Despite wordpress automatically pinging and us manually pinging Blogrolling.com as well as using Ping-O-Matic at 15 – 30 minute intervals, not one of the previous five posts have been shown on the Atheist Blogroll. Now, the blogroll is a wonderful thing and we here at WhyDontYou want to fully support it, but the fact remains it is not working properly. As it stands, blogs no longer get Technorati ranking from it which means its main purpose is to send traffic to a site. Most people use the abbreviated version showing the most recently updated blogs. As it now seems to ignore the good blogs when they update, oddly showing a **new next to all the content-free/YouTube blogs, it is becoming less and less useful. If I had the technical know-how to propose a solution, I would, but surely there must be, somewhere in AtheistLand, a person with the required knowledge to solve the problem? Anyone?
Daily Archives: Sat, 24 November, 2007
Creationists Say the Stupidest Things
Hot on the footsteps of my previous post, I have carried on looking over the latest rantings posted on FSTDT. This led me to a wonderful link to a Hovind movie on DivX.com’s Stage6. I’ve linked to it here, so you can watch the video if you want – personally I have seen enough of his cretinous nonsense to not bother.
On the FSTDT, they have taken someone called “MovieSelect” to task over part of a comment. Namely this bit of idiocy:
Why do christians like myself say evolution is a religion? This is easy at first science was thought as observing about the present so they became facts and no one could say its not true. Now people realize they didn’t only observe the present but predict the past so people find out its a religion because scientists predict the past or the future so it makes it into a theory and theory is a religion i don’t care what anybody says about that and dead bones is not evidence because they can lose form over time.
While it is funny and reasonably fundie nonsense, it was the fifth point in a stream of nonsense made by the same madman. MovieSelect opens with this headspinning reasoning:
Very informative thank you a lot to think about.
Why it proves evolution wrong is-1. Some cells that form the baby’s hands commit suicide. In evolution theory is that cells/organisms only want to try to stay alive why then do they kill them selves? it is because the cells follow orders so then look at it this way the solider follow orders even to commit suicide for the sake of the commanders plans. So the cells follow the creators plans.
No, seriously. That is what he has written. It gives me a headache thinking about it. This is blatantly a person who has no idea what “cells” are. I suspect someone has tried to use analogy to teach him about the bodies process and he has become confused. Very confused. More importantly, it speaks of a deep misunderstanding about evolution – as is often the case with creationists. Almost a shame. Still, the strangeness continues:
2. How does the cells/organisms think for themselves if they don’t have a brain? The evolutionist theory would be they naturally follow natures law, but were did the law come from? If you create something you set rules to it that means theres a creator because before it was created there aren’t any rules because it doesn’t exist. So lets pretend evolution is right then we would not exist because theres no creator in evolution, so why do they claim there is a law?
(Why are creationists so grammatically bad? Is heather a creationist, I wonder :-)Â )
This is a stream of madness if ever I saw one. First off he ask a question which has a simple answer “they dont.” However, he wants it to have a different answer, which he then goes off and critiques. It is like an uber-Strawman. From that dodgy beginning, things go really downhill. Please let this be a parody.
Genuine madness kicks in now:
3. Is there a random chance of our existence? I say no because how can you answer this problem with out an answerer 123,473,957,430,965,743,196,749,574,590,487,595,826 + 539,476,056,790,734,635,680,953,530,579,057,035,987=? the problem doesn’t answer itself.
No, really. This is what he wrote. I couldn’t make this lunacy up. How can you answer anything without an answer? As for the basic addition problem he posted, well it is long, but it is an easy sum to add…. What sheer madness. I cant help but chuckle at how long he must have spent typing that out – you cant just mash the keys when you want to include a comma every 3 digits…
Lastly, we get:
4. Many evolutionist claim to say the world is billion years old because evolution takes a long time for it to happen so why does the baby starts from a cell to a human being in 5 months? Why is it impossible for evolution in the outside world evolve the same speed as in the mothers wound? I will tell you why because evolution is mostly incorrect with there so called factual evidence and there not facts there guesses. Of course they do have ways to sample material underground to state there age but I cant say if there right or wrong because I don’t know exactly how they sample them I do know that they compare present elements decays and relate them to old ones and state how long its been decaying but I think things decay alought faster underground then above the ground so you cant really rely on it. There must be a creator.
Babble, babble, babble. The first sentence is funny – either the crazy fool thinks evolution exists (and for some reason thinks that the development of a cell to human being is an example of it) or they don’t. Why does it take 10 hours for me to fly to the USA, when it only takes me 3 minutes to microwave a bag of popcorn would be a similar argument.
With this fourth comment, MovieSelect must have been getting really carried away. His spelling has deteriorated even more than normal, so I suspect he was typing really fast now – maybe he thought this was a crushing blow against evolution. Sadly it is just disconnected nonsense. He finishes with an isolated cry of “there must be a creator” as if everything else he has written leads to that conclusion. Sadly…
Posts like this really do make me wonder about the mental health of a huge swathe of the world. Worryingly, when you sit there and look around, and everyone else seems to be mad maybe it means you are the mad one…
A Sad and Empty Place
Hot on the heels of the bizarre weirdness that it Kent Hovind’s “Knee-mails” to the mythical, I found a website which appears to try and parody the always entertaining Fundies Say the Darndest Things site (FSTDT). This site with the oh so funny title “Atheists Say the Weirdest Crap (ASTWC)” (very droll) is entertaining on many levels – although not, I suspect, in the manner its creator intended.
For those who haven’t visited FSTDT, have a look. It is a hilarious insight into the twisted things which rattle around inside the heads of fundamentalist theists (not just fundies either it includes a generous helping of racists and other idiots). There are hundreds of pages, each full with idiotic outpourings written by people who often have little or no understanding of the holy book they are claiming is the TRUTH.
Pitched against that, we now have the ASTWC. This has the sum total of six (count ’em) quotes. Four of them come from Richard Dawkins. There appears to be a forum with some posts (and a section titled: “Politics No liberals allowed”) but every time I try to view them, my connection times out. Obviously the internet has some level of taste after all. Because ASTWC is so, frankly, small, I am more than willing to fisk the whole “quotes” page. What is really funny is not the atheistic quotes he tries to ridicule, but how the site owner tries to ridicule them. It will have you laughing for minutes.
In the hate section, titled “The obvious silliness from Richard Dawkins” we get:
“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.” [It actually teaches us the opposite of that, as anyone with working synapses can explain]
Blimey. Pure, 100% school ground retort. No evidence or proof of his claims, so he resorts to an assertion and an ad hominem. Brilliant way of supporting an argument. If you are under 10 years old.
“What has ‘theology’ ever said that is of the smallest use to anybody? When has ‘theology’ ever said anything that is demonstrably true and is not obvious? What makes you think that ‘theology’ is a subject at all?†[The Word of God, the story of the crucifixion, and the fact that it is.]
Straight from the department of not understanding the quote you are arguing against. The “Word of God” is meaningless and could easily be argued as already falsified by biblical inconsistencies, transcription errors and the need for human interpretation. The story of the crucifixion falls squarely in the not of the smallest use to anybody and “the fact that it is” is childish nonsense. I am now reasonably sure that ASTWC is written by a 9 year old.
“Personally, I rather look forward to a computer program winning the world chess championship. Humanity needs a lesson in humility.†[Included for the sheer hypocrisy.]
Pointless. What is hypocritical about it?
“I’m not sure this conversation can go any further.†[Rallying cry of the defeated atheist.]
A return to the school playground. Theists use this just as much. Anyway, that is pretty much the limit of the “weird crap” he (or she, but I think he) can accuse Dawkins of saying. Interesting considering how much Dawkins has said, but we now move on to the attack on FSTDT. This produces the longest bit of continual writing on the site:
FSTDT is one of the most truly disturbing websites I have ever seen on the internet. Please don’t visit unless you want to be mocked, ridiculed, and persecuted just because you are a moral person with faith.
“Guess we’re more popular than jesus” – malicious_bloke [Guess you don’t remember what happened to the last guy that said that. Or that Jesus is capitalized. I imagine there is a great deal that you don’t remember, or else never knew in the first place.]
I suspect that the ASTWC author really doesn’t get FSTDT. I am a bit confused here though. What did happen to the last guy who said he was more popular than Jesus? I know loads of people who have said it in the last (say) six years and I can’t think of anything particularly bad which happened to any of them. What is he talking about here? As for the capitalisation bite, well that is just lame. We could allow this to descend into a long argument about internet vs Internet, but that would be equally lame. Suffice it to say, if his strongest argument is the lack of a J at the start of Jeebus’ name he has no argument at all.
Finally, the ASTWC idiocy ends with this priceless gem:
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” – Steven Roberts [Nice cop-out, there Steve. Unfortunately, comparing the God of Abraham to, say, Shiva, is comparing apples to false gods. So you’re not excused.]
Wow. I am going to chortle about this all day. I was going to write a bit more about this, but I have just discovered that FSTDT has already picked up on this line of nonsense, so I will leave it to them to pull this to shreds. The idiocy in the statement is amazing – sadly it also speaks of someone who will never actually understand why they are an idiot.
Painfully Weird
Mooching around the internet today allowed me to stumble upon a site I’ve visited in the past but largely had forgotten about – despite the fact it reaches a new level of bizarreness. The site is CSE Blogs, for those of you who (like me) wondered what CSE stood for, it isn’t “Combined Services Entertainment” or even the “Centre for Sustainable Energy.” No, it stands for the complete headcase Creation Science Evangelism promoted by “dr” Tax-Dodger Hovind. Surely some one can sue the creation “science” nuts over the use of CSE?
Anyway, as I said, this is a painfully weird site. The posts seem to be made by a lackey of Hovind called “pabramson” (which seems to be missing a “h” in my mind but …) and are largely examples of weird imagined conversations between Hovind and various mythical figures. When I say weird, I don’t mean in the nice, funny sort of way. While the larger part of me assumes that Hovind and his lackeys all know it is a load of crap, there is a little bit which is screaming that the gullible rubes visiting the site and leaving gushing comments (example follows) actually believe the nonsense. Now that is scary.
Thank you Brother Kent, and Brother Paul, Brother Eric, and everyone else at CSE. I needed this today! I have my own ministry and I speak about Creation, evolution, and share the salvation plan with everyone who will listen, and I have never been backed down or proven wrong. (from Micheal Deas)
Great isn’t it. I suspect the reason he has never “been backed down or proven wrong” is mostly down to the fact he preaches to other idiots.
The main thing I find weird about this site, is the sheer volume of Knee-Mail posts. First off, the play on words is one which would embarrass a mildly educated ten year old after a while (which could explain why these lunatics nice people are still getting kicks from it) but each and every one seems to think it is a brand new and funny way to open a “sermon.” That, in effect, is all the posts are – a sad attempt by a criminal to try and preach to the public over the internet in the style of some one in an electronic conversation with a mythical figure.
Take the latest one, the one I came across first, which presents itself as a conversation between “Kent and the Captain.” This is how it begins (note the attempt to recreate an e-mail header at the start, how funny…)
From: Kent Hovind
Sent: August 17, 2007
To: Captain of Ship to Italy with Passenger, the Apostle Paul
Subject: Re: Discussions on the Wisdom of Sailing Against the Advice of the Prisoner Paul and the “Preserved Word†from which He Preaches
(Read Acts 27:6-44)KH: Hey Captain! I hate to bother you at this busy time, but can you talk for a minute (between verses 11 and 12)?
Captain: Sure, knee-mail suspends time; so it won’t effect me at all.
KH: I understand that you own the ship that is headed to Italy.
Like I said, it is weird but I will try to identify all the things which I think are odd – please feel free to correct me if you think I am missing the point…
First off, it was posted on 19 Nov 07. Why does the faux-header say 17 August? Is that when Kent sent the message out of prison? Does “knee-mail” suspend time but take three months to get anywhere? More importantly, why is the Captain of the ship carrying the supposed Apostle Paul getting a message in 2007? Are creationists unable to maintain a coherent line of fantasy? (Oh, yeah, scratch that one…)
I am bit thrown by the reference to “between verses 11 and 12,” when Kent then goes on to make references to verses after Acts 27:12. Having said that, Acts is a bit of a mixmash anyway – trying to read the verses in chronological (or any logical) order is like hammering a nail into granite with your forehead. For example look at the flow between Acts 27:34 – 38: (this is after they had apparently been starving for 14 days)
34: Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you.
35: And when he had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat.
36: Then were they all of good cheer, and they also took some meat.
37: And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.
38: And when they had eaten enough, they lightened the ship, and cast out the wheat into the sea. (source Biblos.com, KJ version)
That is one of the more readable sections, yet it still manages to insert a seemingly out of place head count and have some drivel about baldness. (Also, as they are starving, not having eaten for 14 days Acts 27:33, why did they throw their wheat into the sea – in fact, as they obviously had bread, meat and wheat, why had they starved themselves for 14 days!)
From this bit of biblical madness it becomes a touch easier to see where Hovind gets his writing style from. The thing I can’t understand is why is he being allowed to carry on doing this? Surely there are some regulations on what inmates can and can’t do with regards to contact with the outside world?
Great irony can be found in the comments, especially where Paul Abramson is talking about people writing to Kent in jail (to lift his spirits etc) and he writes:
Do not put “Dr.†on his name, or it may get thrown away by the guards, unfortunately.
Oh, how that made me giggle.
Less funny, although giving a better insight into the minds of the creationist, is the reaction to Dermot’s comment. Basically Dermot writes creationism is not scientific, so Paul Abramson cuts him off (yet doesn’t delete the post, just slices it) to say they are not going to talk about creationism, then talks about creationism. Weird but true.
I like this bit in particular:
For a *believer* then creation is non-negotiable. Either the Bible is true (including Exodus 20:11) or it is not true. Either God is strong or weak. One cannot have both. That is what makes this non-negotiable – for believers.
The God of the Bible is strong. The god of evolution is weak and bumbling or is non-existent. It is incoherent to try to mix evolution with Christianity, I would contend.
Great, isn’t it. Just like six year olds in a play ground arguing whose father is the toughest. I am starting to get an idea of the mental age of these creationists…
Edit to add: Seriously, if this was anyone else, or if it wasn’t supposed to be a hommage to the great sky pixie, people would have put Kent in a padded cell and be force feeding him all manner of chemicals. The man is either a callous con artist or criminally insane. You chose which.Â
Junior High
Hat tip to Gullibity blog for a link to a site that tests the reading age that your blog is aimed at.
So…when I did this blog readability test I was surprised at it’s assessment of the reading level needed to make sense of what I was writing. The widget says you are at Genius level if you read Gullibility – WOW!. Just a note, I would have posted the icon but it comes with an un-announced advertising link. The other thing that comes to mind is whether that means the Gullibility readership are Genii or Geniuses…but what the heck, being a Genius you’ll know anyway! (quoted from Gullibility blog)
Well, I got slightly on the self-critical defensive on reading this. I want to write clearly. I think I change my wordy blogdrivel into plain English, on the second pass, but I have to admit that a fair amount of the blog evidence contradicts the success of this venture.
But, I can take it. I’ll run the blog through the reading age thing and learn from it.
Junior High level?
Well that sounds good in terms of the readability objective, but this puts me slightly on a new para about maybe having very banal content.
(Not a hundred per cent sure what this means really, which is a bit of an obstacle. How old are students in Junior High? In any case, hang your dumb heads in shame, readers.)
So, how is it that Gullibility blog can only be read by geniuses? I scan this very interesting site, looking for posts from Schroedinger or, at least, casually inserted calculus problems that are way beyond my puny mortal understanding. No, can’t see any.
Oh, wait. I see a thoughtful post on the Popper/Kuhn debate. Mention of “paradigms”. A link to a Princeton page of sociology fun? (Admittedly, you really do need to know a fair bit about academic sociology to find any of the Princeton jokes funny or even to understand the references. But I like the concept of sociological humour, in principle.)
w00t \0/. It’s official. It comes from the Internet, which is not allowed to lie.
Sociology=genius.
I can’t argue with that. In your faces, other scientists.
(Bah. This may make me seem a mite Gullible….)