NCSE Promotes Creationism

Is the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) a parody group that I am unaware of? They seem legit, that is until you find out about this trip through the Grand Canyon they are offering.

Explore the Grand Canyon with Scott, Newton, and Gish! Seats are now available for NCSE's next excursion to the Grand Canyon — as featured in The New York Times (October 6, 2005). From June 30 to July 8, 2011, NCSE will again explore the wonders of creation and evolution on a Grand Canyon river run conducted by NCSE's Genie Scott, NCSE's Steven Newton, and paleontologist Alan ("Gish") Gishlick. Because this is an NCSE trip, we offer more than just the typically grand float down the Canyon, the spectacular scenery, fascinating natural history, brilliant night skies, exciting rapids, delicious meals, and good company. It is, in fact, a unique "two-model" raft trip, on which we provide both the creationist view of the Grand Canyon and the evolutionist view — and let you make up your own mind. To get a glimpse of the fun, watch the short videos filmed during the 2009 trip, posted on NCSE's YouTube site. The cost of the excursion is $2545; a deposit of $500 will hold your spot. Seats are limited: call, write, or e-mail now.

What the hell? A dual-model trip that shows both the creationists view and the evolutionist view of how the Grand Canyon was created? Ok, let me dunk my head in a bucket of ice water to cool down. Now it's time to regulate.

Point 1: Creationism is not only false, it is a fucking joke. It is not serious and should not be catered to even as a joke. It should be ridiculed until it becomes taboo to even hold the thought in your head. For proof that creationism is a goddamned lie, I direct you to this site.

Point 2: The theory of evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the Grand Canyon! It drives me insane that the word 'evolutionist' (which isn't a real fucking word) is applied to anyone who holds a different view of than creationists in any discipline. Think the Grand Canyon was created by a river over a long time? Evolutionist. Think the Earth is warming and god isn't going to save us? Evolutionist. Think the universe is older than 6000 years? Evolutionist. Don't have your head up your ass when it comes to facts? Evolutionist. It isn't a real word. Why don't we call it what it is: those who are creationists shall henceforth be known as “fucking idiots” and people who accept an Earth that is older than 6000 years are called “people who are not fucking idiots.”

Point 3: Why do we keep allowing these national organizations to set up the false dichotomies between science and religion? There is fact and then there is whatever the hell you want to call the views of fucking idiots. How about we do a tour of concentrations camps, but a dual-model trip that shows the side of holocaust deniers? Or perhaps we could take a tour of NASA with those who think that there is a giant alien conspiracy and we never landed on the moon? Do you know why we wouldn't do that? Because it would be stupid.

So remember, if you have $2545 to burn and are a moron, there is a rafting trip for you to take through the Grand Canyon.

Fundamentalist Jews Becoming As Bad As The Nazis

Just when I think the extremists in Israel can’t be any more loathsome, they do something to prove me wrong. A group of 50 rabbis (who are civil servants, yeat another reason not to mix government and religion) signed a letter that urged the nation not to rent or sell property to non-Jews.

"It is known that due to selling or renting one apartment, all the apartments of the neighbors devaluate even if the buyers or renters are nice at first ... and the one that sells and rents first causes his neighbors a loss and causes others to rent and sell after him and leave the place."

Wow. They just came right out and said it. I have to agree with them about devaluation of property. However, they are directing it at the wrong people. You know who I really don’t want to live next to because they are dirty, filthy things who devaluate property? Jews.

How horrible does that sound? It is horrible and racist. However, when the good rabbis say it, its religious doctrine and must be followed. I remember reading about a country who thought a group of people devalued their land and dirtied everything up.

Jesus Loves Doors

Tis the season for Jesus to start showing up in weird places. As always, he can never appear as himself on the sic o’clock news. Instead he appears on the back of a bathroom door or a grilled-cheese sandwich. Here are a couple of his most recent appearances.

-Joe De Nuncio of Tampa, Florida was recently told do give a bathroom door back to a company that he used to work for. Joe asked for the door and the company gave it to him. Why did he want a bathroom door from a plywood company? Because Jesus was on it, of course! Don't forget to check out the pictures.

-An Irish pub in Australia has found an image of Jesus in the chipped paint of their door.

These types of sightings often lead people to believe the Lord is sending some sort of message of hope. In this case, according to Keohane, the only sign it may be sending is about what's served inside.

I know when I am looking to post a message of hope, I head to the nearest pub in a tiny town in eastern bumble-fuck Australia.

The tavern has no intention of repairing the stripped paint. Aside from enjoying the attention Jesus attracts, it's also treasuring the image at the request of a local parish.

Of course they aren’t going to repair it. They are making money off of a shitty paint job. This is further proof that Jesus is a capitalist and an alcoholic.

-A Bishop in Green Bay has certified that some visions of Mary by Adele Brise were real. This marks the first bullshit claim appearance of Mary in the United States. Mary and Jesus are like UFO’s: They only appear to slack-jawed yokels with no education who live in the middle of nowhere. Maybe they are real and they just like screwing with people.

A History Of Weakness

Two years ago we had just elected Barack Obama as President. The nation was elated because they thought that finally we would have someone who would change the way the government runs and how we do business as a nation. I, like many people at the time, was fully on board with the President coming into office and getting us back on some sort of reasonable course, a course that had been shifted so far to the right that Reagan started to seem like a left-of-center Democrat. As of this week, what little confidence I had in the President to do the right thing came to a halt.

My discontent had been growing with this administration since the health care debate. I was angry enough to declare that I would not be voting for him again, with good reason. The health care bill gave us so little change that it may as well have not even been passed. Health care costs continue to rise, health insurance companies who are forced to cover preexisting conditions in children are just refusing to cover children at all, and the bill as a whole won't start to take a real effect until 2014. In 2014, the bill will have been gutted because it wasn't strong and it wasn't immediate. This entire episode would have been attributed to a new administration trying to find their way. Things would surely get better after this. Right?

Since the health care debate the President has been cowering in a corner, or more precisely he has been on his knees under Mitch McConnell's and John Boehner's desks. He collapses under any kind of pressure from the right and them throws his arms in the air and says “What could I have done? I had to compromise.” I haven't seen compromise, all I have seen is capitulation. There is a lot of big talk coming from this guy. He says he would love to fight the Republicans on every piece of major legislation that he can. When the opportunity presents itself, he runs and hides behind the curtains in the oval office.

Then there are the areas that he has stood up to fight which is a long list of right-wing goals. He failed to close Guantanamo Bay, he continues to policy of warrantless wiretapping, and seems to be apathetic to the issue of Net Neutrality. The only conclusion I can draw from any of these issues is that he doesn't care. If you do not take a stand against a bad idea than you may as well be a supporter of the bad idea. There is no room for compromise when it comes to failed or bad ideas from the Bush Administration.

Now comes to two issues that the President could have redeemed himself on: Repeal of “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” and repeal of the Bush tax cuts. On the issue of DADT, how can he expect anything to get done while he is doing nothing but sitting on his hands waiting for the turtle of congress to take action? I agree that the bill has to be repealed through congress, but there is the option of enacting a stop-loss in the mean time. Then you start to tighten the screws on congress until they scream for mercy. The public is for the repeal of DADT and so is most of congress, minus John McCain who should be treated like a child and told to go stand in the corner until he calms down. Instead, we get a President who pays great lip service but does nothing in the end. Gays are still being discharged under DADT and congress has still not taken up the issue. You know why? Weak leadership, which also applies to Pelosi and Reed.

On the second issue, why is the President making the case for the Republicans? It doesn't make any sense at all. He went out as he usually does and crumbled at the first sign of pressure from the right. Not only did he crumble, but he gave away all of his bargaining chips before negotiations even started. As with DADT, the repeal of the Bush tax cuts was supported by a majority of the nation. The middle class should get to keep their tax cuts (that's anyone making less than $250,000 a year, which is too high in my opinion) and the wealthiest 2% of the nation has to go back to what their taxes were under Clinton (which is way too low in my opinion). However this President can't seem to wrap his mind around standing on principle. He actually thinks that he lost the House in 2010 because he wasn't enough of a Republican. What really happened was people started to wake up to his bullshit and realize that he has no back bone. The people voted for the Republicans because they had no other choice. Why would they vote for a spineless Democrat?

I can only urge the Democrats to run a primary against the President. After he stood on stage and blamed all of his problems on the liberals (his base, you know the ones who support him most) and said that we were being sanctimonious, the entire party should have started the process of finding someone who wasn't going to be a weakling who cowers in fear every time a Republican walks into the room.

I stick by my decision to never vote for this guy again. He is a lost cause at best and a Republican at worst. The question now is who is going to challenge him? Who can beat him for the nomination or who could run as a viable third-party candidate? I'm looking at you Russ Feingold.

The Five Homophobes You Meet In A Religion Class

Does anything go hand-in-hand better than homophobia and religion? According to the religion class I am taking right now, not at all. I had an extra elective to take this semester, so I figured “Old Testament As Literature” would be a fun class to take. I knew I would be in for a good time when I found out that the instructor is actually a Baptist preacher. What can I say, I am a glutton for punishment.

Well, not actually. The instructor turned out to be a Francis Collins-style Christian who puts a lot of stock in science. The man is a biologist but just can't seem to shake off the trappings of Jesus. Oh well, I can deal with namby-pamby Christians. Especially ones that think that most of the Bible is allegory and the Old Testament is not true.

Enough background. During last nights class I was able to have an interesting and enlightening argument with another student, which turned in to an argument with all five students in the class. The conversation came out of nowhere and had nothing to do with religion, aside from the obvious fact that the only arguments that can be made against homosexuality can come from the Bible or the Koran.

The argument started with this one imbecile stating that he hasn't been able to run in a local park lately because he has been sick. However, that was the least of his worries since he has notice more and more lately that “the park system in Gaston County is being overrun by degenerate homosexuals. I know that I couldn't get away with saying this is most classes, but I feel like you guys would understand.” What part of that I am supposed to understand is... not understandable.

This devolves into a discussion between the other members of the class about how gay people are everywhere, lurking like some sort of 1930's propaganda piece about Jew's waiting to steal good Aryan children. I should have said something before this point, but it took me a minute to process what was happening and form a coherent sentence. Then came the gem that sent me off my rocker. “You know, not all homosexuals, but most homosexuals' idea of a good time is getting straight guys drunk and raping them. They thing the only thing that separates a gay man from a straight man is blood-alcohol content. That's why we shouldn't drop 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'.”

This is the point where I lost my mind. Here is a summery of what I said to this schlemiel: “You are telling me that you have never served with a gay person? Bullshit. Gay people are in the military, they just can't be open about it. If they are allowed to be open about it tomorrow, they still aren't going to find you, or any of you attractive. Your are all a group of bigoted assholes who can't come up with an argument against homosexuality that doesn't involved your stupid, fictitious religion. Have I ever tried to rape anyone in this class? Guess what; I am fucking gay! The lot of you are just as bad as the racists in the 1950's who argued against integrating black people in the military because of the looming spectra of the black rapist, coming to tear your white wives open from the bottom up. Spare me your bullshit.”

I am pretty sure that effectively shut down the conversation. I am not interested in sounding like a diplomat when idiots spout their opinions and expect everyone to go along with them. Would any of you handled it differently?

Physicists Have Morons Amongst Them

There was a lecture given this past Tuesday that I am sorry I missed, not that I am anywhere near where the talk was being given. It was a lecture by a physicist named Dr Don DeYoung about... creationism. What, you thought that a physicist would be giving a lecture on physics? What would give you that idea?

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, says Dr. DeYoung, who is a professor, author and current president of the Creation Research Society (CRS), a 1700-member international group that funds research and publishes a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The fact is, the designs of nature are so perfect for their purpose that they have inspired countless innovations over the years.

This phenomenon is one of the topics Dr. DeYoung will present to the Creation Science Society of Milwaukee. ...For this part of his talk, he will draw from his fascinating book 'Discovery of Design: Searching Out the Creator’s Secrets'

I found this interesting, "They say that if you’re looking for a scholar to debate a creationist, don’t bother asking the Physics Department – physicists tend to side with Creation Science."

None of the physicists I know side with creationism, not that that means anything. I am trying to figure out why anyone would listen to this quack just because he has a Ph. D in physics (which someone should get on checking that out to make sure it didn't come from Liberty University). Does the nature of physics give this guy some peep into the mind of gawd? I am a physics student and have yet to see anything that would make me believe in a god.

Besides, what does physics have to do with creationism and god anyway? If there is a god then physics are rendered useless when trying to understand the beginning of the universe. Way to work yourself out of a job.

Lack Of Basic Understanding Strikes Again!

Lack of basic scientific knowledge has struck again! Some buffoon named Parrish Myers wrote in the Gainesville Times that atheist don't believe in god, but we believe in air, gravity, and magnetism. I think this guy has been listening to too much Insane Clown Posse.

You can't see air, yet you breathe it and it sustains your life. You can't see gravity, but jump off a building and you'll find out just how real it is. Germs are too small to see with the naked eye, but get one and it will make you sick. Magnetism is an invisible force, but it attracts and repels whether we see it or not.

Personally, I have never known anyone who has denied the existence of things such as air, gravity, germs and magnetism. Yet I have known plenty of people who have denied the existence of God. The reason they deny his existence? Because they cannot see him.

OK you troglodyte, here is the difference between the list of things we can't see and god: we can actually observe the effects of gravity directly, we can observe the force of magnetism directly, we know what air is and can observe it, and we can see germs. Anyone with a third grade science education that wasn't given in a Christian school would be able to tell you that. Just so there is no misunderstanding, let me direct you to the Wikipedia entries on air, germs, magnetism, and gravity.

Do you know why you have never met anyone who denied the existence of air, etc? Because we have proof of such things existing. They actually do have a measurable effect on the physical world. What about God? Anything? Can anyone give me any kind of proof that doesn't amount to a feeling they get or some grand delusion that is all in their head? I'll be waiting, but I won't hold my breath.

Atheists are not a group of babies who have yet to develop object permanence. We understand that on a cloudy day that the sun is still there just as we understand that the air we breath is real and the force of gravity is real. I wonder if Parrish Myers would lock himself in a closet somewhere, would anyone believe he still existed? Let's give that experiment a shot.