Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Saturday, December 20, 2008


A fittingly strange and silly end to the Raytractors, a blog about a strange and silly man.

Friday, December 19, 2008

This is the End


Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Post...and RUN!!!

And here we go....

I'm going to post this and move as fast as I can so that I avoid the stampede. I give you the 1st part...

Our New Forum:


Sex, Drugs, & Rock 'n' Roll

Re: Sex, Drugs, & Rock 'n' Roll

Would you agree that Christianity has nothing intelligent to say about any of these three important topics?

Do any other atheists (or even non-fundamentalists) wish to agree with me also that in addition to the rationality, a side benefit of not being religiously committed is that you can have a more sane, balanced, empirical understanding of these three topics?

"A painting must have a painter!" 

The voice peeled out across cyberspace. It was harshened by a  New Zealand twang, but also had the optimistic lilt of an unmolested choir-boy.

I heard the words flow from the screen. He must be a Poe, I thought, but the look on his face didn't seem to say so. It was hard to tell though - that same naive face was obscured by the kind of moustache that had filtered many a cup of holy sacrament.

That mo' spoke with wisdom, like an old-timer at a bar who comments on the game and how he could have played football, if only he hadn't been illegally tripped over in the 14Ds by Charlie McPhee.

He was the only man I heard of who openly admitted to thinking a banana proved an entire religion. His books came forth like a colony of Streptococcae, numerous, mildly offensive and almost exact replicas.

He was Ray and he was not ashamed.

Draft SMRT forum rules

After a flurry of activity this morning, we've come up with a draft of the forum rules. I've seperated the suggestions into Rules and Values. The former being "Follow these or else", the latter being "Please respect these values - they encourage healthy debate".

Absolute minimum:


  • No Trolling (need to define this)

  • Embedded pics/videos should be tasteful

  • Warnings will be handed out for the breaking of Rules or the habitual violation of Values. After accruing 3 warnings, this may (at the discretion of the Moderators) subject the user to {insert something nasty here}.

The following values we could probably stick at the top of the forums, as a "Read This First" or something

  • No Preaching (need to define this)

  • Cite your sources as often as possible

  • Be civil, but creative cursing can be an asset

  • No mention of the missing "a" in SMRT

  • Be rational

  • Be open-minded / wear a thick skin

  • Have fun

  • The forums are intended to be self-policing and democratic

  • Flagging posts shouldn't be done to harass other people

Not restrictive enough? Something missing?

Let us know what you think...

I need a guinea pig

Anyone other than WEM who is online right now and wants to help me test the functionality of some things on the forum, please shoot me a quick email.


**Not being a jerk to WEM, I just need someone who had no mod privileges so they can tell me if flagging posts is possible, ect. In other words, help me test this interface.


Another massive Presupositionalist thread!!

We all know the monster of argumentation that is Christian presuppositionalism. This thread is over a thousand posts.
If you don't want to read it, the participants were kind enough to summarise their positions in verse and rhyme.

Sye TenB:

The atheist claims he can know
But when asked how this is so
His response is so dense
For he claims 'reason and sense'
Whose validity he cannot show.
Dani' El
Sye was a saint who was true
Who said to the blind "We see blue"
They presupposed no one could
Since to see was not good
As it came from a Bible worldview

Andrew Louis
There once was a man named Sye
Who was really an irrational guy
He began with proof
Was withdraw and aloof
And it turned out it all was a big lie

Type Display Name Here
Sye once had a delusion,
He wanted to spread his confusion,
He posted a lot,
but his claims were shot,
'Cos the premise contained the conclusion.
There once was a Christian named Sye
Who fought for his Guy in the Sky
But the godless were bored, 'cause
his Sword of the Lord was
a presuppositional lie.

The Real Anthem

Corey Taylor (of Slipknot and StoneSour) and the celloists of Apocalyptica

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

This post from Ray had me thinking about a saying girls in my high school used to say...

Raytractors please read

Mac has got our new place pretty much ready to go! (THANK YOU MAC!!!) We need to do something before everyone goes rushing in, though.

We gotta come up with some rules.

WEM and myself are the mods as of right now and we need your feedback on this!!!

Please give this some thought and post your suggestions here so that we can refine the suggestions into something we can work with and get this train on track.

Thanks to everyone for their input!!

EDIT: This isn't the whole enchilada, just the forum portion... - MacGyver Jr

For atheists and theists alike who want to better understand evolution

I just got my monthly copy of Scientific American in the mail. This one is a special issue about evolution that has this on the cover:

Evolution at work: How doctors, police and others use it on their job

The evolution of evolution: How Darwin's theory survives, thrives, and reshapes the world

The future of human evolution

Molecular proof of natural selection

How life invents complex traits

Creationist's Latest Tricks

Then inside all of this is broken down into different articles. When you browse the index, lets say at the grocery store or *cough* the library where you can read it for free *cough* the articles are not titled the same as the cover states, just so you know. They are still there, just read the descriptions of the articles to find what you are looking for.

Also, page 74 has an article entitled 'Four Fallacies of Evolutionary Pop Psychology' that looks interesting.

For bonus points mosey on over to SciAm.com and check out the short article entitled Why Everyone Should Learn the Theory of Evolution. Personally, I thought it was so short it was almost more like an extended blurb than an article, but check out the comments.

Here's one:

woundeddog2 at 12:32 PM on 12/15/08

Romans 1:22
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

That's it. As if someone who read the article would say to themselves 'Hey, I never believed the creation story before but I'm convinced now!' Trolls are everywhere.

But then there are the more reasonable Christians who leave comments like this:

mlyyski at 12:45 PM on 12/15/08

The creationist/evolutionist debate is maddening. When I was about 9 years old I was given a Bible, and the books "The World of Science" and "The Sea Around Us". It didn't take me long to come to the conclusion that God created, and science explains creation. I am a Christian who absolutely believes in evolution. The creationists who sat down and dreamed up their theory, though they probably thought they were defending God (another absurd idea), actually did a huge disservice to Christianity. Most disappointing are the science savvy 'intellectuals' who say creationists got it wrong, so God could not be responsible for creation, even though they haven't the slightest clue as to the origion of the universe. In fact, I have yet to see any theory as plausable as a 9 year old's assesment after nearly 50 years, just a lot of stne throwing and name calling on both sides. Mike Lyyski

After reading that last comment I have a sliver more hope for humanity that tells me maybe one day Christians will at least accept evolution more on the terms that Mr. Lyyski stated. Hey, it's not the whole kit'n caboodle but it's better than what we have now.

Back by Popular Demand- Just in time for Xmas


Normal American shopping mall

What this means, I have no idea

God hates you and don't forget it. Especially you, Santa Claus.

Eric- A Study in Absurdity

Sometimes in the course of events over at Ray's, certain individuals single themselves out as the most preposterous, absurd, lying pieces of shit, that they must be recognized as such.

This recognition goes out to "Eric." He has no profile (not a problem actually) but claims he has a science degree while not having a clue about the definition of a scientific Theory."

It has been explained to him on several occasion in a precise manner. Then, some one used a definition from Wiki, so while totally ignoring all the definitions he has been given, he says, "Wikipedia is not and should ever used as a standard, with a few keystrokes you or I can edit the information without accountability." He thinks he is slyly sidestepping the question by doing that, but of course he is only fooling himself.

Eric then uses the dictionary definition for the colloquial "Theory." It is hilarious the way he so overtly ignores facts that he does not like.

As I said, he is a liar because there is no way on earth that someone can hold a degree in science ad not know the definition of a Scientific Theory.

I'm going to post the comment he made that proves he is a study in absurdity.

"Eric" said...
Jason said,
You're misleadingly distorting the meaning of the word "theory" on purpose, which definitely invalidates your opinion.

DJ said,
Hello Eric. As you have a degree in a science-related area, then I assume that you are aware of the scientific definition of a theory, namely that one is a "well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the world"(wikipedia).

Eric says:
Wikipedia is not and should ever used as a standard, with a few keystrokes you or I can edit the information without accountability. [He thinks he's being cute by sidestepping the statement]

Funk and Wagnalls New standard Dictionary of the English Language c19261.The act or result of looking into or contemplating any object or group of objects, or any event or series of events; beholding ; viewing; speculation.2.Hence: (1)A mental plan or scheme framed to agree with the observed facts and designed as a rational explanation of them. In this sense, customarily understood to be a scheme of explanation which comes nearer to being a law verifiable by all others on the basis of observation and experiment than does a hypothesis. (2)Mere hypothesis or speculation; hence, an individual view; idea; as, the soldier's theory of duty.3.More specif., a systematic generalization, entertained in the development of some one of the positive sciences, as furnishing the most satisfactory account ofr rational explanation of a series or group of its phenomena; an elaborate and well-sustained working hypothesis designed to embrace temporarily, and to further the continued investigation of some particular science or one of its branches.theorize1.To convince by theorizing. 2.To form or express theories; speculate.
December 16, 2008 4:25 AM

I must tag on a special mention for Shawn, who ignorantly boasts:

"Why bother [studying evolution] If I know something to be a lie, why entertain it further? I would be the fool then, and not the evolutionist. Rather, I will remain in ignorance of the subject and avail my mind on the things of God, which are wholesome and pleasant to the soul. This glorious meat is food for my soul and is the light that leads to salvation. That is the only thing my mind must know.

They will do anything to create the illusion that their silly beliefs are not going up in the smoke of reason.

The cut and paste hack strikes again...


Is there no one or nothing that the holy 'tache will not exploit to make a quick buck or two...??


Ray and the Onset of Dimensio

He's starting to get to him...

From 'The Anvil of Eternal Justice' post (sounds like something the Green Lantern would wield)

Someone said...'God is real. He's not going away just because you don't like the thought of God. Suppress the truth all you want, but it doesn't change reality.'

And Dimensio - in classic fashion - replied;

"Please substantiate your assertion with evidence."

Then Ray loses it and gives Dimensio what for;

"Dimensio...your continual "Please substantiate your assertion with evidence" when it comes to the existence of God, confirms the truth of Psalm 14:1. It is scientifically impossible to have a creation without a Creator. Nothing cannot create something. That's basic science. There has to be an eternal, immaterial first cause. Let me now make a prediction. As surely as tomorrow's sunrise, your come-back will be "Please substantiate your assertion with evidence." Prove me wrong."

Poor Ray. He thinks that asking for evidence of an assertion proves that 'The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.' is true! It wasn't long ago that Ray was accusing Dimensio of suggesting that people should just believe and not ask questions too.

The rest is pure cart before horse stuff and his prediction is a desperate attempt to head Dimensio off at the pass because he knows full-well that he has no evidence to back up anything that he says. And I just love how he says; 'That's basic science.' as if he's given some indication that he's capable of understanding, well, anything!

Classic Comfort.


It's not funny any more that people are going to hell !! DON'T TOUCH ME!!!

Alternate title: 'Vera goes to a coffee shop'

If you're gonna come out to your parents, wait until after the holidays...

Just had to share this gem from Atheist Mind:

Someone needs to educate this hysterical mother on the true meaning of "Christmas". c^_^ɔ

What's in your head, zombie?

My nomination for atheist anthem. The song is about the violence in Northern Ireland, but apply it to the struggle for minds and religion.

Plus great imagery in the video

lyrics here

Monday, December 15, 2008

I thought I made myself pretty FUCKING clear...

THIS is our theme song. If you don't get it, you're a false convert.

Leap Frogging From Geoff's Post...

I like these lyrics. (NSFW)

Love Song from a Non-believer

I love these lyrics...

Atheist Anthems

Ray recently asked:

"Tell me, what do you sing when you gather for your meetings?"

SmuckersTheDog the came up with Baby Got Back by the ever-relevant Sir Mix-A-Lot
I offered Coconut by Harry Nilsson - the logic of that song speaks to me like the logic of Ray's posts.
A great many people offered Lennon's subliminal Imagine, which if you ask me is a bit of a soft option.

To be honest I'm not one for singing badly together. Trying to space the inherrantly irational preaching of some salt-and-pepper haired minister with some haphazardly vocalised hymns always seemed odd to me.  But get a few glasses of jesus-juice in me and I get down like the US financial markets.

So, say we got together and we had to sing one song what would it be? 

Our Blogs

From the list of contributers on the side bar, here are the associated blogs.
Some listed as "none" may well have blogs under different IDs or on Wordpress or such.
Some blogs links are just holding pages, but knowing you guys, and looking at the titles I sure wish you'd blog.
Some people share blogs.
Some have stated that Raytractors is their blog. I can cezrtainly attest that my blogging activity has diminished because of time spent reading and commenting on Raytractors.

Take some time to check out the blogs of listed, it's worth the effort.
If anyone's blog was left out because I missed it or whatever, bung it in the comments, or, since you've got edit rights feel free to edit this post direct.

Weemaryanne : Stranger Than Fiction
Paul Brown : God is Irrational
Geoff : Monkey Love Child
Ranting Student : The Lively Art of Ranting
theaceofclubz : none
Rando : none
lonomoholo : none
Lance Christian Johnson : Comics, Beer, and Shakespeare + Ruminations on Eagle-Man + Blog o' Dreams
get_education : none
JicamaEater : none
Craig : none
Dave : Atheist Central
Tilia : sarcopterigyan
NaFa : The Crack House
Rufus : The Rufus T. Firefly Blog
captain howdy : none
Charles : none
The MudSkipper Show : Iron Pyrite
Jeffrey Mark : Escaping Christianity + Dubya's Autobiography
Andrew Louis : Idiot Philosophy
Bob : Hell Yeah!!!!! + lostingermay
Benjamin Franklin : The Feeble Lance of Reason
Milo : The Cat Tail + Delta Daze
mjarsulic : none
DisComforting Ignorance : DisComforting Ignorance
MacGyver Jr : none
Yaeger : none
BaldySlaphead : BaldySlaphead
Froggie : The Bushy Tree
ExPatMatt : Shared Space
TripMaster Monkey : none
Quasar : Quasar Tr-Delta
The Skeptical Sorcerer : The Skeptical Sorcerer
Jill D : none
Atomic Chimp : Squeak My Weasel
Revenant : none
Former Follier : none
Maragon : Atheism is the Rational Response + Talking to Theists
Kirsti : My Little Corner of the Web
Whateverman : Whateverman's Pad
CodewordConduit : Reflections of the Damned
Clostridiophile : Banana Fort + Of Microbes and Men
Stew : A Night on the Tiles + 2000 Years of Deception
GermanMike : Christian Radio Review
Obsidian : none
Matthew Wooller : none
Kaitlyn : Happy Atheist Scientist
TEMPLE : none
Alphgeek : Pain And Suffering
henwli : I have no mouth, and I must blog + Banana Fort +
Vagon : none
Adrian Hayter : The Atheist Blogger
The Celtic Chimp : The Celtic Chimp
nonmagic : nonmagical thinking + The Bushy Tree
Irukandji : Who wants my jellyfish?
John Doyle : Master and Commander

Marlin : none
Daddy Stegosaurus : none
theShaggy : none
Jason : Christian Central -- Jason Brunet's Blog
neil h : La Serenissima + Mix Club + Dogwood Tales
Therine : Pretentious College Student
Rocky "BeamStalk" S : none
Robert Madewell : Superstition Free
KiwiInOz : none

What is it with the Bible and Incest?

So Ray's latest blathering is an attempt at ridiculing evolution by copy pasting a bit of text from the Berkeley evolution library. The bit that Ray really takes notice of, of course, is this;

"Evolution means that we're all distant cousins: humans and oak trees, hummingbirds and whales"

Fair enough. I can see why this might be hard to swallow.

But please, for the love of not-god, why does the accompanying image have man and tree hugging each other with love hearts in the air and lustful eyes entwined? Why did a quote about us being distant cousins make Ray think that we should be all loved-up on trees? This could be Ray's most confusing post yet; what the hell is he trying to say?

I'm just disappointed that the cartoon of a hummingbird giving a whale a blow job didn't make the final edit. Shame.


[Disturbing image courtesy of Richard 'Prick-Splinters' Gunther]

Hickory Dickory Dock (By request)

Hickory Dickory Dock,
So you got some errands to do
you go to the cabinet
Take out the Absolut
And swig it from the bottle

hickory dickory dock
You're making jokes about
your cock
The clock stuck 2
you drank some booze
and fell asleep (while your woman waited)
Cause you're all talk.

Hickory Dickery Dock
My bitch just bit my cock
That wasn't very nice
I'll have to punish her
by shooting it in her eyes.

Hickory Dickery Dock
This Rhyme is kinda lame
That's ok cause so are you
And you fucking read it anyway!

God is Still Busy

I thought he rested on the seventh day?


Careful what you believe

I caught part of Exodus Decoded last night on Discovery. I never would have known it was on if my husband wouldn't have told me about it.

It looked promising, as far at intellectual honesty goes. Then it went down the tubes, so to speak. If you look at the above link, at the bottom of the page you'll find the criticisms, and there are more, just Google it. Yes, I know, people can and will critique anything, but when you make a claim like the first born slept in beds while everyone else slept on roofs while explaining how the 10th plague could have been caused by carbon dioxide poisoning, and then I find out there is no archeological evidence that this is true, you tend to make me highly skeptical of your other claims. It also makes me wonder what the hell you were thinking by making a claim like that with no supporting evidence.

I felt the same way about The God Who Wasn't There and Zeitgeist. I feel the same way about anything I watch/read that is making claims about religion or science. Research it yourself, don't just take the word of the filmmaker/author that it's true or you'll end up believing a lot of false information.

I don't take the claims of the Bible at face value and believe them just because they are supposedly authoritative, why on earth would I take the claims made in a movie or tv show as such without properly researching them? If you want to disbelieve the Bible, there are plenty of perfectly good, sound reasons for doing so without twisting history and blatantly making shit up in order to convince others to do so.

Edit: Here are some of the natural explanations that could be used to explain the plagues. A lot of this is the same stuff covered in Exodus Decoded. But, remember there is a Wiki disclaimer that there might be unverified claims in there.

As an atheist, I think there probably are perfectly natural explanations for the plagues, people just didn't know what those explanations were at the time and they thought a deity caused them. I believe this because it is much more likely that natural phenomena happen for reasons that can be explained scientifically, than it is that a deity does anything.

Think about it. Remember when Katrina hit and people were running around saying it was the xian God's retribution for sin? If you have a solid understanding of hurricanes and weather patterns then you can understand what happened very well, without postulating a deity for which there is no evidence.

Science Explains Nothing.

That's it for me. I get it now.


Sunday, December 14, 2008

I feel so Patriotic right now...

The Evil Atheist Conspiracy is apparently making headway in my home country of Australia: in place of the traditional "Religous Education" classes, we get to teach Humanism!

Victorian state primary school students will soon have an alternative -- religious education lessons taught by people who do not believe in God and say there is "no evidence of any supernatural power".

The Humanist Society of Victoria has developed a curriculum, which the State Government accreditation body says it intends to approve, to deliver 30-minute lessons each week of "humanist applied ethics" to primary pupils.

Accredited volunteers will be able to teach their philosophy in the class time designated for religious instruction. As with lessons delivered by faith groups, parents will be able to request that their children do not participate.

The reactions were predictably deranged and incohesive.

~ The fundies are against it because: "What about witchcraft or Satanism? "If you accredit humanism, then those things would have an equal claim to be taught in schools."
~ The "mainstream religous" are also against it because: "humanism is not a religion and so should not be taught in religious education time." -- (Access Ministries)

But the World Conference of Religions for Peace fully supports it, and intends to approve it when it comes up for approval. So who wants to come to visit?

(Entire Post Stolen pretty much verbatim from Pharyngula.)

PS: The final paragraph contains a quote from fundie Jenny Stokes: "Religious instruction in state schools should be Christian because "basically we are a Christian nation", she said."

What the friggin frig on a frigger? No we're not! Australia's constitution is even clearer than the American one!

Chapter V
"116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth."

Respectfully, Ms Stokes: Go to Niflheim!

Genesis Park

Confirmation Bias? A challenge to your worldview? Stupidity unmatched since the dawn of time?

Welcome... to Genesis Park.

The Weird Final Act of George W. Bush

George Bush's final days have been bizarre. It's like we have no president at all.

Bush Dodges Shoe

The different personalities of Daniel. (No, I'm not using your made up spelling of your name.)

Kelley believes that Daniel (freaky spelling omitted)and Ezekiel (freaky spelling omitted once again)are the same person.

Yep, I'd say so. Lunatics abound and psychosis and trolls are pretty common.

Sorry to anyone who thought he was some sort of prophet or that some deity was getting ready to piss on San Fran.

Dear Presupposistionalists

Please contrast and explain the differences between truth and absolute truth.

Truth is defined as:

1. Conformity to fact or actuality.
2. A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
3. Sincerity; integrity.
4. Fidelity to an original or standard.
1. Reality; actuality.
2. often Truth That which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value of existence.

As such, it would seem that an adjective applied to 'truth' in regards to how true truth is would be superfluous in the extreme. If something is considered to be true, then there is no reason to add any kind of qualifier to it, nor does said qualifier change the truth of the true stated fact. If the truth of the truism being discussed was in question, then it wouldn't be labelled as 'true' to begin with.

The definition of absolute is:

1. free from imperfection; complete; perfect: absolute liberty.
2. not mixed or adulterated; pure: absolute alcohol.
3. complete; outright: an absolute lie; an absolute denial.
4. free from restriction or limitation; not limited in any way: absolute command; absolute freedom.
5. unrestrained or unlimited by a constitution, counterbalancing group, etc., in the exercise of governmental power, esp. when arbitrary or despotic: an absolute monarch.
6. viewed independently; not comparative or relative; ultimate; intrinsic
7. positive; certain: absolute in opinion; absolute evidence.

Utilizing such definitions and synonyms, one can see how unnecessary adding such adjectives to a truth claim really is.

Pure truth
Complete truth
Unlimited truth
Ultimate truth
Certain truth
Outright truth

How do these words actually effect how true something is? What it is that differentiates absolute truth from regular truth?

In example:
It is true that gravity exists.
It is absolutely true that gravity exists.

Does my adding an unnecessary adjective to that sentence effect whether or not gravity actually exists?

Does me describing truth as purple make a difference in how true something is?

Because to me, this looks like simply more inane word games that the presupposistionalist engages in in lieu of offering any tangible evidence for the existence of a deity.

Ken Ham- A Study of a Pitiful Deluded Fundamentalist

Ray Comfort is an idiot; kind of like a credulous little kid. He even enjoys being the class fool by making his vague circumlocutions and totally fabricated remarks about science. He then goes on to admit that he has no knowledge whatsoever of science. He thinks he is being "cute." I consider him generally discredited and his hate for Catholics and all other xtian sects exhibits his insecurity and his need to demonize others. I see him as a pathetic dunce, at best.

Now we have Ken Ham

From the New Yorker Magazine:

"Dystopia in Kentucky"

".......The sixty-thousand-square-foot museum mimics the language, layout, and technical effects of state-of-the-art science museums: mastodon fossils and mineral crystals, soaring dioramas of life-size animatronic dinosaurs, several movie theatres, conference rooms, cafés, even a planetarium, and an echoing soundtrack of bird calls. But, as you pay your $19.95 and walk through the entry hall, there are clues that this is all a sophisticated sham.
The simulation serves a primitive ideology known as “young-earth creationism,” which promotes the idea that the earth is just over six thousand years old and that the fossil record appeared after the Flood, around 4300 B.C......" But hey, you all knew that.

Here is the tripe that I'm bitching about today.

He has an article up, "Too Many Theories?"

If you have a few minutes, and the stomach for bullshit, have a look and let us know what ya think of this shit.

Ham is bringing in millions of dollars but he did have a quiet mutiny among his minions last year.
I can see his followers donating money to the Kentucky monument to dystopia, but he was quietly testing the waters to try to build a Creation Museum on the Island of Saipan!

Oh! that would have been a coup d' etat, to place a monument to his silly beliefs on an idyllic Pacific island. And what a better place to hang out! He claimed that tourism would bring the visitors, but when Ham's minions discovered that most of the tourists were Japanese, who wouldn't even think of going to a pit of ignorance like that, they balked and the project was dropped. It is obvious that the Hamster considers himself a God, and makes his followers treat him like one, but he went a bit too far in this case.
[Disclaimer] After writing the last paragraph I was looking for some supporting documents but it seems that they have disappeared. So, rather than delete the paragraph please consider it anecdotal until I do find some cites.

Let's rip on him a bit!

Looks like Ham is still trying to make it happen.

"A controversial organization's bid to build a museum devoted to creationism on Saipan appears for now to be on hold due to a need for funding and land for the project, according to a spokesman. In a statement, David Crandall of the group Answers in Genesis said that building a museum on creationism-the belief that the biblical account of the Earth's origins is literal truth-in the CNMI is still on the group's agenda..........
In a 2007 statement that was signed by more than 800 scientists after the opening of the Creation Museum, the National Center for Science Education said that students “who accept this material as scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the college level. These students will need remedial instruction in the nature of science, as well as in the specific areas of science misrepresented by Answers in Genesis.”

This is outright fraud.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

From Pharyngula

Yep, this is where we should get our science education from; just like we should get our medical advice from Jenny McCarthy.


For All Fired Up

Everyone else go on about your business.

All Fired Up;


Some More INTJ Stuff

We had a bit of fun with the personality test a while back and as a student of human nature I thought it was interesting to find that, I think, the majority of us were introverts to some degree. My own interest in this started fairly early in life when I realized I wasn't quite like other people and it did rather bother me.

So, coincidentally, I posted last evening about a great social outing I had because it just doesn't happen that often, and then about an hour ago, #2 daughter, who works in Human Development sent me this link. Incidentally, she is a also an INTJ.

After all those years it is still one of my greatest discoveries, to find that I, supposedly, fall into the normal range of human personalities. As you may remember me writing, it was only about five years ago that Mrs. Frog figured it out, through her sister, and sent me a link on my email, an article titled "The Care and Feeding of Your Introvert."

I'm tellin ya, after thirty years she finally understood the "why." Who knew it would take this long, or that the relationship could have survived it?

The link is meant to be humorous, and is exaggerated, but nonetheless true if you know what I mean. Some of you have been there.


For Your Information:

There is no scientific link between having an abortion and depression.


God the psycho

Pat Condell is one of my favorite atheists, next to the crew at Atheist Experience. Since it's a slow Saturday, I thought I might share this video with you. Hope you enjoy.

Non-Ray related Humor

Thanks, Cracked.com.


The Resurrection ! - Adapted For The Stage

From The Whited Sepulchre

Nicely done. A guy writes a screenplay for the ressurection based on the Gospel of Matthew. The Hollywood producer loves it but wants to know if the scriptwriter can work in some dialogue from the other Gospels.

Massive edits ensue.

Friday, December 12, 2008

I was pretty sure...

Maybe everyone else can help me here with this one. I was pretty sure that this one was a Poe, but I'm doubting it now.

The Traditional Values Coalition

Warning: This website is full of homophobic, uninformed, bigoted articles that induce douche chills.

The Frog Goes Out on the Town

I couldn't believe the fate that befell me this evening.

I was just leaving work and one of my local cronies calls me and requests my presence at a local watering hole close to my house. I rarely have a drink (even a beer) and drive these days but I went over and find that those reperbates were doing some early christmas celebrating. Not being one to throw a wet blanket on the fire, I had a couple beers, looked out, and it's snowing like hell and more.

I knew I didn't want to drive home in that condition and miraculously, Mrs Frog calls me and says that her and our friend Terry are on their way down to have dinner with me. I was so relieved because I don't have to worry about driving home.

We finished dinner and were leaning back and I look over to see a person I have been wanting to see for a good long time now and he sees me at the same instant. Ryan.

I hired this kid about 13 years ago. We spent nine years learning and working together. He left our organisation to expand his horizons.... of which I regrettably approved!

I have to say that our reunion was not unlike when my own children greet me. He actually kissed me on the cheek. I wanna tell you, I was overcome and I kissed him right back! (grabbing his head like I do my own sons!)

Mrs Frog, me and Ryan spent some good time reminiciting about the good old days!

How to make a girl wet:

Guys are ready to go like rabbits. We don't give a shit
about foreplay, but for girls it's important.

1) Put up some small Christmas lights around your room.
This is better than candles, because the fucking smoke is too much
to deal with, especially if you have a lot of them.
Don't over do it, just a few lights on a string.

2) Put on some cologne.

3) Download and play some old Jazz. Or whatever SHE likes.

4) Learn how to give a massage. Massage her for freakin 30 minutes

5) Clean your damn house. No, the smell of old pizza is not
an aphrodisiac.

6) Take a damn shower.

7) Invite her over to drink and watch a movie.

8) RElax and wait till she starts to get really wet.
Get her drunk.

Repeat as necessary

One Conservative Commentator's Take on the War on Christmas

What's up with these crazy, conservative Christian fanatics? He even threatens atheists with hellfire on his TV news broadcast.

As the Evangelical World Turns

NY Times Op-Ed

The SMRT Bible Project

Ok, folks, Baldy has set up a blog for us so that we can read and discuss the Bible and Stew has suggested this schedule. For any and all who have expressed interest, please go over to the blog and leave a comment regarding what you think of the schedule (should we wait til Jan. 1st is my first question), any guidelines you might want to suggest, thoughts you have, ect.

Thanks again for the participation of all those who are interested and to Baldy for getting this thing rolling so quickly. This looks to be a fun and interesting journey!

EDIT: I don't want to start a new thread for this so I'll just put it here. This article entitled 'Did our cosmos exist before the big bang?' might be interesting to some of you.

Ray's Latest Swan Dive Into The Sewer

Yeah, I know that it's already been mentioned in the comments to an earlier post, but I wanted to mention today's post as being especially vile. Ignore the obvious and ignorant analogy he's trying to make. Just go watch the video he's linking to. Hit pause when you get to the last few seconds when you finally see the face of the woman who's narrating. Now go back to Ray's post and reread these lines:

"I want to know how much you were paid to do this. You are obviously an uncaring, uninformed, niave [sic], narrow-minded, money-hungry liar. I can see it in your face."

That level of meanness and ignorance astounds me. I'm going to go look at some parakeet porn to wash the foul taste out of my mouth.


I was recently inspired to do two things I rarely do anymore. Join something, Raytractors, and draw. My inspiration comes from Quasar, Mudskipper and most recently, CodewordConduit. They have the spheres to put their creativity up for all to see. I admire that.

It's been many years since I've done any sketching and I've never done a comic but I picked up a pen and my daughters markers and paid homage to two brilliant fundy Christian cartoonists. Dick Gunther and Dan "After Eden" Lietha.

So, in my best Rod Serling voice,
Submitted for your approval, disapproval or disinterest.

Parents and Jesus sits on their ass and let another kid die

Maybe the parents didn't pray hard enough, or maybe Jesus was just busy or maybe, just maybe there are no gods and people need to take their kids to the doctor when they get sick and stop relying on 5,000 year old goat herding culture to live their lives.

From the article:

Carl Worthington, 28, and his wife, Raylene, 25, belong to a church that believes in faith healing, and police said that, instead of going to a doctor when their 15-month-old daughter Ava got sick, they turned to prayer.

The infant girl died March 2 from bacterial bronchial pneumonia and an infection, both of which could have been cured with common antibiotics, the medical examiner said.

I completely agree with charging these people with manslaughter. I also think that the people within their church that encouraged this behavior and/or knew what was going on but did nothing should be charged as accessories to murder.

Edit: This isn't the first kid from that church to die because prayer is an epic fail. Here's another.

Edit Edit: Here's a wiki about their church.

Last freaking edit, I swear !!! But I had to say this. I'd make a bet that the fundies will remain mostly silent on this since this shows that when it comes right down to it, their deity and prayer just simply do not work.

Of course you will always have those that say 'Oh, I stubbed my toe and Jesus made it all better!', but when it comes to doing something tangible like actually healing a disease that modern medicine can easily heal, the failure of divinity is obvious.

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Atheists reading the Bible

I was halfway through In Search of Lost Time, when I had to stop to study for classes. I needed a break anyway, I got to a point where I just had to step away from it for a few weeks. I'm going back at it, while at the same time still studying for an upcoming class and also trying to finish The Fountainhead. For added fun I thought I'd throw in rereading the Bible. Hey, why not, it's been awhile.

Last night I got through about chapter 16 of Genesis, making notes as I went along. I'm going to try to do some posts on my thoughts as I go along.

So, anyone else want to plow through it with me? I know a lot of us have read it already, I just thought I'd give everyone a chance to join in, as I always do when I start a new book. If so, I'm using the NIV. We could do weekly or biweekly discussions about what we've read and our reflections on it.

For Shannon.

She sits oblivious
To Heaven and Hell
Just watching a show
About badgers and what they eat

Arms around a little bear
Who is nothing like the real bears
Out there in the world

They would tear her to shreds
She doesn’t know that yet

She kisses the bear
Pulls a blanket around him
I step into the world
To smoke a cigarette

No poison for her
No carcinogens
No hate

Those things can wait.

I Made a Committment to WhateverMan


I said, "I have been through hell and high water since then. I am going to try to compose a Post on this, but suffice to say, It can be a gut wrenching journey."

You said, "dont rush it, seriously.Whenever it's posted, I'm interested in reading..."

I became a "Provisional Deist" somewhere between the age of seven and nine years old. Looking back, I can see that it happened through a series of progressions and insights that I had while reading through the bible. I was then, and remain somewhat, a proliferate reader.

I was a born skeptic and my Mother is pissed about this to this very day. I didn't believe in Santa Claus from the first moment that I remember cogitating on the idea; yet later I helped her perpetuate the myth to my younger sisters. Mom made me "swear" that I would not ruin the fun for them. Those two sisters, who I still love and communicate with regularly, were my first "clinical study" subjects.

I even would do things like look out the window and say that "I think I see Santa's sleigh," and they would run over and declare that they thought they saw it too!

It gets worse from there. I became an agnostic. My Dad was totally understanding on that and even threw some Bertrand Russell quotes my way (BR was a contemporary of my Father,) but my Mom was problomatic in that regard. Don't worry though because I found a way to edify her beliefs with my own and that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

This feeble attempt to describe my journey is a perfect example of "everything I write is not enough." I will attempt to flesh out my experience.

I described myself as a "provisional deist for 23 years. On 9/12/01 I became an atheist."

Wars are fought over dogma, and this attack was no different. I just made up my mind that day that Religion is an "Engine of Grief."

An Engine of Grief

Yarn World (Suck it)

So what
I like to dress in womens clothing
I try it out for you
Get hyped up by snorting caffeine
So my girlfriend rapes me daily

Does that mean I'm strange?

I want to OD on cigarettes
suck a dick oh but I didn't mean that
I have a cock fantasy for Jesus
Uberman Superfuck
Smear lipstick on the christ

A world made from yarn
woven together by tedious hands
My insides are red string
pull it out viscera rainbow
A regular Jackson Pollock
chainsaw disembowelment
Spray the walls with yarn
Patch me back together with
the sewing machine

I'm taking bong rips with satan
Jesus christ and satan are old pals
Never did noth'n wrong
We're tight with 40s and jerking off
Call some strippers
We need some entertainment
Shrooms to make us change perspective
Jesus being a bitch, sucking satan off

Does that mean I'm strange?

Google search well endowed Jesus
Damn nothing
"Why do you think women cry out "Oh God" in bed?"


A recent MSNBC article piqued my interest.

Democrats and Republicans alike are adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way, a new study shows.

And they get quite a rush from ignoring information that's contrary to their point of view.

Researchers asked staunch party members from both sides to evaluate information that threatened their preferred candidate prior to the 2004 Presidential election. The subjects' brains were monitored while they pondered.

The results were announced today.

"We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," said Drew Westen, director of clinical psychology at Emory University. "What we saw instead was a network of emotion circuits lighting up, including circuits hypothesized to be involved in regulating emotion, and circuits known to be involved in resolving conflicts."

I'm pretty sure this happens in general, rather than just in the political arena. Religion, race, socioeconomic status - even topics as innocuous as musical preference. Discussion involving strongly held opinions routinely results in parties simply not listening to each other.

I do honestly enjoy considering Ray and his more notable supporters as being intellectually defficient - and they're usually eager to provide evidence to this effect. Yet, the above study suggests something different...

So here's the question: are fundamentalists doing this? Are they communicating via emotion? Is the phenomenon in the above study the result of a willful disabling of the intellect, or is it involuntary?

Someone else be sickened, outraged and heartbroken with me...

From the St. Catherines Standard:

"Family devastated after their beloved cat tortured, left to die

Carrie Hawkes and her son, Devon, can't fathom it.

And yet Tuesday morning, when they saw the face looking back at them in the window of their Old Pine Trail townhome in north St. Catharines, they were forced to. It was their 10-year-old Maine Coon cat, Bailey. But the giant fluffball Carrie let out the night before was barely recognizable.

"Devon kept saying, 'It's not him, it's not him,' " Hawkes said.

She knew it was, though, despite the fact Bailey was soaking wet, and the tawny fur on his face and his long whiskers were missing. Devon, 15, grabbed a towel and went outside to scoop up Bailey.

That's when they started to piece together their pet's horrific ordeal.

"I thought he was freezing because he was soaking wet," Hawkes said. "Then we picked him up and I realized he was soaked in gasoline."

Bailey had been set on fire. His teeth and claws had been smashed. He had cuts on his brow. His ears were singed and what was left of them was "rock hard."

"He was gasping and gasping," Hawkes said.

Hawkes and Devon rushed Bailey to the vet, trying to reassure Bailey, their pet since he was a newborn kitten, and themselves that everything would be OK.

Bailey died en route.

"He was just so hurt. It took everything for him to get back (home)," Hawkes said.

"He took his last bit of energy to get here," Devon added.

The Lincoln County Humane Society is investigating.

Executive director Kevin Strooband said the animal was being sent to Guelph for a post-mortem to determine the extent of injuries and cause of death.

"Any animal who's caused discomfort by someone or something, if it can get away, it will. But if it can't...," Strooband said. "When you sit down and think, 'What did that cat go through,' it pulls at your heartstrings. How can it not?"

On Tuesday afternoon, the Hawkes family was trying to figure out how their companion, normally wary of other people, could have been victim to cruelty.

Hawkes had let Bailey out the night before. "He never goes far," she said.

He had his usual haunts. The wall behind their townhouse. Under Hawkes's car. In the family's enclosed backyard.

Before bed, Hawkes checked to see if he wanted in, given it was getting cold. But there was no sign of Bailey.

She woke at 1:30 a. m. to look again and saw no paw prints in the snow.

Later that morning, when she got up for work at a Welland medical clinic, there was still no indication the big cat had been by.

Hawkes called and called his name. But Bailey, who usually responded, still didn't turn up.

As she get ready for work, she heard a disturbing sound and came rushing downstairs where she found Bailey in a window well.

"I could hear this godawful scream. It was like a baby crying," Hawkes said.

Given how skittish Bailey was with other people, Devon said he can't help but think someone had to chase and trap Bailey.

On Tuesday afternoon, he could still smell gas outside in the parking lot, making him think it happened close to home.

"I have friends who are angry about this. They're saying, 'Who could do this?' " Devon said. "That cat's been through thick and thin with us. You would have to bear-hug him to hold him. He wouldn't hurt a fly. He was so gentle."

As she wiped her tears, Hawkes said they've lost a member of the family.

"To know that there's someone out there so twisted to do that to an animal. To have him go through that, I can't fathom," she said.

"That's the hardest thing, that he suffered like that."

This happened just a few towns over from where I'm currently living, and only a 20 minute drive from where I grew up.

As someone who owns a rescue animal - a cat that was abused(his poor tail was snapped right in half) and left to starve in the bitter Ottawa winter - I can't even think of what kind of mental disorder someone would have to have to hurt an animal. But I do know that animal abuse and killings have been linked to other far more severe psychosis. Infamous serial killers such as Dennis Radar, the BTK, have confessed that they started out with ritualistic animal abuse and killing in their neighbourhoods as children. I'm so sad for this animal, but I can't help but be afraid for the person(s) next victim - this type of crime is rarely an isolated incident.

Poor, Poor Bailey.

The result of WHAT????

Ray says:

In a recent political scandal, commentators spoke of a "culture of corruption" surrounding a certain high profile politician. In reference to the fact that he had violated the law, one commentator said, "The line kept moving," and that he seemed to have "lost his moral compass."

That’s the result of the theory of relativity. Mankind has a theory that there is no absolute right and absolute wrong. The strange thing about it is, he is absolutely sure that he’s right when he says that no one can be absolutely sure about anything. The political commentators also said that he thought he was invulnerable. Pride and arrogance are often the bedfellows of corruption.

LMFAO!!! For the love of nothing that is sacred please tell me he is joking.

I also see that Ray is attempting to play Sye Jr. with his 'absolute' bullshit. Verbose philosophical mental masturbation shall ensue I'm sure.

Jon Stewart nailing Mike Huckabee (not literally)

From Pharyngula;

Semantics is cold comfort when it comes to humanity

There's also a cool video of a bunch of atheists at the Creation Science Museum; funny stuff!


Molecular Immunopharmacologist Fucktard

My friends and I always meet at a local pizza place on the second Tuesday of each month. The venue is a monthly get-together run by local pastors inviting people for free pizza and honest discussions about some tough questions for Christianity. While their advertisements state that skeptics are welcome and encouraged, their responses often show us that we are more tolerated than welcome. I have written on this previously. Steve and I always manage to stump them...but we can usually predict the content based on past meetings (they repeat the topics form year to year and this is now our second year attending). We have gotten to know the two moderators, Rob and Corey and actually we quite like them despite our differences. However, the topic the other day was, "Don't Science and the Bible Conflict?". We were sure the answer was going to be NOMA friendly-as long as science doesn't tread into theological "territory" each can prosper. The problem is that this time they brought in a guest speaker to field the questions.....my questions. The guest speaker, a blond haired woman with trendy glasses and a nice suit came up to the mic after the talk-which was NOMA friendly as we expect-and started out rather reasonable. Rob told us that she had a law degree and a Ph.D. in molecular immunopharmacology. Impressive. The first question from the audience was, "Well, we know that the earth was created in 6 days, so how are we supposed to feel about evolution vs. creation?". *Eyes roll back into head* Rob said that he was fine with evolution, but felt that this might have been a way the creator set everything into motion. I was expecting this molecular immunopharmacologist to agree and tell the man that evolution is a fact and that we shouldn't read Genesis literally. Instead, she said this: "There is no evidence for evolution, and creation is much more plausible". My jaw dropped, but my interest peaked. Then she went through a rapid laundry list of the most outdated and purile creationist trope imaginable from "Nebraska man" to "Like only produces like" to "if you have a protein of 200 amino acids, the odds of it forming and functioning at 20^200" to "there are no transitional fossils" and finally, "mutations ONLY produce bad things, there are no examples of beneficial mutations".

As D'Souza says in his debates, "I feel like a mosquito in a nudist colony...where to begin?". I took on the protein calculation first. I told her that this was GIGO math (garbage in, garbage out). The assumption is that the protein must come together all at once-completely at random. This misunderstands Darwinian processes. Second, and just as important, anyone who does bioinformatic analysis of nucleic acid or amino acid sequences knows that the same protein will look different even between closely related individuals. You see, amino acids cluster together based on their chemical characteristics. Some amino acids are hydrophobic, some basic, some acidic. I told her that a protein only has to fold correctly so that it's active site is in the correct geometry. Substitutions for charged amino acids, such as glutamate (E) for aspartate (D) generally have no functional consequences. I told her that this is an area of expertise for me, because I also have a Ph.D., mine being in molecular microbiology. She then became defensive and instead of argue with me, tried to drown me out and used several ad homs. She started shreaking at me, "Name one beneficial mutation, NAME ONE, NAME ONE (at this point, I'm trying to answer her), NAME ONE, NAME ONE (still trying to answer her), NAME ONE!!! I finally said, "Could you please stop interupting me, I'm trying to answer your question. I pointed to mutations in Cis acting elements (gene regulatory regions) that can alter body plans....such as those discovered in the gene bmp-2 which lead to longer digits in mice (and suggested to have been important in both forming bat wings and optimizing length). As I left I thought, "antibiotic resistance". Goddamnit, why didn't I say that??? I chose a much harder example to explain. Next, I informed the audience that transitions do in fact exist for many lineages. I pointed to Basilosaurus-a transition from four limbed tetrapods to modern whales. One of several whale transitions known. We can see the blowhole migrating with time from the snout towards its current position, and at the same time the legs becoming modified until the hind limbs are gone, changes to the skull allowing for hearing underwater, etc. Finally, I asked the audience what sense it makes for some modern whales to have a pelvis??? The "Ph.D" lady blew this all off, telling them it wasn't true.

Finally, she claimed that because of the second law of thermodynamics, evolution can't be true because we couldn't increase order. I interupted her and said, "The earth is an open system". She mocked me saying, "Open system, closed system, who cares????" I shit you not, that is what this bimbo with a title said. I said, "Why do you think we are eating pizza right now??? Carbohydrates, protein and fat are used to increase order and thus decrease our entropy at the expense of the entropy of the environment". I went on, "You don't even understand the second law of thermodynamics!!!" She told the audience this wasn't true. Finally, she refuted Rob's whole premise that science and the Bible don't conflict by stating that evolution couldn't be true because this would mean that "death came before sin". I looked around the room wondering if anyone else even realized this. Rob just stared at her. Rob and Corey have always come across as rather liberal preachers who don't take OT events very literally, and she just came in and might as well have taken a dump on Rob's foot. Finally, she spent about 45 seconds berating "any Ph.D's in the room" that use jargon and can't make concepts in science simply enough for children to understand. She said I was making the people do "mental gymnastics" and because of this, what I was saying MUST NOT BE TRUE!!!! Can any of you stomach this brand of non sequitur???? I couldn't, so I interupted her little diatribe against me and said, "You were the one who introduced entropy without explaining it". She paused and glared at me. Then went on to say that my degree wasn't worth anything. A bunch of Christians came up afterwards and said they couldn't believe how rude and dismissive she was and thanked me for being calm and sticking to the argument. It was fun....but that bitch is still a FUCKTARD!!!!! Can't stick to the argument forever!

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Just a thought....

Just a thought. Carry on.
For absolute truth to exist there must be one premise that everybody has believed to be true since the dawn of time.

No such premise exists.

If everybody believed that no such premise existed, then there would be only one absolute truth.

The only absolute truth would be that there is no absolute truth.

Absolute Truth


A Reading Of Nietzsche -Parable of the madman

Do you think this will get posted?

My response to Ray's screed about Hitler, Dahmer and justice.

It appears that the atheists posting on this blog are far more compassionate, and more Christ-like than Ray Comfort.

In the months that I've been reading, and posting on this blog, (when they aren't arbitrarily censored) I don't recall a single instance when Ray Comfort has admitted that he was wrong, and apologized for his error. Even when he has been repeatedly and categorically shown to be wrong,


This would be a good place to start.

Or am I mistakenly interpreting your derision of Alex and asking him "Have you no desire for retribution?" as that you intrinsically do desire retribution?

We do know about your attitude to six million dead Jews. You think that it is well and proper that they are suffering eternal damnation for not having accepted Christ as their savior while they were being led into the gas chambers, and as they were breathing their last breath, and praying to the only God they knew, as the Zyclon-B wafted into their lungs.

They are your people too, Ray. Are you happy for them to be suffering in Hell? That reveals something about you.


It did get posted on A?C

To Mudskipper

At the risk of alientaing myself to some folks, I want to tell you that you are the most inspiration I have seen around here in a while.

I am not particularly fond of your dark humor, yet you can see that I support your efforts (and yes, you have that dark side that I do like to entetain, from time to time.)

Having said that, if this blog is going to perpetuate itself and have some relevent focus, we must abandon the singular critisism of Ray Comfort.

If we do not expand our horizons beyond critisim of Rayfuck, we are as mired in pseudo philosophy as he is.

By this comment I admit that I am long on questions, and short on answers, so I am really wondering on where we go from here, as a blog.

Godless paradise (starring our favorite absurdist)

(It even has a banana reference for good measure)
As I walk through the valley that the river runs through
I take a look at my life, and see that it's evolved, too
Cause I've been mutating, selected so long that
Even my similarities with amoebas are gone

But I ain't never crossed a God that didn't deserve it
Smiting, delighting in his down right perverted
Crimes against his children, he calls it love
He promised to take his homies up to heaven above.

I dream about bananas, they make me sweat
Fit so neatly in my hand, they're created I'll bet, foo
I'm the kinda guy the little atheists wanna be like
On the youtubes day and night
Setting all of the theists right.

Been spending all our lives
Living in a godless Paradise...

So here's the situation: I have been had
Used to live a life taught by mamma and dad
But when I tried to love it, it didn't love me
It turned into a card saying "Get outta hell free"

I'm a educated fool, with words on my mind
I like to break things open, get the candy inside
I'm a pissed off atheist, kick over the manger
And my homies is down, so don't arouse my anger, fool

Death ain't nothing but a heart beat gone bad
I ain't gonna kill you for some traditional fad
And I'll bet when you hurt, you do it for you
The suffering of many for the glory of few

Tell me why are we -- so blind to see
That the ones we hurt -- are you and me

My new best friend

The Last Christian Sect (A Short Story by mudskipper)

After millennia of tracking down the last Christian sect, the Atheist Army storm the last underground hideout of Rayuto, a secretive leader. After smashing down the steal doors and rampaging through the labyrinth of tunnels, they find a ritual room filled with loyal worshipers, huddled with their leader. The Atheist Army has been waiting for this sweet moment for a long time.

Several attempts to find the last Christian sect had failed. The UN had united the entire world into one governing body. The implanting of microchips under the skin had been standard for 143 years. All previous attempts to locate the phantom Christian cell had failed after they had surgically removed the devices with crude instruments. A spy sent by the world government had managed to discover their location nevertheless.

The worshipers were helpless and unarmed, so they had no choice but to surrender. The crowed parted and the lieutenant approached Rayuto.
He got up from his throne.

"Ok, its time to go to jail" the lieutenant said in a stern, raspy voice.

Rayuto opened his shirt, and the Army quickly drew their EMTs and loaded rounds.

Bare chested, his belly began to move.

"What the FUCK!? shit, [barf]" whispered the soldiers.

Slowly, a little man crawled out of Rayutos belly.

"It is me, Rayuto, the speaker of truths. I am here to bring light unto the world."

The crowed was amazed.

"Trust unto me, my children."

"For 400 years I have been transferring bodies to stay alive. Who do you think made that possible? Who gave me the power? I will lead my children to the promised land."


Makes me wanna sniff glue

Great creationist and Biblical literalist fun; and it's educational


Just a reminder

Ray Comfort is still a piece of shit.


Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Why are people afraid of knowledge?

I sure hope some of you have been to TED before.

Religion seems to be a source of comfort for most theists, but for a minority, it's a source of euphoria. These people creep me out. On some level, I'm a touch jealous that they've found a sense of purpose and a meaning for their lives. However, I'm well aware that such people are submitting to a belief system in order to achieve this. They're willing to stop searching for answers in the name of happiness.

Me? I may not feel as secure, but I think the fact that I'm still searching means I get to understand new things. My intelligence actually increases over time. This can only be a good thing for society as a whole, not to mention providing me some satisfaction.

Anyhoo, the above video is one of my favorite TED talks, and it's all about synthesizing happiness. Yep, you can make yourself happy - but not how you'd expect to.

Fundamentalists are happy because they've decided to stop thinking.

I'm happy because I understand happiness.



Chemicals are soluble
mixed with blood
so it seems
memories we shared
exchanging platitudes
through half-hearted smiles

Each second with you
was a slow-motion snuff film
flashing in black and white
I was the prisoner
under your serrated knife

Lewis Black Gets It

Am I stupid, or what?

Before you rush in with comments like "of course, why do you ask?" let me explain. Read the following from bquill73:

Hey Phat,

I wasn't talking to you in my post, I was talking to Ray. And further more, your name "PhatPhil", makes me want to gag. I keep getting visiuals and they are not pleasant.

My immediate reaction was to laugh just because it sounded so childish. After the hilarity of the moment was over, I tried to think what was it about the name "PhatPhil" could possibly make bquill73 want to gag. I mentally checked through a list of possibilities until a light bulb went off. What in God's name would give a fundamentalist unpleasant visuals? Something sexual, of course! duh! Something fat that makes you gag. So immediately I shot off a snarky response (which hasn't been posted yet). Now I am starting to have second thoughts and a little ashamed that my mind went straight for the gutter. Is there an innocent meaning to bquill73's comment? Could fat people be giving her unpleasant visuals? Why would likable, fat people make you want to gag? That doesn't sound like a very Christian response to me.

So help me out here. What does PhatPhil mean? Did I totally miss the boat? Have I made a fool out of myself at Atheist Central? Will Ray post it?

Find out on the next episode of All Ray's Children.

Defeating Presuppositional Apologetics in One Paragraph or Less

Obsidian's last post on presuppositions was a good read, but falls right into the Christian trap of presuppositional apologetics. The reason why Sye and others cling to these arguments is that it obfuscates their core point, and people end up arguing nonsense for hours giving Sye and other Christian apologetics the illusion of being on equal footing with the rationalists.


The argument starts off by saying the Christian presupposes God exists and that explains everything to them. If we replace to the word, "presupposes" with "has faith that," then you still get the same argument, but it amounts to nothing more than fideism (blind faith). Any attempt to apply this standard of blind faith to atheists will almost certainly fail since even the problem of induction doesn't solve itself through blind faith.