Evidence for Me at My finest, Dawkins

October 31, 2009

My beloved sheep, I’ve been rather busy of late and have neglected to astound you all with my infinite wisdom on this blog.

So why break My silence now? Well, as you know, I work in mysterious ways and My blogging is no different. But there is a disturbance in My awesome force, and that disturbance is caused by that pesky Richard Dawkins’ latest written blasphemy – “The Greatest Show On Earth – The Evidence For Evolution”.

The Evidence of Me

He opens his new attack on Me by highlighting the following:

“In 2008, a Gallup poll showed that 44% of Americans believed I created you in your present form within the last 10,000 years. In a Pew Forum poll that same year, 42% believed that all life existed on earth has existed in its present form since the beginning of time”

Now, I didn’t need a poll to tell Me what I already know (I already know everything), but what it does show you is that there are over 50% of you miserable little brats that are slipping down the path to eternal damnation. That’s far too high a number. I want 100% of you to love me and everything I do, at all times. No exceptions. And what’s with the “10,000 years”? Is it so difficult for you to grasp that My Brilliance took just 7 days to achieve?? Wow.

The heathen Dawkins, once again, has the audacity to claim that not only did I not create you in 7 days (or even 10,000 years!) and – wait for it – has “evidence” to prove it (presuming “evidence” would change your faithful mind – be warned!!). And, worse, that you evolved from bacteria – “shit” in other words. This is Dawkins’ way of telling you that you lot are just overgrown and overdeveloped dumb shits! That’s a weak alternative to my eternal offering: I don’t just remind you of your worthlessness, I actually make you feel that way – every day!

What Dawkins fails to realize of course is that I also created all the “evidence” that he points to, and I mean everything:

– the ability of dog breeding and artificial selection
– the radioactive decay that allows carbon dating and radioactive clocks
– the fact that the processes of genetic mutations and evolution are taking place “before your very eyes”
– the exhaustive fossil record
– the gastrulation and neuruation processes during embryonic development
– the geographic distribution (allopatric) speciation
– plate tectonics
– the shared skeletal structures and the shared DNA across species
– the molecular clock
– and all My rather fine examples of “unintelligent design”

I did it all! That’s all Me at My finest, Dawkins.

Now the obvious question you might ask at this stage is the following: if I created all this “evidence” to disprove My Majestic Hand in your creation, then why did I do it? And as usual, I knew you were going to ask that question because I know everything.

I won’t go into each and every example of the “evidence” Dawkins lays out (although I have infinite time and capacity, I don’t have infinite patience – I designed Myself that way). However, I will comprehensively strike down upon three of these examples with great vengeance and furious anger:

chinese_crested

1. Ability of dog breeding and artificial selection – easy. The isn’t an “ability”, it is a gift, from Me to you. I have allowed you to express your vanity by giving you the gift of dog breeding. And what do you do with this gift? You spend time and energy creating outrageous monstrosities such as Miniature Poodles and Chinese Crested. I give you an inch, and you a take a mile. You vain, vain creatures. Not like Me, who is Perfect and Completely Breathtaking.Added them all by My Perfect Hand

2. The exhaustive fossil record – even easier. I purposely placed each and everyone of those fossils there Myself to test your faith. And you failed Me, again. <sigh>

3. Examples of “unintelligent design” – OK, so this one is probably the easiest to explain away. Let’s start with the premise that this “evidence” disproves Me by attempting the following line of un-faithful thinking (also known as “I.D – Incompetent Design” and the “Argument from poor design“):

  1. An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator God (Yours Truly) would create organisms that have optimal design.
  2. Organisms have features that are suboptimal.
  3. Therefore, God (again, that Awesomeness that is Moi) either did not create these organisms or is not omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.

Not My idea

The blind spot in the human eye is such an example of U.D:  I created this ingenious imperfection to ensure that the day-to-day miracles I need to attend to can’t actually be observed by mortals at the time I’m doing them. It is entirely unacceptable that you lowly creatures would be able see My Glorious Hand popping into a room out of thin air, for example, and move your full and hot coffee cup by a couple of inches so that you knock it over and ruin the carpet as you reach for a sip. Mormons – I’m looking at you here.

Going back to the premise based on un-faithful thinking, here is the True and correct interpretation of what you observe to be “imperfections”. I have named this the “Argument from My Attention to Detail To Your Test of Faith”:

  1. An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator, Me, would create organisms that have optimal design.
  2. Organisms have features that are apparently suboptimal, and these apparent imperfections are there for very good reasons but are not the reasons that evolutionists and heathens such Dawkins provide because the actual reasons for these are too numerous, and God (I) does not have the patience nor the motivation to explain these to you because these “imperfections” are there to test your faith in Me.
  3. Therefore, I (known as God to you) DID both create these organisms and Am omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. And 100% Awesome.

There you have it. I created everything – especially all of you lot – in your present form and in 7 days, including all the so-called “evidence” to the contrary.

All ultimately, perfectly, deliberately and extremely intelligently designed by Me to test your fragile faith in Me. So far, you are failing. So stop all your irritating questioning and get praying, or else.


Dawkins’ argument against the existence of Me

February 8, 2008

Yes, I’ve been busy, so busy in fact that I’ve not had time to “god blog” (and for those of you thinking “hey, I thought You had infinite capacity!”, my answer to you is “I do infinite capacity, I’m just making up an excuse – I do that sometimes”).

Now, on to the latest doomed attempt by the non-believers to logic Me out of existence. Barney87 posted the argument popularized by that pesky Richard “Prove it to me” Dawkins:

1) Complex entities can come into existence in three ways: either by design, evolution or chance.

2) God is a complex entity.

3) God cannot have been designed.

4) God cannot have evolved.

5) Therefore, God must have come into existence by chance.

6) The probability of a being spontaneously coming into existence with the remarkable properties of God (omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence) is extremely slight.

7) Therefore, God’s existence is extremely improbable.

Improbable, Mr R Dawkins, but not impossible. That’s no winning argument – in fact it’s a blatant admission that I might exist. And I blog too, but just because it is seems highly improbable that I blog, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, yet here you are reading this post, written effortlessly (and without spellchecker turned on) by the Creator Myself.

So since Mr Dawkins is practically admitting I exist (I accept his apology), let’s state here a more graceful and infallible argument that proves My wonderful existence, quoted from the blaspheming John Allen Paulos’ new book “Irreligion“:

  1. Something – the diversity of lifeforms, the beauty of the outdoors, the stars, the fine structure constants – is much to complex (or too perfect) to have come about randomly or by sheer accident.
  2. This something must have been the handiwork of some creator (yours truly).
  3. Therefore God (er, Me), exists.

It doesn’t get much simpler or obviously correct than this. Matter settled…next!


Don’t Explore Evolution

July 25, 2007

Tut, Tut, Tut. The Discovery Institute is doing a very poor job at hiding its efforts to bring Me back into the classroon, this time by failing to hide its association with a website promoting a new book “Exploring Evolution”.

It was this post that smelled something fishy about the site and book, guessing that the site may have something to with those who claim that there is no intelligent designer behind My intelligent design:

“The text Explore Evolution is connected in some way with the Discovery Institute, a supporter of the move to introduce intelligent design to school children everywhere. Unbelievable!”

Yes, Believe!!!

So using My miraculous powers of knowing absolutely everything I did the following WhoIs search and found this:

Registrant:
   Discovery Institute

   Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
   Domain Name: EXPLOREEVOLUTION.COM

   Domain servers in listed order:
      NS1.DWSERVER.COM
      NS2.DWSERVER.COM

   For complete domain details go to:
   http://who.godaddy.com/whoischeck.aspx?Domain=EXPLOREEVOLUTION.COM
Verio Inc. - Growing Your Business, One Click At A Time

Registered with GoDaddy.com, eh? OK, let’s see what’s there:

Registrant:
Discovery Institute
1402 3rd Ave
Suite 400
Seattle, Washington 98101
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: EXPLOREEVOLUTION.COM
Created on: 28-Jun-05
Expires on: 28-Jun-08
Last Updated on:

Administrative Contact:
Scholz, Matthew webmaster@discovery.org
Discovery Institute
1402 3rd Ave
, Yukon Territory 400
Zimbabwe
US Fax — 206-292-0401 x114

Technical Contact:
Scholz, Matthew matts@discovery.org
Discovery Institute
1511 3rd Ave
, Yukon Territory 808
Zimbabwe
US Fax — 206-292-0401

Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.DWSERVER.COM
NS2.DWSERVER.COM

Registry Status: clientRenewProhibited
Registry Status: clientTransferProhibited
Registry Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Registry Status: clientDeleteProhibited

So why would My beloved creationists push for a book to be published in schools that argue for evolution? Well, it is because creationism has been banned from being taught in schools (damn the Supreme Court!), so by arguing for the case of creationism in scientific terms and arguing against the theory of evolution using non-scientific terms then the creationists have chance of getting around the ban (might as well try…).

Don’t believe Me? Well, Phillip Johnson, one of the founders of the Intelligent Design movement explained it in his own words on American Family Radio, January 10, 2003:

“Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.”

Philip Johnson, American Family Radio, January 10, 2003

Please Phillip, don’t just give the damn plan away. People are listening!!!

Or William Dembski:

“Intelligent design readily embraces the sacramental nature of physical reality. Indeed, intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John’s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory.”

William Dembski, (Touchstone Magazine, July/August 1999)

Dembski…disclosing this isn’t going to help our Cause!!!

And Nancy Pearsy, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute:

“If the broader impact of Darwinism was to remove Christianity from the sphere of objective truth, then the broader significance of the Intelligent Design movement will be to bring it back. By providing evidence of God’s work in nature, it restores Christianity to the status of a genuine knowledge claim, giving us the means to reclaim a place at the table of public debate. Christians will then be in a position to challenge the fact/value dichotomy that has marginalized religion and morality by reducing them to irrational, subjective experience.”

Nancy Pearcy, (Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, 2004)

Oh Dear Me.

In this PBS interview from August 2005 (transcript at PBS.org), Jeffrey Brown asked Michael Behe, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture:

“JEFFREY BROWN: Okay. Professor Behe, is this a way to bring God into the classroom and, I guess the direct question is: Is the designer, the intelligent designer, is that god?

MICHAEL BEHE: Well, first of all, to answer your first question, no, this is not an attempt to bring God into the classroom.”

Not an attempt to bring God into the classroom, eh Behe? Well, that’s not what the book’s website says, which mentions the target audience as AP Biology teachers, High School General Biology teachers, Biology teachers, College-level biology instructors, College biology professors, Home school teachers, Parents, and oh yeah, “Interested adults”.

And now the Heathens know the Discovery Institute is behind the “Explore Evolution” book, we’ll just have to get on with another plan! What a bunch of baboons.


Questionable Fundamentalism

July 25, 2007

I hear all your thoughts. Occasionally I come across one that makes me realize that you are all doing a little too much thinking and not enough praying. Here’s a post from a Babtist / Fundamentalist who is on a very slippery slope to “enlightenment”:

“All my life I have never been able to accept evolution as possible. Science is squarely against it, as is the Bible.”

Good start. Of course science is squarely against evolution! Look, I created the Universe, I then created the Earth and then I created all of you lot, including the scientists (I was feeling creative at the time, sorry). I created scientists, so of course scientists have to agree that evolution is just the fantastical invention of man – follow?

“However during the last few years I have not been too sure about the age of the universe. I have done much study in this area from sources like the Institute for Creation Research, Answers in Genesis, Kent Hovind Ministries, and Reasons to Believe.”

OH YE of little faith!! Of course you are going to start having doubts if you read that kind of heretical filth claiming to be “science”! There’s only one Book that tells you all you need to know about the age of My Creation and how I did it, and it ain’t that kind of blasphemous claptrap!

But, you go on to make even more sense than you have done so far:

“I will not go into all the details here but what has been revealed to me is that it is impossible for Scripture and science to directly contradict each other.”

Exactly! Oh, sorry, I’m interrupting your splendid line of thought…

“If science absolutely proves that the age of the universe is 14.5 billion years old, and Scripture says that it is only about 10,000 years old—tops; then one or the other is wrong. We know that provable science cannot be wrong (it may be incomplete), and we know that Scripture cannot be wrong. Therefore what is wrong is the interpretation of one or the other (or both).”

You see, the problem is that you are misinterpreting the misinterpretations…you even shed some light on this yourself:

“The age of the universe is unquestionably just what it looks like, 14.5 billion years old. (This does not necessarily mean that evolution took place). Therefore it must be the way that Scripture is translated or interpreted that is incorrect. The six days of creation must be long ages of time.”

You poor, misguided soul. Listen to me – I created the everything – top to bottom – in six days and that’s that. The whole 14.5 billion years old thing is just the evil work of some oddball scientists who are trying to look clever to you by observing “facts” and then making up “theories” that support those “facts” and then look for “facts” that can test those “theories” – just look at evolution as an example of the kind of circular rubbish these so called “scientists” come up with (I really shouldn’t have experimented with those types…scientists are nothing but troublemakers). And you conclude:

“Perhaps I will go into more detail on this in a separate chapter later, but it would just confuse the issue if I went into much more detail here.”

No, please don’t go into more detail – you’ve enlightened us all quite enough with your penetrating and illuminating insights.

Look, you’ve proven without question that evolution must be a load of fantasy gone wild, however, you are just creating doubts in your own mind about the age of My Mystery, and you know where Doubt will lead you, sheep.

Just take My advice – stop reading hard science, stop learning about things so you understand their reason and for My Sake’s stop thinking for yourself! Simply stick your head in the Proverbial sand (with the exception of My several One Book(s) of Truth – take your pick) – for this is the only real way to learn the Truth.


How to Confuse an Evolutionist

July 23, 2007

Creating the world is six days was no mean feat. I admit it – I’m rather proud of that particular miracle. But these evolutionists seem to think they have a better explanation and that <snigger> it took longer than a mere six days to cook it all up.

If you hear anyone belittle my marvel with this anti-creationist filth, try this one out on the Heathen, courtesy of Research and presentation Blog for Christian Freedom Ministries of Florida:

“The evolutionist has a big problem trying to explain belief in a God who created the earth and all life upon it in six days.”

Ha! That’ll stop any secular progressive dead in their tracks. Just watch the evolutionist’s entire belief system fall apart with this logic demolishing statement.