Our New Home

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

The Forum

Monday, December 1, 2008

Guys, this science shit is c-r-a-z-y!

Wow,

I've been wondering about my lack of sex-drive recently. I've been feeling torn, as if I want to just rip myself in two and go off in separate directions to find more fertile hunting grounds.

I was at a loss to explain this strange occurrence until I stumbled across a science blog that has all the answers; you may have heard of it....



It's 'Ray Comfort's: Atheist Central' of course!

Sexs [sic] Without Sex

This post explains the funny feelings I've been having, with reference to the atheist god, Darwin. Apparently:

"Darwin theorized that mankind (both male and female) evolved alongside each other over millions of years, both reproducing after their own kind before the ability to physically have sex evolved. They did this through "asexuality" ("without sexual desire or activity or lacking any apparent sex or sex organs"). Each of them split in half ("Asexual organisms reproduce by fission (splitting in half)."
- Ray Comfort



So that explains it. Well, I'm glad we got that cleared up; I can now go back to following my ancestors by asexually reproducing as nature intended. Now, where's my chainsaw..........groovy!

Also, from the same post;

"There are no repercussions if evolution is true. However, if the Bible comes out the winner, you may find yourself losing your most precious possession"

My penis? God's going to take my penis? What the fuck is going on here??!!


Cheers,


Matt




32 comments:

  1. Close. Right genre, wrong film.

    It may seem more obvious to me than it actually is; but I watched the film in question last night so it's kind of stuck in my mind!

    I see Ray has been suitably taken to task about his recent post. Everyone seems to be wading in to tell him how dense he's being.

    The thing is, we know he's not that stupid; I wonder what his game is...?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The stupidity is so bad it burns when I pee.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Honestly, I'd say "Hedwig and the Angry Inch," but that's nothing like Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

    ReplyDelete
  4. OH you mean the Army of Darkness reference.

    I see that now. That was later.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I split my ribs when I read that post by Ray.

    These kinds of scribblings make me wonder why I keep following his antics.

    ReplyDelete
  6. www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxrkyTMfOvI

    Just in case you were wondering.

    Geoff,

    I prefer PZ's approach to framing this stupidity; I'll have to work on my delivery!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't get what Ray was trying to say. Sexual reproduction began before there were any multicellular organisms. Bacteria began sharing genetic material for reasons still being investigated by biologists. This is why the theory of evolution is still a theory; it's incomplete.

    Anyway, it's obvious that sexual reproduction has an evolutionary advantage: most likely in that it speeds up or enhances evolution at the cost of delaying reproduction.

    But I think Ray is confused or something.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Henwli said...
    "I split my ribs when I read that post by Ray.

    These kinds of scribblings make me wonder why I keep following his antics."

    Hen, I know, am I obsessed? Please set me straight if need be...K?

    Do I need to get help? Or, i suppose that I am some kind of rat fink that is paranoid about those fundies getting control of my brain.....I think I'm losing it....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Kaitlyn,
    You said...
    "I don't get what Ray was trying to say. Sexual reproduction began before there were any...

    ...But I think Ray is confused or something."

    I am in total agreement with that last sentence, Kait. Spot on.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As they say, so stupid that it doesn't even rise to the level of being wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  11. And damn theShaggy for beating me to the Army of Darkness answer.

    "Good. Bad. I'm the one with the gun."

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kaitlyn,

    What would the theory of evolution be if it were "complete"? I didn't think you could get any better than theory. Would it be the law of evolution?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Notice how Ray edits after the fact:

    Darwin theorized that mankind (both male and female) evolved in their pre-human state alongside each other over millions of years, both reproducing after their own kind before the ability to physically have sex evolved. They did this through "asexuality" ("without sexual desire or activity or lacking any apparent sex or sex organs"). Each of them split in half ("Asexual organisms reproduce by fission (splitting in half)."

    ReplyDelete
  14. This is why Ray can simultaneously be a prick and a cunt.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Geoff said...

    The stupidity is so bad it burns when I pee.

    That's not the stupidity, its the "accountability" you've been having too much of, with too many different partners.

    ReplyDelete
  16. My post on Ray's blog (in case it gets deleted):

    Thank you, Ray!

    This explains completely my utter failure at attempting to reproduce asexually... Silly Darwin thinking humans reproduced that way...

    Thank you, again!

    --
    Stan


    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  17. Milo, if we understood everything about evolution, it would just be a fact and we wouldn't study it as a likely explanation (theory) anymore.

    Just like how we don't consider the earth revolves around the sun not as a theory, but just a fact. No further study needed.

    ReplyDelete
  18. (slackjawed)

    Whuh?

    Whufuh?

    Whuhfuk?

    (shakes head, narrows eyes)

    This. Is. Not. Stupidity.

    This is deliberate lying -- not to us, not to the fish he claims to be trying to catch for his imaginary friend.

    No, it's worse than that.

    The man is out-and-out lying to the people who trust him.

    His friends. His family. His followers. His customers without whom he wouldn't have a job.

    Sonofabitch.

    Until I read this, I pitied Ray Comfort.

    Now I hate him.

    ---------------
    Don't worry, anybody. I'm too lazy to hate anyone for long.

    For the moment, though, it feels mighty good.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Kaitlyn,

    I understood theory to be more than fact; it's a unifying principle that explains all the other facts. So in and of itself it cannot be proven true. The facts either support the theory or if they don't the theory is falsified.

    I guess my objection is that by using "still a theory" it sounds like ToE is something second rate and not to be trusted, as if scientists are waiting for the day when it becomes a fact. Obviously that will never happen.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Heh. That made it, so I've tried again, this time a little less subtly describing masturbation:

    Thanks again, Ray!

    I just tried to reproduce asexually again, just in case it spontaneously began working, but I only made a mess on my bed...

    Evolution is clearly wrong this time, though, because again, I cannot reproduce by myself, no matter how thorough my experiments, nor how frequent.

    Thank you, Ray!

    --
    Stan


    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  21. K wrote:

    "Milo, if we understood everything about evolution, it would just be a fact and we wouldn't study it as a likely explanation (theory) anymore.

    Just like how we don't consider the earth revolves around the sun not as a theory, but just a fact. No further study needed."


    See what you think of this...


    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

    ReplyDelete
  22. "I guess my objection is that by using "still a theory" it sounds like ToE is something second rate and not to be trusted, as if scientists are waiting for the day when it becomes a fact. Obviously that will never happen."

    I just want to stress that Evolution is still not completely understood. It's the best working model we have for explaining speciation. And in many areas, it pretty much is fact.

    One day we'll stop calling it the theory of evolution and just refer to it as evolution, and that day is not here yet because a lot more research is needed in some very small areas of evolutionary research not fully understood yet.

    As far as I'm concerned though, evolution is a scientific theory and creationism is not even a viable hypothesis.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Thanks for the correction Geoff! I think I was half right :)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Huh, I could have swear I wrote something about how I was actually complimenting evolution because I was saying it's so close to simply being a fact but there are small pockets still not yet fully understood that keeps it, at least partially, as a theory.

    Oh, and people who think evolution is "just a theory" are ignorant and have no idea what a scientific theory is.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Oh, and people who think evolution is "just a theory" are ignorant and have no idea what a scientific theory is.

    ...which is why I always remind those people that so, too, is Gravity a Theory... and it's wrong.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ray Comfort is a dishonest, lying, scumbag Christian. He's edited his original post; it now reads "Darwin theorized that mankind (both male and female) evolved in their 'pre-human' state alongside each other over millions of years, both reproducing after their own kind before the ability to physically have sex evolved." He added "pre-human". He's been caught. The evidence is right on his blog, but he'll never admit it. Let's rename this blog "Ray Comfort is a Lying Christian Scumbag".

    ReplyDelete
  27. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  28. This is a slight tangent. However, if we have anti-evolutionists reading this blog, they should pay very close attention to the following ~14 minute clip.

    Far too often, the ToE is portrayed unfairly as "Goop --> {time} --> Us". By doing so, you gloss over the amazing science underneath it; stuff that allows us to understand how varying species and strains can be related or even unrelated.

    Science like that found in stem cell research

    Without the attempt to understand how human beings came into existence, we would never have thought possible the stuff shown in the above clip.

    EDIT: spelling

    ReplyDelete
  29. Whateverman,

    This should be a front page post.

    Also, I'm interested to see where the discussion with John goes; he seems pretty genuine.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Thanks ExPattMatt. Incidentally, I've recently been considering asking for author status. I think I'll do so right now :)

    I agree with you about John. I'm sure there will be plenty of controversy in the future, but he does seem sincere and willing to try to understand other viewpoints.

    ReplyDelete

Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.