The Raving Theist

Dedicated to Jesus Christ, Now and Forever

Atheist Exposed

July 13, 2005 | 71 Comments

The touching preface to a new blog, Atheist Exposed:

A 48 year old government worker, 30 year closet atheist, is exposing to her friends, co-workers and clients her lack of belief in God. This is an experiment in humanity and tolerance. Hoping for a good outcome. Approaching in a non-confrontational manner. These are my friends, and I care about them. I hope they can accept me as I am. My goal is to help my Christian associates have the knowledge, that they know an atheist, and she’s not a bad person.

Shirley works in a Texas prison, and decided to test her godlessness out on the inmates before confronting the chaplin. Apparently this experiment was inspired The God Who Wasn’t There cabal.

Go visit this dear woman and leave lots and lots of comments.

Comments

71 Responses to “Atheist Exposed”

  1. AK
    July 13th, 2005 @ 11:22 am

    Woohoo! They are all coming out of the closet! Considering that prisons are more religious than the general population, shes got alot of guts to “keep it real” like that. Bravo!

  2. hermesten
    July 13th, 2005 @ 11:39 am

    She’s either got a lot of guts or is a glutton for punishment. I predict that her good Christian coworkers will make her live to regret her decision.

  3. Toxic
    July 13th, 2005 @ 6:38 pm

    We talking the workers are more religious or the prisoners? Because I think that it would be hard to get a genuine read on the prisoners, since religiosity would be helpful in getting parole. So they say what they think they need to say to get out.

    Even Ted Bundy converted… when he was trying to get out of a death sentence.

  4. Shirley Setterbo
    July 13th, 2005 @ 10:33 pm

    This has been quite a shocking day for me. I emailed the RA this morning that he had moved me from peeking around the Atheist closet door, to being shoved out of the closet, through the living room, out the front door, and onto the front lawn. lol I was scared to death when I left for work this morning, at what might be waiting for me, when I got home. Fortunatley,
    what I found, was nothing but best wishes and support. I wanted to personally thank everyone who wrote and to the RA.

  5. eternal_damnation
    July 13th, 2005 @ 10:58 pm

    EVOLUTION IS BULLSHIT

  6. Pharyngula
    July 14th, 2005 @ 8:48 am

    Quick, before the wife gets up

    I mentioned that my wife has been ogling my PowerBook—she's taken over. She needed to prepare for a job interview, of all the trivialities, and so she's taken to snatching my computer away from me for long, long hours on end, like almos…

  7. jahrta
    July 14th, 2005 @ 10:27 am

    Wow, eternal damnation, what can i say?

    I’m utterly floored by your superfluous display of superior logic and debating skills. your ample evidence only serves to further bolster your scientifically-supported and academically proven hypothesis. it is all too clear now that every example of this “evolution” taking place in virtually every species of living, breathing thing on this planet is most certainly a fluke perpetrated by satan, the king of lies. he-who-must-not-be-named (or is that voldemort? i keep forgetting) has surely placed these millions of examples of evolution-at-work for us to find like fetid, rotten easter eggs left out far too long in the sun.

    the debil wants you to forget your superstitious cannibalistic cult and believe instead in science and evil-ution! it must be!

    oh, wait…no. i’m atheist. that’s right….yes, i do believe i have a brain in my head. check!

    But seriously,

    you’re so fucking stupid you’d probably believe your wife if she told you she had an immaculate conception.

  8. Troy
    July 14th, 2005 @ 11:44 am

    Jahrta – Thou shalt not respond to a troll. :-)

  9. Troy
    July 14th, 2005 @ 12:50 pm

    Jahrta – Thou shalt not respond to a troll. :-)

  10. jahrta
    July 14th, 2005 @ 1:37 pm

    see my other post about responding to trolls. can we assume that every single person who spouts off an unsubstantiated “drive-by” statment – usually relegated to small, monosyllabic words – is an atheist in sheep’s clothing? what do the trolls hope to accomplish by creating fake targets when the real ones come here also? if we stop responding to the trolls, then the real fundies out there might not ever receive the tongue-lashing they so richly deserve :) surely you can see the bind i’m in.

  11. Lucy Muff
    July 14th, 2005 @ 4:28 pm

    eternal damnation is stupidly wrong. Evolution has been many times proved according to rules of science and most reasonable person will accept that it is for real. The scientist with open minds will also tell that evolution takes much too long wien it is done with random mutants but can fit into earth history when there is a guiding force (like of God) talling what mutants can be existing and when. So Evolution is real and is very excellant evidence for the God

  12. Poons Goddy God
    July 14th, 2005 @ 5:29 pm

    If God could speed up evolution, we wouldn’t have to chop off our foreskins. That feature would have been designed in.

  13. Andrea
    July 14th, 2005 @ 8:13 pm

    Jaharta I agree with you… if you don’t mind spending the time to respond to trolls, then go for it.

  14. david anderson
    July 14th, 2005 @ 9:53 pm

    It must be said, religion thrives among the weakest: amongst children dragged to church by their parents from birth, amongst prisoners who sometimes only get to leave their cells for religious services, and ‘in foxholes’, as they die for the benefit of their sociopolitical betters, who have trained them to believe they are dying for a ‘higher power’.
    Note that the current pope, B-16, when he was a cardinal, protested Harry Potter because it infected the minds of the young before their religious sense could develop. By which , he meant developed according to a very dogmatic, specific training which allows zero alternative influence.
    From where is the greatest new source of Islamic Americans? Our prisons! Why? Because Islamist proseletyzers pay them some attention, and give them an activity out of their cells! No other Americans can organize prisoners-only folks who utter the magic password-“religion”.
    We will never advance as humanity without examination of the role of religion in personal, social, political, and economic relationships. The greedy, powerful folk who have benefitted from organized religion for centuries will resist to the end, but their perfidy is being exposed in every church scandal, every bombing in the name of whichever god, and in every opposition to beneficial technology denied on religious grounds. Note well that America is the last Western culture nation to take organized Christianity seriously, but it is also the most militaristic, weapons-selling, might-makes-right bunch of folks in a long time. A lot of Americans are accepting this despite the fact it is a direct contradiction of the alleged teachings of Jesus. Such contradictions have been noted around the world, and will eventually have consequences at home.

  15. Seth
    July 14th, 2005 @ 11:13 pm

    Yo, I need some support that Jesus didn’t exist, for debating purposes. Can anyone provide links? I know some info on this, but I’d like to be able to refer to specific historical texts

  16. Seth
    July 14th, 2005 @ 11:14 pm

    Oops, sorry about that

  17. Mookie
    July 15th, 2005 @ 12:28 am

    DA #13,

    Right on! Religion sucks balls, and holds back human potential. Imagine people enslaved by the millions by an idea that has very little merit. The fact that the meme has been around for a long time is not proof of its usefulness and validity, it is proof of its oppressive and horrible history of abusing humanity. A golden age in religion is a dark age in science, logic, reason, compassion, empathy, etc. The belief in some foreboding skydaddy pushes the abusive and dominating patriarchal figure, making it acceptable, even worshipped. A pat on the head and a knowing smile, as does a master to his dog. To hold back humanity in this way is a crime against us all. The meme war is on; has been for some time now. Religion is one meme I view as diametrically opposed to human progress, mutually exclusive. I choose progress, I believe in human potential. After all, we are a clever batch of monkeys! :-)

  18. evolution
    July 15th, 2005 @ 8:50 am

    ETERNAL DAMNATION IS BULLSHIT

  19. leon
    July 15th, 2005 @ 8:53 am
  20. Dada Saves
    July 15th, 2005 @ 11:45 am

    Shirley’s comment thingee appears to be kerflooey at the moment.

  21. Seth
    July 15th, 2005 @ 4:28 pm

    Thanks, Leon.

  22. Crackerus Dadderus
    July 16th, 2005 @ 5:14 am

    david anderson
    I assure you – there was no religion in my foxhole. There’s no big equal sign between patriotism and religion. I’d study up on facts before throwing out statements like that.

  23. Crackerus Dadderus
    July 16th, 2005 @ 5:16 am

    Sorry david – that post deserves two replies. That was just stupid.

  24. eternal_damantion
    July 16th, 2005 @ 8:07 am

    “Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” Prof. Louis Bounoure,
    President Biological Society of Strassbourg, Director of the Strassbourg Zoological Museum, Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research. The Advocate, p. 17

  25. rev_holy_fire
    July 16th, 2005 @ 8:19 am

    “Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts.
    This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species.” Dr. Etheridge,
    World famous palaeontologist of the British Museum

    EVOLUTION NEVER HAPPENED.

  26. Steveven
    July 16th, 2005 @ 8:36 am

    *sniff sniff*
    I smell appeals to authority…

  27. Dada Saves
    July 16th, 2005 @ 9:28 am

    Quote mine much?

    RE “Doctor” Etheridge: ‘The widely touted

  28. Vernichten
    July 16th, 2005 @ 10:16 am

    “Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.”

    E.T. Babinski (www.edwardtbabinski.us) actually contacted French authorities. They revealed that Louis Bounoure never served as Director or even a member of the CNRS. He was a professor of biology at the University of Strasbourg. Bounoure was a Christian but did not affirm that Genesis was to be taken to the letter.

    The beginning of the quotation, “Evolution is a fairy tale for adults” is not from Bounoure but adapted from Jean Rostand, a member of the Academy of Sciences of the French Academy. Rostand also wrote that “Transformism may be considered as accepted, and no scientist, no philosopher, no longer discusses the fact of evolution.” (L’Evolution des Especes [i.e., The Evolution of the Species], Hachette, p. 190).

    The end of Bounoure’s quotation is from his book, “Determinism and Finality.” It runs, “That, by this, evolutionism would appear as a theory without value, is confirmed also pragmatically. A theory must not be required to be true, said Mr. H. Poincare, more or less, it must be required to be useable. Indeed, none of the progress made in biology depends even slightly on a theory, the principles of which are nevertheless filling every year volumes of books, periodicals, and congresses with their discussions and their disagreements.”

    I found this on the web in 1 minute. There are many more sources that debunk this misquote from a fraud.

    Steveven is correct. Appeals to Authority are examples of Fallacious Arguments. The reasons that an “expert”‘s testimony can not be considered proof are numerous, but the first one that pops into mind is that all men are fallible, a popular rallying cry for believers. It’s generally the believer’s idea that all men are sinful liars, except when they agree with the believer. Then proof is neither required nor desired.

  29. ocmpoma
    July 16th, 2005 @ 10:58 am

    Dada Saves, Vernichten – thanks for jumping on those quote mine grenades.

  30. Rev_Holy_Fire
    July 16th, 2005 @ 12:23 pm

    EVOLUTION IS DEAD!!!!

    http://www.evolutionisdead.com

    “Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX ever.”

    Dr. T. N. Tahmisian,
    Physiologist. Atomic Energy Commission. As quoted in: Evolution and the Emperor’s New Clothes, 3D

    EVOLUTION IS A HOAX!! A FALSE DOCTRINE

  31. Debbie
    July 16th, 2005 @ 12:55 pm

    To the theists visiting here … two of your quotes above have been debunked. What are your thoughts on this? Would you like to thank the commenters for correcting your errors?

    I guess not … you don’t care about the truth but think about the following:

    Who is Dr. T. N. Tahmisian as an authority on evolution? It doesn’t matter if you have a Ph.D. or if you are a five year old, if you are commenting from a position of ignorance.

    You can always find someone willing to quote a personal opinion. I’m sure you can find people with Ph.D.s who BELIEVE aliens have visited the Earth. It doesn’t make it any more true in the absence of a body of evidence. The Discovery Institute and the other creationists have nothing to offer by way of evidence, only regurgitated lies and misleading statements.

    The biological world does not make any sense without evolution. You cannot reconcile the Old Testament with the physical world we live in. Get over it. If that destroys your faith, it doesn’t make evolution any less true.

  32. glenstonecottage
    July 16th, 2005 @ 3:23 pm

    eternal_damantion said:

    The spelling error was due to the fact that subconciously, this fool really wanted to call himself “eternal dementia”.

  33. Rev_Holy_Fire
    July 16th, 2005 @ 4:37 pm

    Debunked, really? Prove that there is a common ancestor? Do you think I’m stupid enough to believe that life “evolved” from simpler life forms? Evolution is pure fiction and fantasy, if you want to believe fairy tales, then do so.
    The evidence for a creator is strong, and more credible than evolution.
    Sorry if the truth hurts, but evolution never happened.

    “(An) old piece of bone that was thought to be a collarbone of a humanlike creature is actually part of a dolphin rib…

    The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone.” Dr. Tim White

    EVOLUTIONARY SCIENTISTS WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO PROMOTE THEIR FRAUDULENT THEORY.

    THERE IS NO COMMON ANCESTOR, EVOLUTION NEVER HAPPENED.

  34. Crackerus Dadderus
    July 16th, 2005 @ 6:51 pm

    Rev_Holy_Fire – you claim we believe in fairy tales, yet you believe in an angry sky god, talking asses, raising the dead, a boat that carried two of all animals, unicorns, plants being on this earth for at least one day before there was a sun to heat them, an all powerful god that wasn’t smart enough to tell Adam and Eve about Satan nor powerful enough to keep him out of the garden, and all mankind being punished for two people eating a piece of fruit.

    We believe animals adapt to their environment.

    Who sounds like the nutjob?

  35. Rev_Holy_Fire
    July 16th, 2005 @ 8:12 pm

    You do , Crackerus Dadderus. Anyone who believes that there is a non-human common ancestor in the human chain is seriously lacking brain cells. Try learning some probability theory, and you will see why abiogenesis and evolution are nonsense.
    The probability of life coming from a primordial soup billions of years is theoretically equivalent to the webster’s dictionary being created out of an explosion from a print factory.

    In the words of the mighty Fred Hoyle,
    when a tornado sweeps through a junkyard and assembles a 747, I’ll believe in abiogenesis and evolution.

    Bring it on atheists!!!!

  36. Crackerus Dadderus
    July 16th, 2005 @ 8:27 pm

    Well Rev_Holy_Fire – obviously you need to study up on probability. Take into account the trillions upon trillions of places in the universe where life of some form could take hold and all of a sudden the probability increases. Now take into account it wasn’t a full blown human that walked out of the “primordial soup” and it increases even more. Your explosion doesn’t work because all the paper would burn – even though that’s your point – that argument can’t be used in this scenario.

    If the formation of the simplest of microbes is more fantasy to you than talking donkeys and unicorns then hopefully you won’t pollute the world with children that you feed your religious crap.

  37. Xcanadian
    July 16th, 2005 @ 8:34 pm

    Rev_Holey_Theory

    Dr Tim White is an evolutionist.
    http://www.isepp.org/Pages/03-04%20Pages/White.html

    And re: Sir Hoyle…
    “Hoyle also suggested that life had a cosmic, not terrestrial origin, and viruses could originate from certain meteor streams.”

    from
    http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/hoyle.htm

    so ahh.. great sources!

  38. rev_holy_fire
    July 17th, 2005 @ 9:37 am

    Sure Crackerus:
    I’ll brush up on martingales, random variables, stochastic processes etc.. I use them all the time to price financial derivatives.
    Here’s a good book for you: Measure Theory by Paul Halmos.

    Genesis makes more sense than a fiticious common ancestor.

    Prove that there is a common ancestor. Where all the missing intermediate species?

    ************************************************
    “Why has it taken 100 years to learn that one of the largest of all dinosaurs Apatosaurus (Brontosaurus of the school book) has been wearing the wrong head? That seems rather basic. How did this mix-up occur; and where has the old fellow’s head been all of this time?
    The answer to the last question is, of course, that its true head has been in the museum’s research collection for all these many years, patiently waiting for research to catch up to reality.” Display Notebook,
    Dinosaur National Park Museum, Vernal Utah

  39. glenstonecottage
    July 17th, 2005 @ 10:27 am

    rev_holy_fire said:
    I’ll brush up on martingales, random variables, stochastic processes etc..

    Why don’t you brush up on the “flat earth” theory, too?

    Because if the idiots who wrote the Bible knew the earth was round, they sure forgot to mention it—just as they somehow forgot to mention that polygamy and slavery were wrong.

  40. Vernichten
    July 17th, 2005 @ 11:15 am

    rev_holy_fire, apparently you are not aware of the rules of argument, or you choose to disregard them, neither of which speaks highly of your education. Atheists do not necessarily purport evolution, they simply disbelieve your gibberish. If you are stating that there is an omnipotent deity that created the universe then it is you who must provide proof.

  41. cubic rooms
    July 17th, 2005 @ 1:13 pm

    Evolution is a fact; it is obvious; it is all around us. There are so many breeds of dogs, cats, cattle, swine, equine, chickens, etc., because because man has encouraged desired characteristics and discouraged undesired characteristics through selective breeding. Nature does the same thing by natural selection, only the goal is different. Nature does not care about dog shows or horse races or steaks per hoof. Nature’s only purpose is survival. Species adapt and evolve to better survive in constantly changing conditions. That is simple; that is clear; that is fact; and that is evolution. We do not know every step, every twist and turn that has occurred over the ages, but that does not defeat the theory. Biogenesis is a different subject.

    Debbie (#33 above) – excellent comment.

  42. simbol
    July 17th, 2005 @ 2:23 pm

    Most ofhose people who don’t believe in evolution, behave very different in certain circumstances. When they need a blood transfusion or an new liver or kidney, the pay strict attention at compatibility. That is to say to modern biology and genetics and by doing so, they are evolutionists.Why they are not confident in that all of us were created to the image and likeness of god and because of that we are exactly equal, and shed all this scientific blabah of compatibility?

  43. Lucy Muff
    July 18th, 2005 @ 5:56 am

    I have already told you of the false incompatibility of evolution and “science” as it stands. With god’s hand guiding the process it makes much right sense. Evil doers like scientologists and Hoyle like to call on aliens but they forget god created all, so even with aliens it is still work of god. Also, I add that the vatican has access to the best scientists in the world and so since they have no agenda it is wise to take their prononcements as the most likely truth. Some professor trying to make science the be all and end all has a deeply vested interest and so is fool or liar or both to expect godless evolution as best description. Why else would god command noah to take TWO of each animal? Obviously to protect gene pool from well deserved floods. If only we could learn from history and bible we would not have so many freaks.

  44. glenstonecottage
    July 18th, 2005 @ 8:42 am

    Bible thumpers in the news:

    Victims Hope to Confront Eric Rudolph
    By JAY REEVES, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 6 minutes ago

    BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Confessed bomber Eric Rudolph will be in court today for a sentencing hearing.

    Rudolph, who remained defiant when he admitted setting deadly explosions in Birmingham and Atlanta, has only discussed his reasons in written statements. Yet one of his victims hopes to get some glimmer of response from Rudolph when she comes face to face with the anti-abortion extremist in court today.

    “You did not shut the clinic down. You did not shut me down,” said Emily Lyons, who was critically injured in the 1998 blast outside a Birmingham abortion clinic where she worked as a nurse.

    Her message for Rudolph: His crimes only made her stronger. “I want to see if it registers with him, or to see if it’s just more of that blank look,” Lyons said in an interview last week.

    Rudolph, 38, pleaded guilty in April to setting off a remote-controlled bomb that maimed Lyons and killed police officer Robert “Sande” Sanderson outside the New Woman All Women clinic on the morning of Jan. 29, 1998.

    Sanderson’s wife and son also could make statements at Monday’s hearing.

    Rudolph, who remained defiant when he admitted setting the bombs and has only discussed his reasons for the blasts in written statements, will have his own chance to speak at the sentencing. He has rarely displayed any emotion in public since his capture.

    Defense lawyers did not return calls seeking comment on whether Rudolph planned to speak. He also faces sentencing later in Atlanta.

    In a statement distributed after his guilty pleas, Rudolph portrayed himself as a devout Christian and said the bombings were motivated by his hatred of abortion and a federal government that lets it continue.

    “The fact that I have entered an agreement with the government is purely a tactical choice on my part and in no way legitimates the moral authority of the government to judge this matter or to impute guilt,” Rudolph said in the statement.

    Lyons was wounded by flying nails and other pieces of shrapnel in the bombing. She has undergone 21 operations, lost her left eye and has visible scars on her arms and legs. She is no longer physically able to work.

    She planned to release her self-published book about the bombing on Monday, her 49th birthday.

    Under a plea agreement that let Rudolph avoid a possible death penalty, Rudolph confessed to the Alabama bombing and to the bombing at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics that killed one woman and injured more than 100. He also admitted setting off bombs at an abortion clinic and gay bar in Atlanta in 1997.

    He was captured in May 2003 after more than five years as a fugitive in the mountains of western North Carolina.

    Under the agreement, federal judges in Birmingham and Atlanta will sentence him to four life terms without parole. Rudolph’s sentencing in Georgia is set for Aug. 22, and victims of the Atlanta bombings will have a chance to speak then.

  45. simbol
    July 18th, 2005 @ 10:03 am

    Problem is Lucy, that the only who accept evolution are catholics, 20% of believers in USA. So I conclude you are speaking for catholics. The rest, say 60% (assuming 20% are atheists, agnostics or deists), guided by their preachers, don’t accept evolution, in theory but they accept it in practice, and are these who campaign for sweeping evolution from schools. Is a curious fact that the people who don’t accept evolution, accept medicines tested on animals, and by doing so, recognize the parentage between these aimals and humans. On the other hand, the fact that you accept evolution, albeit in an “accelerated” version, leads me to the conclusion that you are the “missing link” given the fact that sometimes you speak like a chimp. (I write like Tarzan).

  46. DamnRight
    July 18th, 2005 @ 12:13 pm

    … seems to me that in spite of the terrible odds against it, someone always seems to win the lottery…

  47. Lucy Muff
    July 18th, 2005 @ 3:50 pm

    Simbol, never have you heard me speak, so obviously you are a liar or an idiot or a masturbator of chimps and have got horn for me. Either way the power of christ compels you to shut yor gob.

  48. simbol
    July 18th, 2005 @ 8:30 pm

    I write like tarzan because I speak like tarzan

    you write like a chimp because you speak like a ……wait

    I must apologize to ….. chimps

  49. Lucy Muff
    July 18th, 2005 @ 8:33 pm

    yes, you should apologise to chimps. It is not nice to capture them in a box and repeatedly masturbate them so you can obtain monky love spunk which you foolishlly think will keep you looking young. Instead you should read bible and think about what you will say to satan when you go to hell.

  50. Vernichten
    July 18th, 2005 @ 11:02 pm

    Lucy Troll, if you don’t already, you should think about writing bestiality porn fiction. I don’t know much about it, but you seem like you have a gift for it.

  51. Lucy Muff
    July 19th, 2005 @ 3:28 am

    vernichten, I can write about how you enjoy performing fellations on walrus at family gatherings, ok?

  52. Vernichten
    July 19th, 2005 @ 8:21 am

    See, writing animal erotica is like second nature for you! Work that keyboard, “girl”!

  53. boywonder
    July 19th, 2005 @ 7:14 pm

    No matter how remote the odds are of our existence, the fact is we are here. If there ever was a place in the entire universe that could support life, that is where you would find it. Guess what? This is that remote place. There is no need to explain away our existence with a god. Also, I could throw 1,000,000 dice on the ground and note the sequence. That would be comparable to the present situation where we are trying to look back in time and reassemble (or at least understand) that sequence of events. The odds of throwing a million dice and getting the same sequence again are admittedly near zero. That is not a problem though, because when we threw the million dice the first time, they fell in a random pattern based on the physics of gravity and the shape and speed, etc. of the dice. The point is, it was RANDOM and only needed to conform to the physics of our universe. Creationists fail to understand or admit that the goal of science is not of recreating the sequence of events of our universe, it is merely trying to understand causality and conformity to universal laws.
    There is also the misguided assumption that we can find all of the clues (dice) to understanding the complete sequence in the first place. That is why there is no discernable “missing link” (which is a misnomer by the way). Time, entropy, and the rarity of fossilized evidence are the reasons why our ‘theory’ of evolution is incomplete. That does not make it less valid. You would think anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity would admit we have more proof for the theory of evolution considering the only “proof” offered for god is the bible. Wishful thinking all around, I guess.

  54. Rev_Holy_Fire
    July 19th, 2005 @ 9:03 pm

    Evolution is not based on fact, but speculation.
    Peking Man, Nebraska man, Piltdown man were all frauds. Humans reproduce humans, and the process of strong induction, only humans can reproduce humans. We didn’t evolve from lower life forms.

  55. Fred Evil
    July 19th, 2005 @ 10:01 pm

    Hey Rev,

    Let’s ask a simpler question, ever been to the American History musem? Ah, a fine upstanding patriotic Republican AMERICAN institution that. Ever wander down the hall with the First Lady’s gowns in it? Ever wonder why, in the SHORT course of American history, the average height of First Ladies has consistently gotten taller? You can literally watch as the gowns get taller and taller. Why the average height of humans, over the SHORT period of a couple of hundred years, has increased by 3-4 inches? I’ll tell ya what it ain’t, it ain’t evolution! Not a chance in hell, it’s simply better nutrition, medical SCIENCE, and improving the quality of our lives. Now, if that happened without evolution, in the short course of 200 years, what do you think can happen over the course of 500-1000 millenia? Resisting the idea of evolution is like resisting the idea that water turns into ice! It’s flagrantly obvious to anyone who bothers to accept even the most basic of facts. To deny it is to refute logic in it’s entirety.

    I can understand if you disagree perhaps, that we can evolve from one-celled organisms to the full variety of humans we have today in a mere 5 billion years, that can be a bit difficult to swallow, but to say that evolution cannot and does not exist is completely inane, and you sha’n’t be taken seriously if you continue to do so.

    Now comes the concept of intelligent design, which was intelligently designed by the far right in a desperate attempt at validating their antiquated and anachronistic beliefs. For crying out loud, if God created anything, of COURSE he created evolution! how else to keep the muggles running about in circles jabbering at each other, insisting he doesn’t exist. The biggest problem with your arguments against evolution (which really could turn out to be a farce, to be completely honest) is that you don’t have any other ideas that are backed by any science. If you come up with anything that is plausible, I will listen, but to insist that the concept of evolution is impossible, while railing that an omnipotent, omniscient being that exists, but that I, being a mere human, cannot possibly understand it, therefore I should go sit down and suck my thumb, is beyond the pale.

    Sorry for the rant, but “You simply cannot keep saying “No it isn’t”, that’s not an argument, it’s simply being contradictory, an argument is two opposing viewpoints substantiated by facts, not simply saying “No it isn’t”.’

    bah…

  56. simbol
    July 20th, 2005 @ 1:07 am

    Rev Holy Fire
    “Evolution is not based on fact, but speculation.”

    Yes, but only about the spring of life, and not only on speculation but on INFORMED SPECULATION.

    Certainly nobody knows how the first RNA molecule, the most likely, was formed, but we know a lot about what happened in the afterward. So much so, that certain major religions has no other recourse than to accept evolution, sustaining that the first form of life was created by god which is not precisely an informed speculation. But this look, at least, not so bizarre as intelligent design. Renouncing to Adam and Eve is quite uncomfortable because this have long range implications. This is tantamount to recognize that most of their sacred book needs a complete review, or at least a whole reinterpretation.

    And about how life sprung, if you think god was the author, be happy with that. For my part, I’m afraid that the answer will be different. Why? God has never appeared at each major step of science and I don’t see any reason for that to change in the future. “faith” in science?. Not at all. Science is not a body or a self, is a lot of people working under certain rules seeking not only knowledge but also fame prestige, and money. And this extraordinary machine has produced wonders (good and bad) and his driving forces compels it to look for the answers of this important question (how life sprung).

    Boywonder

    I insist that Lucy muff is the missing link. Don’t forget lucy and me are discussing her special theory of evolution, whose main feature is “acceleration”. That means the lapse of normal evolution was compressed in 6000 years that fits nicely with the Bible. As you can assume, whatever can happen in this extraordinary theory. So, please don’t meddle and let evolve this scientific discussion.

  57. simbol
    July 20th, 2005 @ 1:55 am

    Rev

    I forgot something:

    It’s true that the driving forces of science, sometimes produce the Piltdown, Peking and Nebraska men. But is also true that the driving forces of the god’s shop produced the “sudario di torino” and tons of nails and crosses used in the Christ’s crucifixion, not to mention some miracles that christian churches prefers not to speak about. While churches hide, maintain or defend their tricks, scientists rejects and uncover theirs’ as a consequence of their method.

  58. Vernichten
    July 20th, 2005 @ 8:16 am

    Piltdown Man was a purposefully deceitful act, and Nebraska Man was an error, both of which were corrected by scientific method (not religion), but Rev_Holy_Fire, do you have compelling evidence that Peking Man is a hoax, or did you throw that in there to round out your weak case?
    Shouldn’t religion be discredited completely, considering that everyone who espouses its tenets, which are untrue, is by default a fraud and/or liar?

  59. DamnRight
    July 20th, 2005 @ 8:21 am

    If approximately 2 million people (not to mention the millions of animals) lived & died in a rather small, known area (Sinai desert), over a 40 year period, a mere few thousand years ago, why is there absolutely no archeological evidence of it?…
    … and no one seemed to notice the sun stood still…
    … or that Herod killed all those children…
    … or that there was an eclipse & earthquake at J

  60. simbol
    July 20th, 2005 @ 11:22 am

    fred evil

    “The biggest problem with your arguments against evolution (which really could turn out to be a farce, to be completely honest) ”

    Can you elaborate about that of evolution turning out to be a farce?

  61. simbol
    July 20th, 2005 @ 12:07 pm

    Rev

    about the controversy on the peking man I recommend you:

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/monkeyquote.html#conclusion

  62. Debbie
    July 20th, 2005 @ 2:06 pm

    The Rev and other theists point to a “missing link” in evolution as a fatal flaw in scientific knowledge. Are you kidding me? ALL links in their superstitions and fairy tales are missing.

  63. 4thgeneration
    July 20th, 2005 @ 6:11 pm

    The Rev and theists like him want to convince atheists and scientists that evolution is a farce and creation or some other divine intervention explains all. However, what would scientists do with that? Would my research lab stop searching for the molecular mechanism that causes a specific bacterium to attach to abiotic surfaces? We must continue looking for the answers that can be found in biology, microbiology, and other applied sciences. We can’t just “chalk it up” to divine influence. Evolutionary principles and sound science yield the answers to future treatments.

    Lucy posted

    Also, I add that the vatican has access to the best scientists in the world and so since they have no agenda it is wise to take their prononcements as the most likely truth. Some professor trying to make science the be all and end all has a deeply vested interest and so is fool or liar or both to expect godless evolution as best description. Why else would god command noah to take TWO of each animal? Obviously to protect gene pool from well deserved floods. If only we could learn from history and bible we would not have so many freaks.

    Wow. The Vatican has no agenda and access to the world’s best scientists. That is the first time I’ve heard that one!

    When I think Biochemistry or Molecular Genetics, I definitely think about calling the Vatican.

  64. Fred Evil
    July 21st, 2005 @ 12:12 am

    simbol –

    In the interest of being completely fair, and seeing as how there isn’t a person alive who has watched us evolve all the way from one-cells to present form, I have to admit (as should we all), that evolution is still just a theory, albeit by far the most likely. I say that evolution is just a theory in the sense that we have evolved all the way, I believe it to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that it exists in the short-medium term.

    For all we know, we are descendants of creatures who landed here on a spaceship, and have ‘evolved’ from our original form to what we are now….again, I find it extraordinarily unlikely, but not having been there, I can’t swear it to be so….

  65. Vernichten
    July 21st, 2005 @ 9:11 am

    Damn, I was going to say that.

  66. I don't think about things I don't think about
    July 21st, 2005 @ 9:29 pm

    It is important to remember that a scientific theory is defined very differently than the word “theory” used by the public. A scientific theory is a system of statements and ideas that explains a group of facts or phenomena. This is not your run of the mill, baseless guess (e.g. My socks disappear in the dryer, so I suppose elves are stealing them…). This is a well thought out conclusion which has been tested over and over, and found to be accurate. Yes, the Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory. So is the idea that all living things are made of one or more cells. This illustrates how defined and “concrete” a scientific theory truly is.

    So what if evolution is wrong? That’s the beauty of science: it is dynamic. We are always learning more. We are always understanding concepts more deeply. We are always investigating. If a scientific principle is refuted, it can and will be revised.

    One of my favorite evolutionary biology professors always said scientific theories should be solid, but never set in stone.

  67. I don't think about things I don't think about
    July 21st, 2005 @ 9:29 pm

    It is important to remember that a scientific theory is defined very differently than the word “theory” used by the public. A scientific theory is a system of statements and ideas that explains a group of facts or phenomena. This is not your run of the mill, baseless guess (e.g. My socks disappear in the dryer, so I suppose elves are stealing them…). This is a well thought out conclusion which has been tested over and over, and found to be accurate. Yes, the Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory. So is the idea that all living things are made of one or more cells. This illustrates how defined and “concrete” a scientific theory truly is.

    So what if evolution is wrong? That’s the beauty of science: it is dynamic. We are always learning more. We are always understanding concepts more deeply. We are always investigating. If a scientific principle is refuted, it can and will be revised.

    One of my favorite evolutionary biology professors always said scientific theories should be solid, but never set in stone.

  68. I don't think about things I don't think about
    July 21st, 2005 @ 9:29 pm

    It is important to remember that a scientific theory is defined very differently than the word “theory” used by the public. A scientific theory is a system of statements and ideas that explains a group of facts or phenomena. This is not your run of the mill, baseless guess (e.g. My socks disappear in the dryer, so I suppose elves are stealing them…). This is a well thought out conclusion which has been tested over and over, and found to be accurate. Yes, the Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory. So is the idea that all living things are made of one or more cells. This illustrates how defined and “concrete” a scientific theory truly is.

    So what if evolution is wrong? That’s the beauty of science: it is dynamic. We are always learning more. We are always understanding concepts more deeply. We are always investigating. If a scientific principle is refuted, it can and will be revised.

    One of my favorite evolutionary biology professors always said scientific theories should be solid, but never set in stone.

  69. I don't think about things I don't think about
    July 21st, 2005 @ 9:29 pm

    It is important to remember that a scientific theory is defined very differently than the word “theory” used by the public. A scientific theory is a system of statements and ideas that explains a group of facts or phenomena. This is not your run of the mill, baseless guess (e.g. My socks disappear in the dryer, so I suppose elves are stealing them…). This is a well thought out conclusion which has been tested over and over, and found to be accurate. Yes, the Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory. So is the idea that all living things are made of one or more cells. This illustrates how defined and “concrete” a scientific theory truly is.

    So what if evolution is wrong? That’s the beauty of science: it is dynamic. We are always learning more. We are always understanding concepts more deeply. We are always investigating. If a scientific principle is refuted, it can and will be revised.

    One of my favorite evolutionary biology professors always said scientific theories should be solid, but never set in stone.

  70. 4thgeneration
    July 22nd, 2005 @ 4:40 pm

    Well said, IDTATIDTA.

  71. The_great_cabal
    July 25th, 2005 @ 12:12 pm

    I assume that since eternal_damnation and his sock-puppet Rev_Holy_Fire do not believe in evolution, they do not ever get flu shots or take antibiotics, since both are manufactured from tools provided by the evil Darwinists…

    Oh, and Lucy Muff, you’re patently wrong. “God” does not guide evolutionary paths. The Big Green Sky Monkey does.

    In conclusion, Evolution is real and is very excellent evidence for the Big Green Sky Monkey. Finally, BGSMism is a better religion than Xianism because all members must know how to spell before believing, otherwise they are cast in to the pit of Zanzibar.

  • Basic Assumptions

    First, there is a God.

    Continue Reading...

  • Search

  • Quote of the Day

    • Fifty Random Links

      See them all on the links page.

      • No Blogroll Links