I am back…in tan.

My vacation to Cuba was great and I have plenty of blog posts lined up. Be prepared to have me bombard your minds with Awesomeness!

And, because my readers ROCK!

Back in Black -AC/DC



Who died and made you the king of anything?

Ok, I had to post this video on my blog for one simple reason. This is a prime example of the scientific illiterately (I had trouble spelling that word which does not bode well for me, or it’s too early and brain is still in sleep mode) that is plaguing much of the creationist movement. Not only do they pool all the sciences into one bucket and label the container “Evolution”, but they do not understand the simple concept that is time. Creationists (particularly those in the young earth category) do not comprehend the shear magnitude that is epoch of the universe existence.

Below is the video I spoke of. I hesitated to post this particular mans content because I don’t want to give him any more exposure than he deserves, which is none, but I do feel this example of ignorance is what makes these people so laughable and, to a greater extent, dangerous to the education process of the human race. People who buy into this type garbage will inevitably vote and could put undesirable people into public office. Let’s be honest here, not everyone can be a quantum physicist, but a quantum physicist can be and act like a moron outside the quantum realm. I am not saying that only creationists are idiotic (just most of them). However, this guy is not a scientist by any means nor is he intelligent enough to understand what he is talking about.

Since when is geology a sub science of Biology? He asked for an example of a mountain or rock being folded over a long period of time without breaking or being subject to water. That I must say does not exist. We do not have a sealed lab where we have a mountain under controlled conditions allowed to sit and form without outside force (erosion, pressure, life, etc.). To claim the world was as smooth as a marble before Noah’s mythical flood is preposterous. The world was not flat in the beginning. It is unreasonable to even suggest such nonsense. Mountains existed prior to life beginning on this rock. It did not take a flood to produce mountains.

It did take water, most likely in the form of glaciers, to carve and bend rock into the weird shapes that exist today. Volcanic activity (Hawaii is an example he used) also makes mountains in a short amount of time.

Let’s see what else? Gravity can suck the water out of rock down into the earth ( would like to point out that I think he thinks that the water goes down to the center of the earth). Gah? Is that the only water cycle mechanism that mountains are subject to? What about evaporation. You know that thing where water defies gravity and turns into a gas to be sucked up into our atmosphere. Evaporated water makes clouds that can be extremely entertaining for child like imagination. Neat! On a side note; Moss and lichen can eat rock and turn it into soil with the help of water but that also takes a long time.

Marble Canyon in British Columbia is a great (and short) interpretive trail which can show how water erodes mountains. (Some great pictures here: http://www.colonialvoyage.com/viaggi/canadakootenay.html) If you have not been to this place, you should go for fun. They actually show what the canyon looked like 10 years ago, hundreds of years ago to Millions of years ago as you proceed down the trail from the top.

Sara Bareilles can state my thoughts on talking with creationists more effectively than I ever could. You go gurl! Although one could exclaim the same sentiments about me and this blog, I choose the latter!



Welcome to the New Year!

Morning everyone!

I decided to leave my Christmas post until well after the holiday as to not incite rebellion to those who believe the holiday is secular. Incidentally, I did receive gifts at family gatherings and at work parties. I enjoy these parties because they tend to bring out the best in people. However, I would say this about most parties (except a recent wine tasting party which turned into a wine guzzling party with many drunken arguments of a personal nature, the kind you would not have normally), organised fun tend to bring out happiness in all who participate.

I am pleased at the direction that Winnipeg Skeptics is taking. Recent articles in several news papers have encouraged people to take a look at the group and take notice. I enjoy the activism that has occurred at a recent psychic event where a few skeptics stood outside the theatre, in the bitter cold, and handed out leaflets telling people how they too can be psychics. Brilliant!

A trip to the Winnipeg Creation Museum has garnered several responses including one request for Gem Newman (Winnipeg Skeptics founder) to debate John Feakes (proprietor of the WCM) at an event for Christian Home Schoolers. I will go to this debate if I am invited to.

Guys, I have made it quite clear about my thoughts on Evolution and Creationism. In case you missed it here is a recap. Creation equals Myth, Evolution equals Fact. Below is a brief rant on this topic because of a recent debate I watched which annoyed me (and a few others) to say the least.

Honestly, I think about the debate (which is really a “no debate”) between these two groups a lot. I try to think of arguments on both (for and against) sides about the topic of the “Origin of Species”. I can think of only one argument supporting creationists (loosely) and that is, no one knows what happened at the beginning. I am speaking about the beginning being life on earth. We can, with careful observation and calculation, see the first few seconds of our universe. We know our universe is expanding at an exponential rate from a point of origin. The beginning of life on earth, how that spark of life began from a soup of liquid elements, is something we may never understand. I would like to point out that scientists are trying to recreate the moment of “Immaculate Conception” (interesting how Word forced me to capitalise those two words) in the virgin womb called Earth, but have been unsuccessful to this day.

Creationists have fuel to continue their debate because you cannot refute their claim of a Creator without looking like a mad person. God, as an entity, cannot be proven or disproven without a body to dissect. And even if a body does surface, I would suggest that it would be similar to the body of Superman in that you cannot dissect it with any known tool (referring to the infallibility of the God they speak of). To defeat a Creationist in a debate you simply have to bombard them with the numerous contradictions in their claims (they are not theories). I have watched a lot of debates between these two groups in several different venues, all of which have the same outcome with similar ways of achieving said outcome. Evolutionists nearly win them all. If they don’t win the debate it’s because the person who is debating in the evolution corner is a complete moron.

Creationists tend to debate evolution scientist, when they should be debating Abiogenesis scientists (which are another example of the creationist ignorance about their own claims). Evolution is something that cannot be questioned. I won’t go into why it cannot be question anymore than I will explain why the sky is blue. If you don’t know the answer when you read this blog then I suggest you do your own research into the topic. Evolution of a species is a fact.

Here are some of the arguments used by young earth creationists.

  1. Perfection of the Eye, ear, nose, etc. (I look to my deaf friend and shrug)
  2. Intermediate species in the fossil record (Evolutionist:”They all are.”
  3. New species generation (god damn Crocoduck, Steve Irwin rolls in his grave)
  4. The Fossil record (and the Grand Canyon)
  5. Dating methods (Are they accurate, not to the minute but damn close)
  6. Historical document legitimacy (the bible is the word of god or the word of gold)

Currently, these are all the arguments I can think of regarding the creationist strategy to win a debate. An issue that plagues the creationist point of view is the complete lack of experts who are accredited to be experts (which means legit credentials from legit universities and acceptance of these credentials by accredited organisations) and the complete lack of legitimized peer reviewed documents (peer review does not mean your brother, aunt, clergyman read the article and liked it). There simply isn’t any documentation, other than the propaganda papers the creationists put out themselves, to support the claims made. I find it extremely insulting to my intelligence to listen to the “experts” creationists bring to the debate table. Kirk Cameron (an actor) is the poster boy for creationists. I have heard him debate on numerous occasions and I wonder why, the hell, he is there. The boy (he will be a perpetual boy from his rolls in late 80s early 90s television sitcoms) literally has no expertise in this field.

Kirk is followed closely by the “Banana man” who tends to make a fool of himself in front of the scientific community every chance he gets. The banana, he shows as proof of God’s creation, is simply a hundred year tradition of selective breeding in the banana cultivation industry. In other words the fruit was twisted and deformed by man to be more pleasing to our senses.

The point of this rant is to show my reader the complete lack of incite that a creationist debater and creationist community has. If they picked their battles more efficiently, they may be more respected at the debate table. (Just thinking about the damn Crocoduck that Kirk Cameron keeps showing makes me upset at the audacity of this group of people. Honestly, dude, learn about evolution prior to debating it, I promise you that you will stop debating it and start debating Abiogenesis scientists. They are working towards the origin of life on earth not Evolutionists.)

I have several more blogs to post that are currently waiting in limbo in the “my drafts” portion of this blog website. I am not sure what order I will be posting them but you can expect one closer to February (I will be on vacation most of January).

That being said, I am looking forward to a guest blogger to post her finding on the Church of Scientology. This particular group has been a recent topic at the Winnipeg Skeptics drink up and she felt it prudent to warn her fellow skeptics about this dangerous criminal group of fanatics. So you too can be excited to read the blog from this to be announced accomplished scientific mind. This looks like it will be an exciting year in the world of Critical Thinking!