God Kills 42 Children

I came across the strangest, and with the exception of the flood, the gruesomest tale in the Old Testament;

2 Kings 2:23-24 NIV

"From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up, you baldhead!" 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths."

So Elisha had a big ego and asked God to kill the children. Then God, being the bloodthirsty creep he is, decides to do it. Wow. That's sad. This is really exemplary of the primitive mind of the people who wrote the bible.

Ray's Jesus Dilemma

"I think that "great" teachers don’t say the sort of weird things He said (believe His words and you have everlasting life, that His voice would raise the billions of the dead human race, etc.), and if He didn’t exist, who said these amazing words? So, I think that there are only two reasonable options. He was either a crazy liar, or He was the Son of God. Am I wrong?" -Ray Comfort

Yep, there are plenty of crazy people walking around claiming to be the son of God, claiming to heal people, claiming they have the answer to eternal life. We can observe that these people exist and say these things. We have never observed someone doing miracles. Therefor it is more likely that this Jesus character (more accurately, the authors of Jesus) were just lunatics. You can go to any street corner and find another Jesus, just give them some alcohol and they will tell you some amazing things.

Don't blame me for calling Jesus (better yet his character) crazy since Ray was the one who came up with that. Weird, if Jesus (or his character) was crazy, what does that say about his followers?

Which is more likely, a person could violate every known physical law by walking on water, etc. or Ray is just suffering from delusions of grandeur? Since we know the delusional people exist, and we have NEVER witnessed the former, it is more likely (and given that he thinks he has defeated a science with as much evidence as gravity) that he is delusional.

The God of the OT

A silly question

Why do Christians pray?

I mean, God is omniscient, and pretty much knows what you are thinking before you even think of it. Every time I go over to a Christian person's house for dinner, which is fairly often, I often ask myself that question when we pause to pray. "We" being the 3rd person way of being polite, since it is really "They" who pause ( With a curious look on my face as I look at the somber lot talking to someone who isn't there). What could you possibly say, or ask for, that God in his omniscience, doesn't already know?

What do they hope to accomplish? Do they want to change God's mind? Do they want to prevent a catastrophy that God already KNOWS about? Maybe save a brother or sister with cancer that God already knows will live or die. I mean, it's not like he will change his mind since he already knows what will happen. So in a way, prayers are futile. God is inert, he can't be changed because he lives at all times, knows everything and therefore has already made up his mind, so to speak (curiously he can't even make up his own mind in the first place because he existed forever).

Maybe it's a way to tell ourselves that maybe we can change future events, even though we really can't since God has already been there-done-that and knows exactly what is going to happen. He even knows that you would ask him, and has already issued a response before you even asked! Wow!


Man has always wanted to be able to change, or at least see into the future. The earliest civilizations had there own methods. The Romans had birds wings, some had tea leaves others had special cards, ours even has a 1800 number for convenience. I believe it is part of the human condition to fear the future, to want to change it, to make it better somehow. That is both inspiring and curious to me.

Being a Intelligent Design advocate is easy

1) Find something we don't yet understand
2) Say "Goddidit"

The Best Story Ever!

How to make a religion

Making a religion is like bringing any other product to market, or publishing a book.

1) Have several people write a book explaining what your religion is about. The more plausible, the better, but make it magical so it's not just another philosophy book.

2) Use plenty of vague, open ended ideas and poetic language. Stay away from facts because they might come back to bite you.

3) Throw in some general predictions, like; There will be an increase in knowledge, things will be more organized, there will be war etc. If you make a self-fulfilling prediction - Golden. Don't make specific predictions, like on 6/24/08 the world will end, or after 6/24/08 you won't have any (rational) followers.

4) Like any book, make new editions from time to time, but you can't change it too often, or people might get wise to the fact that you are editing. Call the editing process a "Holy" act to do damage control.

5) If you have a council, vote on what will be put in or left out of the holy book. (See council of nicea).

6) The longer the editing process and learning, the more water tight your message will be. The best religions are thousands of years old. Religions aren't made over night, but if favorable conditions come up, the bad ones will die and the most plausible, vague, poetic ones will rise to the top.
In the end, you have to remember, people would rather be happy than right, so play on their gullibility, create a cult, have fun.

God Incognito

The Big Guy is not Falsifiable

Attributes;

1) Invisible
2) Made of nothing and everything
3) Can (and does) make things appear as though he doesn't exist
4) Cannot be understood/ Anything is possible.

Oddly, imaginary friends have the same attributes.

Ok, Lets See

I love reading Ray Comfort's Blog. Everyday I get a little chuckle inside, like butterflies, little moments of joy.

I say to myself, OK, lets see what kind of stupidity, asinine, borderline insane dingle berries we are gonna get from the internet's biggest ex-nothing, Ray Comfort.

I'm never disappointed. Each new post from Ray brightens my day and makes me feel (like there's no hope for humanity and we should give up now) like I can go through the day.

Ah Ray, you put the "F" in Fundamentalist.

I wanted someone to condense all of Ray's post into one word so I wouldn't have to read it.>>

Ok,Thanks for the words guys.
Dale was the winner with his entry and coinage of a new word (i believe) of "Flabblegabbery." You win a thousand free Google searches, use them any time.

Other notable mentions were "JibberJabber" (iago) and "Lazy" (Ray's entry)
Mark was disqualified because he didn't give a word, Just FlabberGabbery.

We Have A Winner!

Dreams of Being Eaten

I woke up last night in a cold sweat. I had a terrible, creepy nightmare. I was surrounded by evil bananas that were trying to eat my brains and convert me to Christianity. I tried to run, but I kept slipping on peels and falling down, as the horde of undead bananas chased me down dark alleys.

The leader kept groaning "Join Us, Join Us, Join Us..." ARRRGH

Ray was right, the banana is the atheist's worst nightmare...

Question

Matt,

You gave me this bible verse;

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" Romans 5:12

Ok, so here I take it that death started when Adam and Eve first sinned. So when did lions start to have sharp teeth? Were they given sharp teeth before A&E sinned, or after? If the former, wouldn't that suggest that God knew A&E would sin? If the latter, how can this be explained in biological terms (POOF Godidit?).

The Raymanator 5000

Watch out you evil atheists, the Raymanator is on the loose and he's thirsty for ungodly blood. Part cyborg, part ex-nothing backwater preacher, there's no match for his out-this-world dogma and superpowers of ignorance which humble the lowly godless ones. With sidekick K-Dog, there's no stopping this duo. Cower in fear!

Your days are numbered atheists.

Rules to live by

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

-Carl Sagan

This is an interesting way of judging statements and evidence. If I told you that I had a donut for breakfast, you wouldn't debate me and go over the possibilities as to whether or not I ACTUALLY ate a donut. On the other hand, if I said that I floated two feet above the ground and hovered for approximately 30 seconds by the sheer power of my mind, you would seriously doubt me.

I don't need any evidence to prove that I ate a donut this morning, since it happens all the time and I have no particular reason to lie. However, my hovering ability requires substantially more evidence since this has never happened in the history of humanity, and violates the laws of physics, human physiology and common sense.

I typed Carl Sagan's quote into Google and got a Christian apologetics site called CARM. Go figure. They said, "This is why the skeptic must require "extraordinary evidence." It enables him to retain his presupposition should the extraordinary level of the evidence not be met. Therefore, requiring extraordinary evidence effectively stacks the deck against the claim." If you call normal investigation methods "stacking the deck," then I guess you might as well believe in Leprechauns and Fairies since you have set the standard of evidence so low that you cannot distenguish fact from fiction.

The article says that Atheists require video as extraordinary evidence of the supposed resurection of Jesus, which is silly. Since Christian don't have any evidence (outside of a forged historical document 60 yrs after the event) they resort to reductio ad absurdum to make it seem silly to require basic evidence. The whole article boils down to Pascals Wager in the conclusion and nothing much else.

http://www.carm.org/evidence/extraordinary.htm

Calvin and Hobbes

Atavisms

Matthew,
You wrote this about atavisms and evolution on your blog;

"A recent article from Live Science provides a list of the top ten "useless limbs," two of which caught my eye. The article includes the human tail-bone among its other "useless limbs," which, contrary to popular belief, does indeed have a function. There are nine muscles attached to the tail-bone in humans which are extremely important for certain activities, including: sitting, certain bowel movements, labor movements, and supporting certain internal organs. Why are these functions so often ignored? Because the "useless" tail-bone in humans is often used as evidence to support the theory of Darwinian evolution."

Question;
Take a look at these videos and tell me how these people can have functioning tails, without needing the "Extremely important" muscles attached to them, that is, they are still able to have bowel movements, can sit, and their organs don't fall out etc?







Another point;

Bottlenose Dolphins normally do not have rear fins (aside from the tail).
Yet, this Bottlenose Dolphin in China displayed attavistic dorsal fins where they don't normally exist. In fact, every Bottlenose Dolphin has the capability of making these rear fins. During the embryo stage, every dolphin has this rear fin (see H in the photo), but is disappears when the during development.

Normal Bottlenose Dolpins;
Notice no rear fins.

Dumb and Dumber

If Ray will never accept the fossil evidence for evolution, he should quit talking about it and just say "NU HUH" like every other three year old would do.

First he says he will never accept evidence, then he there isn't ONE piece of evidence. When people post dozens of pieces, he completely ignores it, (Starts making stupid remarks), then says he only wants ONE piece, no more no less!!

What a dope.

There's almost no point arguing with a three year old child. It's funny nonetheless.

"We could do that with autos (sports car to Hummer), airplanes (biplane to jumbo jet), etc., and then announce our "scientific" conclusion: "Aha! See? That proves they have a common ancestor!" That's nonsense!"

THEY DO HAVE A COMMON ANCESTOR YOU DOPE!!!

(interestingly, the oldest car looks like a bicycle and the first airplane never flew.)

Be more explicit in step two

Matt,

Here is the dilemma as I see it;

1) Matter cannot traverse infinite spacetime, therefor God did it. (Violates Occam's Razor once again)
2) Matter can traverse infinite spacetime because your analysis if flawed.

Since you don't provide any references to your statements, I'm assuming you are using the outmoded Zeno's paradox or something like it. Zeno's paradox states that it is impossible for an object to go a given distance since the intermediate steps approach infinity.

If you think of a given task as (1) then the midpoint would be (1/2) and so we get this infinite regression;
{...1/2,1/3,1/4,1/5...} The unit of distance becomes infinitely small, and consequently infinitely difficult.

Unfortunately this is incorrect. Zeno's paradox is solved if you consider time. As the distance approaches infinity, the time needed to travel the distances (that is approaching infitinity) becomes infinitly small.

I'm assuming you haven't read anything about String Theory, so I'm going to give you a little info. Since the standard model of physics falls short of explaining how matter (which you confuse as "universe") works, String Theory proposes some solutions. One of them is a massless particle. You may know that under one of Einstein's theories, an object becomes infinitely massive (impossible to move) as it approaches the speed of light. A massless particle would not be constrained by this, since it has no mass. Consequently, it would be possible to traverse infinite spacetime.

That's just my two cents. I could be wrong (I'm not a phycisist).

None of this, however, has any bearing on whether an invisible guy who likes the number 7, the smell or burning flesh vs plant matter and who has his own palace in the sky, exists or not.
How would that prove that the Bible is true? It wouldn't. You need to remember not to Multiply Hypothesis. You should be more explicit in step two.

I'm Napoleon!

"A Casual stroll through an insane asylum shows that faith proves nothing."

-Friedrich Neitzsche

You Lose, I Win

So far, Ray's only defense against my question was that Lance said the "G" word, so he must believe in "G."

Well, Ray said "Evolution," so I win.

I love these school yard games.

Since Ray won't give me a prize, I gave myself this trophy. It's made of tin foil.

Ray Chose My Question! Whats my prize?

(After Ray posted my question on his blog, I wrote this...)
Ray,
I don't get it.

In your post you said you wouldn't accept evidence ("Even if you came up with what you believe is evidence, time would prove it to be another hoax"), but in this comment;

"Give me some evidence of species to species transitional forms in the fossil record. You can't :)"

You said you would accept evidence. So...(wait for it)...Which is it?

[This was really ironic if you look at my last cartoon post]

Got your GED/AA, now your gonna topple all of science

Noah's Flood; The Physical Evidence

Positive evidence that Noah's Flood didn't happen, hence the biblical account is incorrect. You can say it's magic if you want.



Let me break it down for you;

1) Cheetahs have an extremely low graft rejection rate.
2) Other animals have high graft rejection rates.
3) It is therefor assumed that cheetahs went through a population bottleneck.
4) According to the Biblical account of the flood, all terrestrial animals went through a population bottleneck.
5) It is very difficult for other animals to receive grafts from donors. Ergo
6) The other animals (including humans) did not go through a bottleneck therefor...
7) No flood.

Ray's going through a tough time

I really enjoy laughing at Ray and making fun of him. But as Phil pointed out in his last post, Ray is going through a hard time right now.

You see, Ray usually is really glib about what he knows. This time, Ray admitted he doesn't know how old the Earth is. This is a really big step for Ray (Baby steps, Baby steps).

Since, according to Ray, the bible is PACKED full of scientific evidence, he himself is beginning to question that the Earth is between 6-10 Thousand years old, when all of science points to 4.5 Billion (With a "B") years.

So I'm not going to make fun of Ray on this one, because he's going through a tough time (its hard being a skeptic).

Baby steps, baby steps, baby steps

3 Rules (A work in progress)

1) People should try to learn as much as they can, because it never hurt anyone.
2) people should try to love on another, (or move to another appartment if that fails).
3) There are no bad/dumb people, just people who need help and understanding.

Russell's Teapot

Bertrand Russell said it better than I could ever hope to;

"Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

I don't need to disprove your God because its an invisible celestial teapot.

Leprechaun caught on www.irelandseye.com webcam

Origin of the Universe (as we know it)

"Do you believe the universe had a beginning, or has it always existed?" -Matthew

Good question Matthew. I don't claim to KNOW how the universe came into being, like Ray Comfort. It's funny to read Comfort's blog in which he says atheists believe "Nothing created everything." Unfortunately for Ray, this is just a straw man. No one with any credentials in the field, says that nothing existed before the Big Bang (except the boogie men in Ray's fantasies).

The fact is that we don't know what happened before the "Planck wall." The Planck wall is 10/\-43 seconds after the Big Bang. 10/\-43 is scientific notation which means (0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001) of a second. It is difficult, if not impossible to observe what happened before that time. Without observation, scientists can only speculate about what existed before the Big Ban. Certainly no one who is doing science says NOTHING existed.

Another problem of observation pertains to what are known as "horizons." Light travels at a finite speed. That being said, we can only gather information from light and gravity. The light that hits our telescopes has been traveling for billions of years. So our perview of information is limited by the amount of light that hits the instruments we use. Consequently, our information is limited, because events (which generated light) have reached us yet.

Personally, I believe matter always existed. This is just my opinion, and I don't claim to KNOW. You asked "Do you believe the universe had a beginning, or has it always existed?" Both, in my humble opinion are true. The "universe" or the galaxies and planets we see, had a beginning called the Big Bang. Matter, on the other hand, always existed. In other words, matter was transfered via the Big Bang to form the universe.

Ray completely ignores hypothesis that exist about what happened before the Big Bang. One of them is String Theory (AKA M-theory). String Theory is a mathematical explanation of how matter interacted before the Big Bang. String Theory says the universe was created by the collision of "membranes" which are made of strings. This is consistent with thermodynamics and other theories. At this point in time, String Theory is not science, because we need observable evidence (So was Einstein's Theory of Relativity before it was observed), but it is one hypothesis that shows promise and is being investigated. Ray, in his classical arrogance, completely ignores this.

Here are two hypothesis;

1) We don't know how the universe came into being, so God did it. (Violates Occam's Razor)
2) We don't know how the universe came into being, so we should keep looking.

Thanks for the question.

Further Reading;

NOVA TV program about string theory

Article about String (M) Theory

PDF File

Pure BS

Homo Rayforensis (left) And Homo heidelbergensis (right)

(Based in AT-700, the "Skull 5" of Atapuerca.)


RAY! WE FOUND YOUR COUSIN!

No Transitional Fossils!

If you like this video, you should check out the other videos made by a real biologist, DonExodus
http://youtube.com/user/DonExodus2

Just a joke

What part of don't you understand?