell anyway, along with everyone else in the flock whose actions are so motivated (possibly including the speaker).

Myth 9 : "There are no such things as atheists" a.k.a. "There are no
atheists in foxholes"

More fantasy from the believers, that there could never exist a single human whose reason and logical abilities surpass the pressure from society to believe in a deity. This is especially true in a situation of imminent death, where they believe all atheists would drop to our knees and beg God for forgiveness.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could somehow be sure that those who currently disagree with us would come around in the end and know we were right? Just like most other parts of religion, this is blatant fantasy.

There are 25 Million atheists in the country, more that Jews and Blacks combined. Many atheists became atheists not because they were born into it (like most theists), rather because we contemplated god in its many forms and decided it just doesn't make an ounce of sense. This isn't a choice, it's fact - a logical proof. We are simply too logical to believe God is anything more than fantasy.

As far as foxholes go, when I face death, as we all do sooner or later, I will use the last few remaining seconds of my life to remember my favorite moments, and evaluate my contribution to my family and society. I would definitely not waste precious time praying to a deity "just in case I'm wrong" I'm not.

Myth 10 : "This country was founded by Christians, on Christian values,
and should therefore be a Christian country".

True, some of the founding fathers were Christian, but some were Deists (generally believed in God), and some were outright atheists. But a more important point needs to be made: the founding fathers went out of their way to specify that church and state be separate. They believed that their religion was just that: theirs and theirs alone.
They also remembered that they were their trying to be free of the state church of England, and recognized from their first-hand experience that true religious freedom can only come when belief is left to the individual. It is this ideal, among others, for which our forefathers fought and died.

Individual religious choice - including the right not to practice - is still under assault in this country. Those who would prefer to make the choice for you have labeled us criminal, evil ne'er-do-wells and launched a massive campaign to keep freethinkers subdued. They have been successful, mainly because atheism is fragmented and

They continue to be successful, but we can reverse the trend. Atheists must make themselves known. If you are reading this, and you are a closet atheist, you owe it to your country, your fellow atheists, and yourself to let people know how you feel.

February 6, 2007

Debbie Schlussel, You Ignorant Slu....

I am really contemplating channel blocking CNN on my TV. How responsible is a TV news network that does a segment on discrimination of Atheists in America, to put on a panel of 2 devout shvartza Christians and a dumb Jewish mouthpiece (who thinks that America is a Christian nation). Here is Paula Zahn and her segment: WHY DO ATHEISTS INSPIRE SUCH HATRED?:

Steve Smith, at least spoke from an constitutional perspective. Karen Hunter is a Pulitzer Prize winner and a retarded assmonkey. Impose on her right to have prayer in school?

Hey numbskull, is it OK if a kid yells out during prayer that there is no God, or Allah is the true God, or that Jesus never existed?

Atheists should shut up?

Should Jews shut up if they were to vocalize that Jesus wasn't the Messiah?, you dumb hoe.

But it was Debbie Schlussel who really pissed me off. If America is a Christian nation like she says, it also a White nation then too. Why doesn't she tell the black panel members to shut up as well? She states that Atheists target Christians. This has to do with the fact that there are a lot more ex-Christian Atheists than anything else. And they know the psychological brainwashing that goes on with a Christian youngster.

Atheists like myself, and many who visit my blog (many ex-Christian) are equal in their assault of anything religious that is being forced down the throats unconstitutionally by religious zealots. But in America and Canada, most of the zealots are trying to force the Christian God into schools and the government.

I have gone on the record stating the number one problem in the world today isn't Christianity, but Islam. On a micro level it is Christianity. But the Christian zealots usually get defeated, so they really aren't that much of problem.

I wonder if Debbie has a problem if public schools allowed praying to Christ out loud before each class day. Debbie, do religion at home all you want. Go to your house of worship 7 days a week if you want. And if you really want to, homeschool and teach your kids nonsense all you want, or pay to have your kid attend a religious school. Let them grow up as stupid as you. But keep the crap out of the public schools and government.

Brian Sapient from Rational Responders, gets kind of angry, curses a bit, but makes lots of great points. Listen here.

I sent Debbie Does Assmonkey Stupid an email. I don't expect a response, but I did make the point that Brian made about Atheists in jail. We are completely under represented there. I wish Debbie would stop saying she is a Jew.....it is painfully embarrassing to me. Schlussel worries, as she should, about moonbats and how they open the door for Dhimmitude. Schlussel herself is apparently a Dhimmi for Christians.

I would have loved to see an Atheist on that panel. He or she could have bitchslapped Debbie and Karen relentlessly. Richard Dawkins would have ruined their reputations for quite some time as media figures.

Pharyngula wrote a post about this as well.

Debby Shlussel proves she is paranoid and retarded beyond belief in her response to the hate mail she received yesterday in her new post When Atheists a/k/a Future Muslims Attack. She actually has two examples of supposed Atheist who became Muslim terrorists, like John Walker Lindh. I find it hard to believe that any Atheist would converted to Islam unless he was insane. But I guess I better go out and buy a Koran since it must be my destiny.

Karen Hunter also buries herself some more with her responses found at About Atheism

February 4, 2007

The Atheist Jew Does The Blasphemy Challenge

I only did one take. I didn't want to get addicted to pepper. It wouldn't be an expensive habit, but I can't see it being that healthy.

In case you've never heard about it. The Rational Responders put on The Blasphemy Challenge a little while ago. They've had over 800 video responses so far.

Part of the promotion is a giveaway of a DVD of Brian Flemming's The God Who Wasn't There.

Brian Flemming gets attacked on Fox's The Heartland:

Who was the angry one? The Christian host or the Atheist guest? Did this Fox talking head realize that most of those who have participated are Atheists already. How is doing this challenge preventing anyone from believing in God? It will hopefully make teenagers and even young adults and maybe even older adults take a step back and ask a few questions, maybe many questions.
45% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old and that evolution is bull crap. It is about time that questions are asked. Religion is a form of mental torchure, and it promotes ignorance which turns into wilful ignorance.

Here is the Night Line piece of the Rational Response Squad:

Here is an example of wilful ignorance amongst Jews, check out the comment thread here about evolution. The regulars over at Mad Zionist's blog are a bunch of imbeciles. I just shudder to think of these people using their "logic" and "tactics" on their children. Most Jews are smarter than these dolts. Thank science.

Speaking of Jews. I had an email request to link a survey. I started doing it but didn't finish because most of the answers take for granted that the respondent believes in God, at least a little. The survey is here at JewishSurveys.org

February 2, 2007

Thoughts On The Jehovah Sextuplets

Click cartoon to enlarge it:

This is a situation where a ridiculous religious belief gets in the way of SAVING LIVES. It is up to the state to protect the lives of minors; those incapable of making mature decisions. Once the state knows about this situation, they have every right to step in and SAVE LIVES.

What the parents are doing here is akin to murder and they want the doctors to be accomplices. Here are what doctors swear to:

From the Hippocratic Oath (Modern Version):
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

If a Fundamentalist Christian put his house on fire because he believes Jesus told him to do this on his 50th birthday, and to make sure his wife and kids were also in the house with him at the time, and firemen showed up and started to put out the fire, only to hear the man and his family telling them not to, because if they did, he and his family would wind up going to hell instead, do you think any fireman in their right mind (regardless of faith) would even consider what this lunatic is telling him to do?

And if the firemen didn't put out the fire, would this be acceptable to the religious freedom nuts out there.

Speaking of the nutcases, this situation in BC is silenting a lot of Fundies who have been whining about religious persecution, and the war against Christians. What says you Fundies? Should the doctors respect the parents wishes? Two have died so far. Is this acceptable?

This is even a dilemma for hardcore Libertarians who believe heroin and cocaine should be legalized. The ultra-Libertarians think government should have no say. What about here?

How about this?, since the babies were born premature, they can be considered late trimester abortion cases. Let the parents decide.

The bottom line is the children have been born (and they can survive outside the womb without the parents help), and they were not born with any beliefs.
There is no such thing as a Jehovah Witness ethnicity, and unlike Jews, are not Jehovah Witnesses by birth. They are too young to make this decision and not bound by any religion. They should get the best medical treatment that is possible. End of story.

Did you know that there are 6.5 million Jehovah Witnesses out there. But only 144,000 get to go to heaven when Jesus returns. The rest stay on an Edenized earth forever and ever.
I wonder what happens when the sun burns out.

It is just another cult of delusional Godidiots.

They keep saying the end is near. From the cult's beginnings in the late 1800's to now, they have already had three major dates of exact predictions of Jesus' Return come and go. In the meantime they were able to suck millions of dollars and belongings from their faithful flock.

Damning blog post at Progressive U.

Jehovah's Witness Law: In order for a crime to be recognized, you need either a confession by the guilty party or two witnesses. This pretty much gives a green light to sexual abuse.