Showing posts with label JL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label JL. Show all posts

Wednesday, 13 May 2009

Look what I got for my birthday!

It's an action Jesus figure!

OK, I'll admit that my eldest son thought he would look cooler with a 'Power glove' and an 'Axe of Unnatural Death'. But, hey! I could start a NEW sect of christianity here! Someone is surely going to believe in it.

This was a present from JL for my birthday, quite possibly because she has a faithful representation of the FSM (bless his noodly appendages) hovering over her desk at school.

Any ideas or adventures for Jesus, please feel free to add to the comments. :-)

Friday, 8 May 2009

Petrified trees prove the bible is right. *sigh*

When someone challenges me, I usually have to respond. (It's a weakness.)

Alrighty then. Petrified trees. Apparently there are VERTICAL trees that go through the layers of strata. Therefore the fossil record is rubbish.

With no further research, (and let's face it that COMPLETELY proves the bible) it would appear a problem to geologists.

However... what is not mentioned is the fact there are many more horizontal trees in the same area. Roots are non-existent and bark is missing from one side - this really shows that it was not covered by layers of ash while it was growing. The strata is actually flat - inconsistent with slopes that would have been covered with such trees. Mt Etna eruption provided an excellent example of how trees blasted out of the ground by volcanic eruptions can cause upright conditions.

There is more information in detail
http://amazingdiscoveries.org/AD-ChanceOrDesign-FossilRecord-PetrifiedTrees.html

I have a lot to thank JL for. I'm learning so much! :-)

Challenging science

The nice christian, JL, in her quest to convert my (rather pleasant) heathen ways went on the attack about carbon dating and it's 'wildly inaccurate' results.
Being on the back foot, I had some misconceptions about carbon dating but, in my defence, they were craftily worded fundie traps which I fell into. (eg. saying that carbon dating cannot measure age of fossils, so what proof is there?)

However, EVEN IF carbon dating methods were wrong, just because 'the bible says so' is not magically the only viable alternative. *sigh*

Tree rings are accurate to 9000 years. Pay attention - this is something most kids learn in primary school! You won't find a 50 year old tree with thousands of rings. NEWSFLASH - Trees predate the Abrahamic god! "But the bible says the sky pixie made trees! Whhhaaaahhh!!!!"

Redshift - How light frequency is affected by the fantastical speeds of astronomical phenomena moving away from us (creating light towards the infra red spectrum)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8022917.stm

Carbon dating is a very good way of estimating. The biggest inaccuracies have occured when objects of 20000 years old have had an error of 3500 years. An error margin of up to 17%.
Even accounting for this extreme measure - hmmm - basic maths here - more than 6000 years!

The trap I fell into (because I simply don't know everything) was that you cannot use carbon dating for fossils. (Or diamonds, which are REALLY old! I just assumed that being made of carbon... doh!).
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html


The above link explains more concisely the methods used and refutes the claims of creationist (and I use the word sarcastically) 'scientists'.

JL's mission was to get me to doubt scientific reasoning and to not take scientific opinion as the truth. And yes, we SHOULD not just believe everything we hear. We must make informed decisions based on evidence. We must be willing to accept that with our limited knowledge and senses (we can only see a razor thin slice of the EM spectrum for example) that we will make mistakes and improve upon our knowledge.

And that is what I love about science. For every opinion, theory and proposal in the public domain, it must be tested, scrutinised and every possible attempt is made to prove it wrong or come up with a better explanation with the evidence and reasoning to back it up. It is inspiring, it is challenging, it is dangerous, it gives us the tools to make sense of this amazing existence... it is truly humbling to realise that there is so much in existence that we will never know.

What I find demeaning, insulting, patronising, illogical and offensive to human intellect is that theists label 'don't know' with 'god'.

Science has been answering many 'don't knows' for centuries. People no longer need to fear myths and superstitions; worry about angering vengeful gods; conduct strange rituals; wear lucky charms etc. Thanks to science, we have grown up and matured as a species.

Science is not the enemy of religion but religion has suffered because of it. Ahhh, life was so much SIMPLER 6000 years ago.

Conclusion: Just because science freely admits the limits of our understanding and is constantly trying to improve its knowledge doesn't make the bible true! (Bl**dy obvious I know, but SOME PEOPLE... tsk)

Thursday, 7 May 2009

Conversations with a (nice) christian.

This is a response to my 'Alpha Course' post. (If it has scrolled off the bottom of the page then 'clicky!' )
'JL' is one of those nice christians who (in my experience) make up the majority of christians that are willing to talk to me. Currently we are in the middle of a friendly 'holy war' at our school, where she is trying to get me to appreciate Jesus and I am bestowing the gift of Pastafarian knowledge. I have shown her undeniable evidence of FSM's power by making her jump and pointing out how the kind FSM brings her safely back to Earth with his noodly appendages. (He loves us all and keeps us safe - FACT!)

Randomfish, I believe I might even have been the long-haired born-again that suggested an Alpha course to you.


Yep, The most recent one.

It's not like you have anything to lose, anyway :-p

Well, my scientific reasoning for one...

re: 'based on a relationship, not knowledge'
It always makes me smile that people get so OUTRAGED that the Bible is younger than Jesus, or at least most of it. That it's been *gasp* ADDED TO(!!!111) over the years. Of course it has. Ours is a living God. He didn't just speak once 6000 years ago (you heard right, DB!) and that was it. If you develop a relationship with your living God, he will speak to you. And he will tell you do not have a religion based on laws, you have a new life based on His loving gospel.

We agree here. Religion (especially christianity) has evolved. It has HAD to! Let's face it, if we had the same thinking as we did 1000 years ago, you would look pretty stupid now.
We don't get ill because god is punishing us. We get better because we 1) take medicine or 2) naturally get better over time.
Gods don't live in the sky. We are not the centre of the universe. Evolution is happening. The Earth is over 6000 years old. Morality is not owned by any religion...
Damn those astronomers, doctors, biologists, historians, geologists, philosophers...! They have had to make those crrraaaazzzyyy christians do some drastic rejigging of what to believe! LOL.

'Faith is more important than logic'

Logic is more important than blind faith. Blind faith is an insult to intelligence and reason. Blind faith can be harmful. For example, feel my pain when Arsenal lose! (Thankfully rarely!)

Don't pretend that you have faith in nothing, that faith in itself is ridiculous. You have faith in love, if nothing else, surely.

I DO have faith in humanity; kindness of strangers; love and hope. They are essential for understanding our humanity. I just don't attribute an imaginary friend to fill the gaps in knowledge.

Logic tells me that you can't get evolution from one species to another, only within species. Science tells me that even after thousands and thousands of generations of fly mutations, a fly is still a fly. So how did every living species in the world evolve from a fish? Including, presumably: turnips, scabies mite, chinchillas, sharks etc etc? Are you not putting your faith in a straaaange theory of evolution, hmmmmmm? ;)


Fellow humanists/ atheists, JL is a really nice person and please do not judge someone on their lack of understanding of evolution.

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/different-patterns-of-evolution.html
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/sat-ii-biology-understanding-origins-of-life.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

'Because of who god is, we will always have questions'
Of course. And let's face it, when Jesus came and proclaimed himself the Son of God, not many people believed him, and what more proof could God really give us? Perhaps you would like a book full of graphs and diagrams, haha.

I proclaim to be the leader of Alpha Centauri. Can you see the problem with that? Jesus was not the first prophet to claim to lead the Jews. He happened to be the most famous. Stories told, generations later, wrote the gospels with a bias to make him more holy. Events were taken from a wide variety of religions (resurrection, death on a cross, virgin birth, claim of godhood, miracles, 12 followers, betrayal, ascension) sometimes even directly rewriting existing religions. See Dionysus, Osiris, Mithra...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa3.htm
Jesus, the man, existed.
Jesus, the son of a god, sadly (but it would actually have been rather groovy) is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. More likely a work of fiction and copyright theft.

"You are sinners and in need of a lord and saviour".
Hell for you probably isn't the same idea of hell for me. I think there is a cartoon idea based on lakes of fire with a little red devil with pitchforks. In reality, to me anyway, hell is death; it is separation from love and joy; from contentment and safety and the Lord. For me, now that I know the Lord, no pit of burning sulphur could ever hold as much sadness and fear as separation from His love. But that's just me.

Ahh, you refer to the 'nice' Hell. Depends on how literally one takes the bible doesn't it? Even Jesus refers to Gehenna.
Two very useful sites below
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/jesusteachingonhell.html
and this is pure class.
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/hellreal.htm (This nutter is doing theism no favours!)

And finally...
My final point I made in a rather fun theological debate is that JL is ACTUALLY a 'humanist with an imaginary friend'.

Peace to you all.