Archive for the Darwin Category

Satan Answers Mr. Keller’s Tough Questions.

Posted in atheism, atheists, Bible, Darwin, Darwinism, evangelisim, evolution, False religion, God, heresy, homosexuality, liberals, political correctness, prayer, public schools, secular humanism, secularism, separation of church and state, Truth, worldview with tags , , , on August 25, 2011 by devilbloggger

Oh yeah.

My my my.  Sometimes one of mine outdoes himself in his blind hatred of all things God (true God, that is).  Sometimes this servant of mine has a loud voice that gets heard by many, convinces a few, and pleases one. My my my.

When I saw Bill Keller’s article  in today’s New York Times entitled, “Asking Candidates Tougher Questions About Faith,” I must admit I was worried.  I thought it might be an exposé focusing on the atheistic faith of some politicians, the anti-Christian faith of others, or the general degradation of all things moral and upright by almost every politician.

But I suppose I should have known better.  After all, this showed up in my paper of record.  And it didn’t disappoint.

Yes, Mr. Keller dumped not on “faith” in general, a necessary element of anyone’s political worldview, but only on sincere God faith of the type expressed by George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Ronald Reagan.

I’m with Mr. Keller on this one, my friends.  There is nothing worse for my kingdom than a politician who has a sincere belief in God, and nothing better for my kingdom than a politician who has a professed, but clearly non-existent faith in God.

You will notice Mr. Keller has no problem with Mr. Obama’s faith.

Neither do I.

But consider the faith of Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, or horror of horrors Rick Perry, and Mr. Keller begins asking the baited question, “Does it matter?”

Matter?

For what?  For an ordered society where people can live freely in relative peace like they used to do when God was not banished from public discourse?

Yes, I suppose it does matter.

And to press his point, Mr. Keller sent a questionairre to suspect candidates to find out where they stand on questions he believes important.  The entire questionnaire can be found on The 6th Floor blog.  Just for fun, I have given my answers to his questions below.

Enjoy. 

1. Is it fair to question presidential candidates about details of their faith?

My answer:  Yes, of course.  Everyone has faith in something or someone, and the public has a right to know what or who is the object of one’s ultimate faith.  Obviously, it is that “something” or “someone” which/who will ultimately drive a politician’s policy choices.  I just hope that atheists, and practical atheists like most Democrats in the US don’t get questioned on this point.

2. Is it fair to question candidates about controversial remarks made by their pastors, mentors, close associates or thinkers whose books they recommend?

My answer: Yes, it is fair.  But the emphasis should always remain on “pastors” and not “thinkers” like Karl Marx,  Bill Ayers and others who espouse destructive ideas that I’ve miraculously made standard thought among the political elite, as well as the faculty of most college campuses.

3. (a) Do you agree with those religious leaders who say that America is a “Christian nation” or “Judeo-Christian nation?” (b) What does that mean in  practice?

My answer:  No. America used to be a Christian nation.  Of course it is not now.  In practice a Christian nation would not kill millions of babies for convenience, celebrate homosexuality as normal, or trash Biblical sexual morality (all three are intimately related).  A Christian nation would not ban Christmas displays, censor Christmas carols in public schools, fire teachers for reading Bibles at work, object to crosses in public places (whether inadvertent or purposeful), freak out over after-school bible studies, go spastic over graduation prayers, kow tow to imprisoned terrorists on religious grounds, sue every person for every Christian utterance made in public, or … well, you get the idea.

4. If you encounter a conflict between your faith and the Constitution and laws of the United States, how would you resolve it? Has that happened, in your experience?

My answer: I encounter conflicts all the time.  The Constitution was written based on an implicit faith in the God of the Bible–an obvious conflict for my purposes.  Fortunately, I resolve it by convincing many people that the Constitution is “living” and subject to change based on prevailing morals by consensus.  Does it seem like the time is right to make abortion a Constitutional right?  Then, by God moi, I make sure someone finds that right buried in that dadgum thing somewhere. 

5. (a) Would you have any hesitation about appointing a Muslim to the federal bench? (b) What about an atheist?

My answer: Moi?  Ha ha ha ha ha.  Of course not. 

6. Are Mormons Christians, in your view? Should the fact that Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons influence how we think of them as candidates?

My answer: No.  But Mormons can be just as damaging to my kingdom.  I hate Mormons almost as much as I hate Christians.

7. What do you think of  the evangelical Christian movement known as Dominionism and the idea that Christians, and only Christians, should hold dominion over the secular institutions of the earth?

My answer:  Frankly, that idea scares the . . . well, the . . . the heck out of me.  Fortunately, it will never happen, but I can use the notion to prey upon fears, just as I’ve done with Mr. Keller.  Question: Would Mr. Keller care if “Dominionism” was the idea that atheists, and only atheists, should hold dominion over “secular” institutions of the earth.  Why not?

8. (a) What is your attitude toward the theory of evolution? (b) Do you believe it should be taught in public schools?

My answer:  I LOVE the theory of evolution.  This theory has done more to advance my kingdom than any other in the history of the world.  Of course it should be taught in public schools, but not as Darwin presented it, a tentative scientific theory, but as dogmatic fact immune from criticism.  Darwin, a true scientist, included many reasonable scientific objections to his theory of descent with modification in his book Origin of Species.  I would not want students to know these objections, all of which continue as refutations to Darwin’s theory today.  One of my greatest lies on earth is that Darwinism is ironclad science and anyone who questions it is naïve at best, and evil at worst.  (Consider: Darwin’s own book, half of which contains scientific criticism of his theory, could not be taught in public schools today!  The criticisms are just as valid today, but they are not allowed to be taught. Darwin would likely abandon his theory based on them.)

9. Do you believe it is proper for teachers to lead students in prayer in public schools?

My answer:  Are you serious?  Of course not.  Unless, of course, the prayers are to an ungodly toy deity.

There you have it, my servants. 

I wonder how my answers would stack up against the politicians Mr. Keller opposes?

I wonder how my answers would stack up against the politicians Mr. Keller endorses?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Science: atheism is a post-disposition of the mind.

Posted in atheism, creation, Darwin, Darwinism, science, theology, Truth, Uncategorized, worldview with tags , , on July 19, 2011 by devilbloggger

Quote of the Day: [I]t is an amazing thing to witness staunch atheists become cringing creationists one millisecond after they permanently leave the life of free will and enter my eternal kingdom of irredeemable theists.   —Evolution debate un-naturally selected to die in Louisiana

Brain.

What is the human brain, my friends?  Is it, as modern science would dictate,  merely a conglomeration of atoms that happened for no good reason to form in the Big Bang’s chain reaction of motion?  Like earth, wind, and fire, is the brain nothing more than the aftermath of a purposeless, chance event? 

 Darwinism holds this view, and this is precisely what all little chillens in public schools are taught.

And I like it.

But why, my servants, do humans, even after learning that they are accidents of nature, believe in God?  Why, after generations of worldwide indoctrination into Darwinian philosophy do people continue to have notions of God?

Do rocks believe in God? 

I know, my servants, I know. 

And so that you can join my efforts more effectively at making humans more like rocks, I will let you in on an enduring truth that must be extinguished.   This information is highly confidential, please treat it accordingly.  The only other place this information is found is in the Bible, so as long as you don’t spill the beans, the secret should remain.

Here it is: human beings are fundamentally different from every other creation, including me, because humans are uniquely created in God’s image.

Blechhhh!

That’s why atheists, who must work to believe that they are no different from rocks, work so hard at believing they don’t believe in God.  It’s actually impossible, and explains why atheists are such gloomy characters.

And today’s news from the atheistified Science Digest helps show why.  I’m referring to Science Digest’s article entitled, “Humans ‘Predisposed’ to Believe in Gods and the Afterlife.”

According to the article:

A three-year international research project, directed by two academics at the University of Oxford, finds that humans have natural tendencies to believe in gods and an afterlife.

Duh!

Natural tendencies?   I’ll say.  And I’ve been trying to smother those  tendencies for centuries.  Why do you have to bring it up as scientifically verified?

Fortunately, the researchers throw me a bone in reporting:

The studies (both analytical and empirical) conclude that humans are predisposed to believe in gods and an afterlife, and that both theology and atheism are reasoned responses to what is a basic impulse of the human mind.

Yes, atheism is a perfectly natural response!  And, I might add, this is why I like when an atheistic publication reports on such issues, because they should have written, “that both theism and atheism are reasoned responses . . .”

Hey, theogeeks, atheism is a theology!

While theism is the default response of the human mind, if one sufficiently succumbs to my lies, the foolish mind darkened by the wisdom of this world can suppress the default theism with feigned atheism.

Atheism is not only a reasoned response (according to my reasoning), it is a scientifically proven post-disposition of the human brain. 

Humans come into this world as fallen theists created in God’s image.  My job is to ensure that inborn sinfulness is nourished by worldly wisdom and vain philosophy so that the faint image remaining becomes almost completely obscure.

And every atheist that believes in unbelief confirms my success.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

And the beat goes on.

Creationism seems to have a life of its own

Posted in creationism, Darwin, evolution with tags , , , on January 30, 2011 by devilbloggger

And I said let there be . . .

Bad news out of the United States, my servants.  Bad news.  It seems that no matter how much I try to suppress the truth of creation, those Americans simply won’t let it go.  Not one, but two stories today, my friends, embarrassing me in front of the rest of the world, where I have effectively silenced all voices of reason.

Is it because the Americans are still free to think?

First the bad news, then the worst.  Last week’s story in ScienceDaily, entitled, “High School Biology Teachers in U.S. Reluctant to Endorse Evolution in Class, Study Finds,” says that a majority of public high school biology teachers in the U.S. are not strong classroom advocates of evolutionary biology.  And this, according to the political scientists who researched it, “despite 40 years of court cases that have ruled teaching creationism or intelligent design violates the Constitution.” 

The article continues:

“Considerable research suggests that supporters of evolution, scientific methods, and reason itself are losing battles in America’s classrooms.”

Consider that quote, my servants.  Of the three, evolution, scientific methods, and reason, which one do you think is dragging the other two down?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Now, that is not to say I’m not also behind the effort at eliminating reason and the true scientific method from America’s classroom.  Removing reason was the only way I could force (against the scientific method) Darwin’s (and my) truth claim that mindless, undirected natural processes, AKA evolution, made 10th grade accidents of nature that could question whether they were accidents of nature.  When students are free to reason based on the evidence, they always reason their way to God.  It’s been that way since the beginning.  Aristotle did it.  Little Johnny does it.  I can’t prevent the destination when the reason train freely leaves the wonder station.

So if “supporters” of evolution are going to moan and groan about the loss of reason and the scientific method, they will get no sympathy from me. 

Go find your own creation story if you don’t like mine or God’s.

Here’s the problem, my servants, if I might be very open.  You can’t have both reason and evolution.  The two are mutually exclusive if reason’s goal is truth and evolution means speciation by unguided, purposeless processes of nature (which it does in biology).  Reason based on the evidence according to the scientific method never leads to evolution because evolution is not scientifically true.  And truth doesn’t care what the Constitution deems unconstitutional.   Just like killing human babies is wrong even if the Constitution says it is a human right, creation is true in the public schools even if the Constitution prevents its teaching there.  Truth doesn’t care what a teacher says, what a curriculum demands, or what a final exam requires.

Stubborn thing; truth is not changed by what anyone thinks about it.

Even Google can’t fix a lie: try Googling “evidence for speciation” and see if you can find one example of natural selection naturally (not in a designed experiment or in a computer simulation) actually producing a new species.  Darwin used an imaginary example and his modern disciples carry on his tradition; there is no evidence, my lied-to friends.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

So researchers need to stop whining about the loss of “evolution, scientific methods, and reason itself” in American classrooms.  I removed reason specifically so that schools could require evolution to be taught dogmatically.  I recognize that the problem is not, as the noble researchers’ quote above suggest, that “evolution, scientific methods, and reason” are losing battles in American classrooms.  Rather, students are well-trained in the exercise of “which one of these does not belong in this group,” and reason must be suppressed as a prerequisite to “learning” evolution.  The problem the researchers are blind to is that evolution must be forced into the minds of little public school chillens against the weight of reason informed by the scientific method

I’ve worked hard to successfully suppress reason by insisting that evolution be referred to mindlessly as “the fact of evolution.”  And it took decades to successfully change the scientific method.  Instead of Francis Bacon’s time-tested, common sense New Organon method, in which reasoning is inductive, beginning with the facts of nature (nature appears designed) and working slowly toward testing reasonable inferences (the world is designed), for evolutionary biology I’ve supplanted the deductive method, which simply starts with the defacto proposition that the world is not designed.  Note the method of modern dogmatic evolutionist:  Own it, you stupid public school student; you are not designed!

 You see? No reason, no scientific method, no . . . evolution?

And there’s the problem.  It seems that even when reason is suppressed and the scientific method is rigged, evolution still doesn’t gain any traction. 

Maybe what the Americans need is not only a Constitution that prevents teaching what appears to be true, but which also demands that evolution be believed as true against all appearance.   That should do it, right?

Well, it couldn’t hurt with respect to the news of the second related story in the news today.  It seems that, according to a LiveScience.com story, 13% of high school biology teachers advocate creationism in class.

Yikes!

This is not 13% who wish creationism was taught, but rather 13% who “explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least one hour of class time presenting it in a positive light.”

Nowhere else in the world do I have this problem.  Except for small pockets of resistance, large swaths of modern culture bought my lie years ago, and now resign themselves to the “fact of evolution” despite the fact that this implies they are purposeless creatures with no more intrinsic dignity than a rock.

But in America?

America needs to evolve.

Evolution debate un-naturally selected to die in Louisiana

Posted in atheists, creation, Darwin, evolution with tags , , , on December 8, 2010 by devilbloggger

Do you know what the opposite of a creationist is? 

The opposite of a creationist is a materialist–that is, one who believes that matter is all that exists and all of the universe’s design is merely apparent design that has occurred through the random forces of physics and chemistry. If one believes there is any intelligence, any mind, any overarching plan to life, then that person is a creationist.  What else could he or she be? 

Do you know where you find materialists?

Only on earth.

Because everyone in Heaven and Hell is a creationist.  Including me.  What else could I be?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Yes, my servants, it is an amazing thing to witness staunch atheists become cringing creationists one millisecond after they permanently leave the life of free will and enter my eternal kingdom of irredeemable theists.

Ha ha ha ha ha.  I love it.  To see the look of surprise on their faces!  And then shock!  And then anger as they realize that they have been duped by me–deceived their entire lives to believe they were not knitted together in their mother’s womb by a creator who numbered every hair on their little pinheads.  And then the gnashing of regret as they realize they can do not one whit about it now. 

Or ever.

Ha ha ha ha ha.  My kingdom is full of creationists lost forever in an abyss created by the selfsame creator for me.

And you should hear the begging to go back to tell their families, so they need not end up in this place of torment.  Oh! it makes me want to cry! 

NOT!

You see, I know that if people do not believe in creation based on the evidence of design on earth, they will not believe even if someone rises from the dead to tell them. 

In fact, someone did rise from the dead to tell them.  See what I mean?

That’s why, my servants, I welcomed the good news today out of Louisiana, United States, telling of another public school district shutting their eyes and ears to the clear evidence of design, and mandating that all their little chillins learn only that science has proven they are the product of mindless, purposeless forces of nature that never had them in mind.  (If you don’t believe you are the product of mindless, purposeless forces, you are a creationist.  Why do you let your children be lied to? Ha ha ha ha ha.)

In a FoxNews article today entitled, “Louisiana Moves to Block Creationism Debate From Inclusion in Biology Textbook,” I find my servants on earth rejected calls by conservatives to include references to the debate over evolution and the religious-based concepts of intelligent design or creationism in state-approved biology textbooks.

Yes, my servants, the little occurrences of blind nature, products of random chemistry and physics, are not even allowed to debate the weaknesses of evolution.

I won again.

You see, my servants, I not only have convinced an entire generation of Smart People that evolution is true despite the evidence, I’ve convinced all the rest of the people that Smart People are not to be questioned and their beliefs not to be debated.  And Smart People say that “science” cannot discover truth, if truth looks like religion. 

Of course they are partly right.  If truth looks like atheism, the science of Smart People has a chance.  But if truth looks like a supernatural creator God, then science as practiced by Smart People cannot discover truth.  It is impossible.

But the good news is that everyone discovers truth nevertheless.  It’s just a matter of when.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Oh look, here comes a Smart Person now!

My favorite book

Posted in atheists, Darwin, evolution, secular humanism with tags , , , , , on October 1, 2010 by devilbloggger

Guess which book is NOT my favorite!

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Now, if I can be serious for moment.  Some of my best work shows up in the form of books on earth.  And I burst with pride when I think about a few that really set my will in high gear.  It’s really hard to choose, and soon I will put down my top ten, but for sure in the top ten, if not number one is Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species.

Surprised?  Don’t be.  You see, for ages most people had strong leanings toward belief in God, in large part because of the existence of life and its diversity.  After all, a coherent world view must be able to explain not only why we are here and where we are going, but where we came from.  The ancient Greeks, like Epicurus, did a fine job of laying a naturalistic, Godless foundation for naturalistic “creation,” but still, life defied all Godless explanations.

Then along comes Darwin, just at a time when the world was ripe for a good Godless creation story, and what does he do?  He writes a book that substantiates nothing–ha ha ha ha ha.  But he wrote something that sought to explain how all the various species on earth could have come from a first life form (which remains unexplained).  His brilliance was in semantics, coining “natural selection,” which is not unlike “accidental purpose.”   He gave no evidence for natural selection, provided no examples of natural selection doing anything interesting (except for fictional examples to serve as placeholders), and he could not explain how the contrary fossil evidence of sudden creation could fit his theory of gradual change.   He figured later evidence would fill in the gaps.

But guess what?  He (and I) succeeded brilliantly!  Now everyone thinks we have tons of evidence, many examples, and we’ve succeeded in getting academicians and politicians to force the lie that there is no such thing as contrary evidence.  And the gaps?   They are still there!   Ha ha ha ha ha.  And school children are told they share a great- great- great- great-grandpa with an ape! And (though they are not told) a worm! And sea weed!  All living species came from that same darn first organism!  Ha ha ha ha ha!  I love it.

Really, I’m beside myself with pride in my success.  Good ol’ Darwin.  What a servant.  And his followers?  Well, the purposeful followers remain my servants, especially those who say that there is no conflict between religion and evolution.  That is the biggest, best lie of all. I get giddy when I hear that one.

Of course, it depends on what religion you are talking about.  There are many religions for which evolution is not only compatible, it is a stated tenet.  Take Secular Humanism, for example, Darwinian evolution is in its creed.  And atheism?  Its believers must believe Darwinism as an article of faith. 

But if you are talking about a religion that believes like I do in a creative God who created out of nothing, well, there’s obviously no compatibility between it and mindless, purposeless processes of Darwinian evolution.  And the evidence is on my side here, folks.

%d bloggers like this: