History according to creationists #1

“No fairy story in #Bible. #Israel, same geographical location w/ same beliefs” – @joecienkoski, 19/10/2010 @ 14:07

He’s not the first to use this as proof of the the bible, and any explanation of what self-fulfilling prophecy doesn’t get you anywhere.

Well let’s start off dismissing this as pathetic with a short history. Israel was created in 1948 by the United Nations, and unless God has a seat on the U.N then it’s bollocks.

Didn’t take long to refute did it. But let’s just take a moment to work through the logic of Israel’s creation in 1948 being all down to the christian God.

The creation of Israel is directly linked to the Holocaust of the Second World War, so that’s six million deaths deaths. Without the Second World War there wouldn’t have been a Holocaust, so let’s use the lower estimate of 52 million deaths in that conflict, including 40 million civilians, to make YHWH look less of a blood thirsty bastard.

But hang on one moment, that world war wouldn’t have happened without the First World War so that throws 15 million more into the dead toll.

So God allowed 67 million people to die. And I haven’t even mentioned the millions who were injured, raped, tortured, left homeless, lost sons, daughters, fathers, mothers and in the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have slow, painful for many years to come.

This is the price worth paying just to create the modern state of Israel?

Have I missed anything out Fundies?

Science according to creationists #1

“Light years measure distance, not time. Light can be slowed down and can be sped up” – @joecienkoski, 31/10/2010 @ 15:51

Let’s look at the definition of light year shall we.

A light-year is the distance that light travels in a vacuum in one Julian year, about 6 trillion miles.

So light year is a unit of distance but, and I know this is hard to follow for creationists, there is a clue about the TIME it takes light to travel in a light YEAR. Can you spot it?

Now Joey is perfectly right, light has been slowed down and sped up in laboratories BUT that’s irrelevant since a light year is light in a “vacuum” not a laboratory.

The very basics of Evolution

@scott_hurst posted a long tweet to @starchasr. It’s brilliant, so I’m reposting it.

The first thing I need to deal with is a couple of your very fundamental misunderstandings and seeming severe ignorance of the very basics of evolution. So, I am going to have you an entire evolution in a nutshell post and let the feed into the pharyngeal (also known as laryngeal) nerve as an example of exactly the kind of thing we find in nature that is inexplicable from a creationist point of view and to be expected, if not actually inevitable, from an evolution point of view.

Evolution has no foresight. There is no plan. There is not really such an idea as “more or less” evolved. Everything on the planet is exactly as evolved as we are, as everything shares exactly as long a genetic/evolutionary history as us. Every species alive today is at the very tips of the same “tree of life” that we are, and all come from exactly the same beginning.

A few facts of natures that are relevant:

  1. The recipe (recipe is a much better analogy than blueprint) that forms our bodies is contained in the DNA of our chromosomes.
  2. Our chromosomes contain segments called genes. A gene is generally the recipe for making one protein. Besides genes, there are also regions that regulate the expression of genes, there are old broken genes that no longer work and are not transcribed. Some of those broken genes were plainly inserted by retro viruses sometime in the past, as you be discovering from the ERV paper. There also seems to a good deal of garbage that seems to be not genes, not regulatory, nor even old broken genes…. We don’t know what its purpose, if any. Looking at what we find in the various broken genes can provide many thousands of pages of compelling (and fascinating) evidence for evolution on its own. We’ll probably discuss this further as some point. DNA that isn’t useful, for whatever reason, will be referred to as non-coding.
  3. Through chemical action, radiation, and plain old errors during replication, DNA is sometimes changed. That is called a mutation. Sometimes the mutation can be rather large. For instance, entire genes or even groups of genes are occasionally replicated one or more times.
  4. Mutations are random. Yes, random.
  5. Many mutations occur in the a non-coding region. Therefore, they are without effect.
  6. The vast bulk of mutations that happen to affect a coding region are bad. They are random. Random changes mostly cause problems. Often this will cause an (complex) organism to die during development. This is the cause of many spontaneous abortions in humans, btw. If it is not that severe, it will still lead to a “less fit” organism.
  7. In evolutionary terms, “fitness” is only a measure of an organisms ability to spread copies of its own genes into the future. It does not mean any of the things that humans would normally associate with the term. An organism that was slower, weaker, and/or lived half as long would still be more “fit” in evolutionary terms if could produce more offspring (that also survived to have offspring of their own) than the stronger, faster, longer lived organism. This could be ANYTHING from a fungi to a cow. It doesn’t matter. (Changes the meaning of “survival of the fittest, eh?)
  8. In general, being swifter of foot, stronger, sharper of vision, etc often does align being able to leave more offspring…. but that is not a requirement and is not universally true. In the end, being able to leave more surviving offspring is the final arbiter of fitness.
  9. Occasionally, a mutation does make an organism more fit.
  10. There are finite resources for organisms to live on. Even the slowest breeding organism (say an elephant perhaps), if left unchecked, and every offspring survived, would completely bury the planet in surprising few years. In every single species, enormously more offspring are born than can possibly survive. In nature, every organism competes with every other for the finite resources. MOST offspring do not survive to reproduce themselves. This might be the most important single thing to understand about evolution.
  11. Any mutation that provides any advantage is more likely to survive this competition for resources. Organisms with “good” mutations preferentially survive. Soon most or all members of a species will carry this mutation as they will out compete their lesser cousins for survival and reproduction.
  12. If any species is divided geographically or otherwise into groups, each group will obviously gather different sets of mutations. They are random, it could be no other way. When enough difference accumulate between to two group, eventually they will no longer be able to interbreed, if/when they are ever reunited. These two populations are now two separate species.
  13. Let this tale play out of glacially significant periods of time and almost unlimited change can be accomplished.

Now, something that should be obvious from all of that, is that evolution is a “tinkering” kind of slow change. That is, while huge change is possible, it happens bit by bit by modifying what already exists.

This one concept gives something powerful to search for when looking at the way bodies are organized. We should expect to find man things that seem very odd if put together as a clean-slate design, but make enormous sense if they were modified bit by bit from something that that existed in an ancestor. Now, we are finally ready to look at the pharyngeal nerve.

The pharyngeal nerve is a nerve that comes directly from the brain, rather than branching from the spine. We have a few of these for various purposes, mostly to control thing on our face and head. The pharyngeal nerve is what controls the voice box in mammals and also helps in swallowing. In mammals, the path of the this nerve is rather surprising. Rather that going directly from the brain to the voice box (a pretty short trip), it goes down the neck, into the chest, loops under the aorta, and then back up the neck to the voice box. In a giraffe, this causes the nerve to be 30 feet longer than necessary. Its voice box is 15 feet up the neck from the aorta. What a puzzling “design”.

So, how does this makes sense from an evolutionary perspective? This same nerve, made by equivalent genes, and developing in a completely parallel way during embryo development in fish controls the gills. Because of the anatomy of fish and the relative location of the heart and gills, this is a very reasonable and direct route for this nerve.

Mammalian voice boxes are equivalent tissues to gills in fish. Same family of genes make it, and it develops from the same embryonic tissues as gills do in fish. Over evolutionary time, as what is now our voice boxes changed purpose and migrated… and more importantly, the heart migrated further from the head, this nerve gradually went from direct connect, to a 30 foot detour in a giraffe.

A “designer” would be foolish to come up with such a plan. But this kind strangeness is to be expected in something that was modified a tiny bit at a time over an enormous number of years.

This is just ONE especially compelling example. When you look closely at the bodies of every species, you find this kind of tinkering and jury-rigging everywhere. I can find you lists of 1000s, if not millions of examples.

Now, if the sea is FULL of competition and the land is empty of competion…. Is it any surprise that coastal fishes would eventually colonize the land?

This is FARGIN WAR on atheism day 95

Aug 20 2010, 0:02 UTC

@robineccles I certainly believe the Holy Spirit has guided my work. All my work is based on proving Christ- God

Christianity is fucked then.

Aug 20 2010, 0:06 UTC

@StyxMaker . I don’t have to worry about evolution being true. The real question is what will you do when you find out evolution is false.

After 150 years, evolution is still going strong. After nine days of repeating this mantra of yours, you’ve STILL to provide ANY evidence against it.

Aug 20 2010, 0:18 UTC

@robineccles . Jesus fulfilled over 300 Old Testament prophecies. Said he was the Messiah. Did miracles to prove He was the Messiah.

Aug 20 2010, 0:20 UTC

@mibarroso Evolution is still unproved a unprovable. Evolution is not a fact but a theory that has been outdated.

Repeating this claim doesn’t make it any more right.

Aug 20 2010, 12:16 UTC

@Simply_bled Micro evolution is true science that can be tested and studied every single day. Creationists like to call it ‘variations’


Aug 20 2010, 12:23 UTC

@Golmer you’ll see that creationism is true science and the true reality of everything we see; Nothing unscientific about creationism

Where’s the papers? Where’s the peer review? Where’s the theory? Where’s the fucking evidence?

Aug 20 2010, 12:47 UTC

@ThatAtheistGuy microevolution is scientific and see it every day; macroevolution is religion and you must accept by faith

Blah blah blah

Aug 20 2010, 12:48 UTC

Abiogenesis is spontaneous generation repackaged for consumption but equally as absurd: distinction without a difference.

I’d love to live in Joe World.

Aug 20 2010, 12:57 UTC

@_7654_ No actually I am firmly a Christian. I seek to convert someone #atheist to theism. You never go backwards from Jesus

And do atheists “witness” Christians?

Aug 20 2010, 13:10 UTC

@renarde theory of creationism (Bible’s account) much more fits the evidence of what we see every day than the theory of evolution

Name one bit of evidence that fits the Bible completely. Just one.

Aug 20 2010, 13:10 UTC

@renarde you may believe that evolution is science, but I’ve proven my book that evolution is religion. If the atheism’s creation story

Atheism isn’t creation dickhead.

Aug 20 2010, 13:12 UTC

#ChristianS, the bottom line answer is we can Fully Rely On God (FROG) even believing in a literal Adam and Eve

Yeah of course. No DNA bottleneck, you’re “theory” is fucked.

Aug 20 2010, 13:26 UTC

@MyDarlingCecily Genesis 6:15; Ark is to be 450 feet long/75 feet wide/45 feet high (could have been bigger if cubit was bigger back then)


Aug 20 2010, 14:03 UTC

@p3n7agram don’t you know that scientists go into the field with an evolutionary bias, as they were force-fed evolution in first grade?

One example would be nice.

Aug 20 2010, 14:07 UTC

@StyxMaker how exactly did the solar system form? (that keeps perfect time, 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, winter spring summer fall)

I think you’ll find humans crammed the time into the natural cycle of the universe, hence the leap year, the leap second, etc.

Aug 20 2010, 14:12 UTC

@LarryLovesJesus I believe in the Big Bang. God said it and ‘Bang’ it happened

Fuck, rewrite the science books! Joe’s cracked it.

Aug 20 2010, 14:26 UTC

@p3n7agram absolutely they are real scientists. You are the ones who out of hand discounts them because they believe in creationism

This is a reference to the ICR, AIG and Discovery Institute. The really world famous scientists who have come up with the Wedge Strategy and Irreducible Complexity, which is a solid theory. Solid in the sense of a wet paper towel. So what science journals has these “scientists” published in recently?

Aug 20 2010, 14:48 UTC

@Simply_bled I’m actually the perfect spokesman for creationism, Christianity. God created science AND the #Bible

They’re all fucked as well.

Aug 20 2010, 15:20 UTC

@ThatAtheistGuy #Bible has many different authors, but all were guided by God the Holy Spirit, therefore w/o error historically & factually

Didn’t Luke, Matthew and John either copy Mark wholesale or plagiarise it to death?

Aug 20 2010, 15:39 UTC

@StyxMaker and why are there galaxies suns out there spinning backwards

Oh boy.

Aug 20 2010, 15:51 UTC

@AnnraoiOD your macroevolution implies that something turned into a dog; INTO a wolf. This is where it turns religious


Aug 20 2010, 16:05 UTC

@StyxMaker don’t give me that crap. You can study medicine perfectly fine without believing in evolution. Luke was a doctor

And a crap writer. Allegedly.

Aug 20 2010, 16:06 UTC

@CapnAlex it is foolish to think you must believe in evolution to study biology, chemistry, zoology, cosmology, physiology

Aug 20 2010, 16:16 UTC

@Golmer you can study chemistry, anatomy and physiology , without even bringing evolution into it. they are true fields of science.

Aug 20 2010, 16:18 UTC

@CapnAlex you can study biology all day long without the word ‘evolution’ ever coming to mind. Many things we can study about life

When was the last time you picked up a book dealing with biology. Or anything to do with science?

Aug 20 2010, 16:19 UTC

@jeanybeany80 Jesus did know I’d be speaking on His behalf and warned me that I will be persecuted for His sake. (Matt 5)

And I’d bet he hasn’t been more pissed off since being nailed to a cross. Allegedly.

Aug 20 2010, 16:21 UTC

@Golmer I believe in evolution until I was 30 years old. It was actually for scientific reasons I abandoned evolution

And what were those earth shattering “scientific reasons”? It turned out to be a Ken Ham DVD hahahaha

Aug 20 2010, 16:22 UTC

@Golmer evolution is a made-up theory to give ‘scientific justification’ to reject God. You somehow think it’s science, but it’s not

People rejected god before evolution.

Aug 20 2010, 16:24 UTC

@Golmer evolution and biology really have nothing to do with each other. Biology is science of life; existing life; and in observable past

I think you’ll find it is.

Aug 20 2010, 18:16 UTC

@persephone419 I don’t know how anybody cannot like Sarah Palin. She’s bright,intelligent has common sense fearsGod; loves her country

Aug 20 2010, 18:22 UTC

@persephone419 there is some reason the left fears Sarah Palin. Most ordinary down to earth people love Sarah


Aug 20 2010, 18:24 UTC

@persephone419 Fox audience is the most diverse audience.

If you like your audience to be right wing fundementalist christians, then yes, it’s really diverse.

Aug 20 2010, 18:28 UTC

This war on #atheism on the battlefield of ideas, I am refuting the belief system of atheism by show the impossibility of the implications

This is FARGIN WAR on atheism day 94

Aug 19 2010, 23:57 UTC

@AnnraoiOD The world is better because Saddam Hussein is out of power. The world should thank George W. Bush for his steadfastness

I’m sure all tens of thousands of dead Iraqi’s are eterally grateful. At least you got your oil supply secured from those nasty muslims eh.

Aug 19 2010, 23:56 UTC

@shauny Our founding fathers started off with a two-hour prayer. The original statehouse was at church on Sunday

Doesn’t matter, what does the US constitution state?

Aug 19 2010, 23:54 UTC

how do you explain all 27 NT 1st century books/9 authors mentioning 500 eyewitnesses isn’t MUCH proof of the resurrection

Hearsay. Written a 100 years after the fact.

Aug 19 2010, 23:46 UTC

@GagaShady I make a good case for Hitler’s atheism. It’s also a good case that Hitler “professed God with his mouth but not in his heart”

You make no case whatsoever.

Aug 19 2010, 23:39 UTC

@mardillo with all due respect to the kind peaceful Muslim community, there are many extremist Muslims who want to bomb & destroy societies

There are extemist Christians as well. See army of God.

Aug 19 2010, 23:38 UTC

@robineccles Hitler may have been someone who professed the name of God, but his heart was far from Him. Certainly a practical atheist

Evidence for that?

Aug 19 2010, 16:48 UTC

@Golmer I have been studying the news for many years. 99 times out of 100 Israel is only retaliating. 1% b/c they see terrorists plotting


Aug 19 2010, 16:17 UTC

@MyDarlingCecily I am not saying anything different than the basic definitions of each word. Kind is very scientific and specific


Aug 19 2010, 16:14 UTC

@persephone419 have I ever read a biology book? how about 12 years of science class? Biology is simply the study & science of life right?

So you have the background to challenge biology, and your words show you weren’t pay attention in those 12 years.

Aug 19 2010, 15:09 UTC

@CapnAlex I’ve never seen #atheist define science? Science is observed study identify describe investigate phenomena & theoretical explanat

Science is defined already. Atheism or creationism doesn’t get to define it to suit their needs. Google is your friend.

Aug 19 2010, 14:59 UTC

@ThatAtheistGuy I think #RichardDawkins knows he put his foot in his mouth by giving real deepest thoughts. He’s amazed at cell replicating

No he didn’t. He was ask a theoretical question about intelligent design and he said aliens. Theorectical.

Aug 19 2010, 14:52 UTC

@Drei88 If we got taller, over time, explain how Neanderthal man is bigger than today’s man? explain finding the camel twice the size

Oh boy.

Aug 19 2010, 13:09 UTC

@robineccles “cosmic Jewish zombie”??? How about 27 independent, 1st century documents w/ multiple attestations, and corroborating accounts

You’ve got no contemporary evidence of miracles, resurrection or anything.

Aug 19 2010, 12:53 UTC

@TeenageAtheist sorry, they go hand in hand. Evolution/atheism Why? If we evolved, you must go back to something from nothing

Nope. Evolution doesn’t need atheism and atheism doesn’t need evolution.