The Lower Quote, As If You Didn't Know, Is By Richard Dawkins, Son.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

The Skeptic's Circle - Every One Of You Is Expelled!

(For this week's Circle, guest host and cdesign proponentist Ben Stein will introduce the entries. Enjoy.)

Hello. I'm Ben Stein. You may remember me from the movie I was in back in 1986...
Ferris Bueller Cover
...or perhaps from my game show.
Win Ben Stein's Money
I'm moderating today to keep you all honest and to ensure you take into account all possible explanations during this close-minded little Darwinist hate-fest.

I agreed to all this to raise awareness for my new movie, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, which you also may have heard of due to the fact that your fundamentalist leader, PZ Myers, was ejected from a screening because he crashed the gate and was wildly brandishing a pistol. Here's an unfinished trailer from my movie to show you what he missed. Ok, roll it:
That was it, right? Ok.

Oh, and to avoid confusion, Richard Dawkins was let in because he's a gentleman and came all the way from England just to see my movie. God bless Richard Dawkins, even though he's a Darwinist Hitler-maker.

Ok, so to start off, we have a person called the "Skepbitch", which I don't approve of at all. Don't these atheist Darwinists do anything other than swear? Well, her post about the Jesus Hitler is pretty far from recognizing the reality that God is her creator. She does get right to the point though when she admits that, "Atheists are not religious. Therefore, Atheists are bad". Maybe she'll get in to the scientific community of Heaven after all.

Keeping with the Hitler theme you all love so much, a person supposedly named "Skeptico" has a submission about best buddies Hitler and Darwin. What a shock. Even though he is, by all appearances, a close-minded, hopeless, believing-in-nothing, atheist, Mr. "Skeptico" at least has the heart to admit:
I’m happy...that...There are (at least) three...valid argument(s) against evolution...by...creationist(s).
Well, sir, there are far more than three, but you are on the right track.

Next is a woman named Greta Christina, whose last name I really like. She has a post about skepticism - which is always code for Darwinism - and medicine. You can find out all you need to know about her and her blog by this quote I pulled:
(I)n my opinion...Periodically...make...healthy...vigorous...love of (meaning "to")...Loki (a pagan Darwinist-type god).
I think my case against Ms. Christina rests. Read her post at your own mental risk.

A site called "Evolved and Rational", which is a contradiction of terms since no one evolved and rationality only comes from God, gives you two posts, one about the impossibility of Darwinism and another about Jesus' loving sacrifice on on the cross. I skimmed the first one and liked the letter; the second one has an obvious religious tone so I know it will be great. I like this guy.

"Andrea" is next, if that is her real name. Her writing talks about new "logical fallacies". This post is fine as long as you realize that there are things that we will never ever understand and that we should base our beliefs on the thinking of the smartest and brightest in the theological community, ignoring the Darwinist tripe. We need to know that God exists because if he didn't, life would just be meaningless. Atheist Fundamentalists are just so dogmatic and full of hate....

Next is this person called "Bug Girl" who talks about having Sea Monkeys in your Pants. If ever there were evidence for atheists being freaky future hell-dwellers, it's in this writing. Goodness, isn't basking in God's infinite love enough for you heathens? Sex with animals...you're worse than homosexuals.

Speaking of infinity, some "Akusai" person at a site called "Action Skeptics" (again, no subtlety about being a Darwinist) writes about just that concept. I do, however, enjoy the frankness of Mr. Akusai when he admits that we came from monkeys:
...our monkey-brains can hardly deal with billions and trillions much less infinity.
Well if we came from monkeys, sir, why do we still have monkeys? Hahaha...silly Darwinists, you'll never win my money with that logic.

Someone with an almost-real name is next. "Skelliot" talks about a Christian charity that also performs exorcisms on the needy. I fail to see a problem here and would recommend that most, if not all of you people seek out a qualified priest or rabbi for an exorcism of your own.
Ben Stein is Frustrated at his Lack of Brain Power
Now we go back to names that make no sense at all to me, "PodBlack Cat" writes about something called "Dragon*Con". You know, it's like you atheist Darwinists have a whole other nonsensical language you use to talk to each other. No wonder everyone hates you. Where's your lovable character in pop culture? House M.D.? I think not.

Someone with the obvious pseudonym "Orac" is next with his post on stem cells and how useless they are. Here's a quote from him:
...no validated therapies for embryonic stem cells have yet made it into clinical practice...
You can't argue with that. No use for the things equals no abortion equals God is great and Intelligent Design should be taught in schools alongside Darwinism to give children the option of believing what they want.

Also talking about how stem cells have not panned out the way doctors wanted is Dr. Steven Novella who says:
...radioactivity was (a) new and fascinating scientific discovery, (which) lead to a market for radioactive tonics good for a multitude of complaints...
See, he's open to new ideas! Other doctors should take lessons from this gentleman.

An obviously disturbed individual who calls his site "Archaeoporn" gives us a shocking bit on the Shroud of Turin. Normally I would not endorse anyone who has "porn" as part of their name, but when you see a nice quote like this from them:
At this point in the year (Easter season), as well as Christmas, they (The Discovery Channel) tend to focus on Christian themes...A good...Bible Code documentary...has...absolutely...valid research.
You just have to lend support. At this point, I would like to thank my quote mine...- sorry, "research assistant" - Casey Luskin.

"RationalEyes" has tripe on vaccines and autism on TV. Seriously, the link between those two things is so well established now that to go against it would be like going against the tornado-through-the-junkyard, so you can just skip that post altogether.

Some weirdo calling himself "Happy Jihad's House of Pancakes" drearily meanders on about Reiki for far too long. How many people are giving posts to this thing? Aren't I contracted to only be here for 10 minutes? I could use some breakfast. Oh, alright....

Ah, finally a person with a real name. Michael Meadon at a site called Ionian Enchantment talks about Five Medical Myths in his submission. I believe everything that is in bold in his post - I didn't read the explanations but I assume that he's in agreement with me and as such, I'll thank him for his support of Intelligent Design. This is looking better now.

Michael also mentioned that there was a great article talking about the aforementioned religious relic, the Shroud of Turin. I am not a big reader, but I assume that this is further confirmation that Jesus was real and was the savior of Mankind. I really like Michael.

Next is something called "The Tank Vodcast". I have no idea what a "vodcast" is or how a tank would go about it, but they talk about their Psychic Predictions, so I guess they are ok. Psychics are powerful people and I do not want to be on their bad sides. Just look at what the amazing Sylvia Browne can do:


Apparently Mr. Hal Lindsey lives on the East Coast of Canada because his blog is called "Bay of Fundie". I guess he's an uneducated Darwinist because he misspelled "Fundy", but that's what you get from atheists. I especially like the last cartoon he shows. It's right on the mark.

What? The post was about Hal Lindsey, not by Hal Lindsey? No, you're wrong. ...Why don't you read the post.

About time for another real name. Martin at "Aardvarchaeology", which, I assume, affirms the reality of Noah's ark on a mountain and Jesus' brother's bones being found, talks about weird, and obviously atheist Darwinst German siblings who have sex. Now, does everyone see where Darwinism leads? It leads to homosexuality and incest on a rampant scale. That will, obviously, lead to sex with animals. Do you all want dog-sex in the streets!?

Cripes, now there's someone who calls himself a doctor but has a name that no real doctor would have. PalMD, talks about the flu and Joseph Mercola. He also goes a long way towards confirming what we always knew about Darwinists:
There actually exists a year-round, world-wide surveillance program...the giant conspiracy to take your money and poison you with flu shots.
That's right, I know what you're all up to and I'm not going to stand for it. My movie will bring your evil conspiracies to light. My monotone voice and boring demeanor will rile up the masses and drive them towards action!

What? There's more posts to talk about? *sigh*

At some place called "Skepchick" there's a person called "Sam", who gets all excited talking about frog sex. Deviant frog sex, as a matter of fact. You Darwinists will never learn. I do enjoy his use of logic though - the Creator works in mysterious ways, fabricating toads from fungi....

Lastly, also from Skepchick, Stacey talks about Academic Freedom, a subject close to my heart after my film came out. I show clearly how brilliant scientists lose their jobs because of Darwinists shutting the doors to academia and expelling intelligence. Shame on you all. I hope you accept God into your lives and become whole loving members of your communities who love your families and say your prayers.
Under God, Say It!
To close out this festival of hate and Nazi-loving Darwin-atheists, I just want to say: I can't believe how close-minded you all are. I mean, changing your minds all the time, flip-flopping...it's embarrassing to real science. The sort of science that never waivers from its convictions. The science that God revealed to us. I hope you all open yourselves up to true freedom and true debate so we can all agree that God's word is the final one answer to all our questions.

Oh, and stay away from my movie. None of you are invited to see it, except maybe Michael and perhaps Hal Lindsey. Why you people are against America and free speech is beyond me, but if you insist on trying to gain entrance, I'll have you forcibly gagged and removed.
Ben Stein Needs a Brain
Besides, I don't need you. There'll be plenty of people waiting to see it as well as my new show, America's Most Smartest Model. Anyone? Anyone...?

(In two short weeks, the 84th Skeptic's Circle will be held over at Archaeoporn - make sure to go check it out!)

22 Barbaric Yawps:

At 26/3/08 11:24 PM, Blogger Post-Diluvian Diaspora said...

nicely done

 
At 26/3/08 11:25 PM, Blogger Flavin said...

Looks like a great Circle, Mike. Can't wait to read it.

Side note: your link at the end to Archaeoporn is bad.

 
At 27/3/08 3:47 AM, Blogger Atheist in a mini van. said...

Wow. So much interesting reading, so little time... ;)

 
At 27/3/08 6:39 AM, Blogger Wanderin' Weeta said...

Hilarious! Enlightening! Snarky!

And I haven't even got to the entries yet.

 
At 27/3/08 7:28 AM, Blogger BigHeathenMike said...

Last link fixed! Thanks, Flavin.

Everyone swim in the snark. Swim!

 
At 27/3/08 9:26 AM, Blogger Godless Geek said...

Funniest post ever...

 
At 27/3/08 9:42 AM, Blogger Bing said...

Excellent.

 
At 27/3/08 10:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are two small problems with the blog on infinity which I can't add as the blog does not allow open comments.

1) Saying that the universe has a finite past history. It is possible that it is the universe as we know it, that is, the universe at our fairly-well tested energies and temperatures, that is finite in extent and that some currently unknown physics was in effect before what we would call the very, very early universe. That being said, such a position is hypothetical and doesn't make for drawing any grand metaphysical conclusions.

2) It might be that, finite in extent though the past might be, the beginning point may not be actually "reachable" within the spacetime of the universe. Thus any path (or perhaps only a subset of paths)in spacetime going back in time might be able to be continued indefinitely (though the time between each event on the path would be demonstrably smaller). In this case, as well, there is no room for deriving definite metaphysical conclusions.

 
At 27/3/08 4:25 PM, Anonymous PalMD said...

I feel very good about this post...it...fulfills all of my...expectations...regarding fish...orgasms when...sitting in pews.

Only the...heathen would fail to understand that God...speaks...in flatus.

 
At 27/3/08 8:07 PM, Blogger Akusai said...

To anonymous, regarding my post on infinity:

At which point was I drawing any grand metaphysical conclusions? Your concerns are irrelevant to the point of the post, which was "Woos don't understand what infinite means because they think it means 'everything imaginable.'"

Whether one can speak of the finite past of the universe practically or in-principle only does not change that. Metaphysics doesn't at all enter into anything I was saying.

 
At 28/3/08 5:01 AM, Blogger Michael Meadon said...

Superb Mike.

 
At 28/3/08 9:07 AM, Blogger Sean the Blogonaut F.C.D. said...

Killer post, Mike

 
At 28/3/08 4:44 PM, Blogger King Aardvark said...

Sorry Mike, but I can't read this post. Whenever I try, I hear Ben Stein's horrible monotone boring into my brain, and it hurts in a very bad way.

 
At 28/3/08 7:30 PM, Blogger Thursday said...

Nicely done; in a monotonous, droning sort of way.

So... Tired... Must... Avoid... Stein...

Can't sleep: clown will eat me.

 
At 29/3/08 11:47 AM, OpenID skelliot said...

Great post. I laughed many times. Stein is old and should be punched in the spleen.

 
At 29/3/08 2:55 PM, Blogger Maakuz said...

What an awesome post. How come Ben Stein reminds me of Tom Cruise...?

 
At 30/3/08 5:27 PM, Blogger salomedesade said...

Maakus, Ben Stein reminds you of Tom Cruise because both are idiotic zealots who refuse to listen to reason.
Mike, to quote Fat Tony, you crack me so consistently up.

 
At 6/4/08 11:32 PM, Blogger Bull13 said...

Why in the spleen LOL? Fist time I have been here and love it. You cuss almsost as much as I do. ANYBODY AND I MEAN ANYBODY THAT IS STILL carrying water for ID or any other religous bullshit needs to be slapped, but why bother? Shit does seem to splatter. Was reading the punk ass who wrote the letter for the movie saying Dawkins crashed blah blah fucking blah. Just like muslims it is alright to lie as long as you lie for the faith.

 
At 1/5/08 4:20 AM, Blogger Jaakonpoika said...

Ben(jamin) Stein is under heavy artillery for 'exaggerating' or 'going easy' on the influence of evolutionism behind Nazism and Stalinism (super evolution of Lysenkoism in the Soviet Russia). But the monstrous Haeckelian type of vulgar evolutionism drove not only the 'Politics-is-applied-biology' Nazi takeover in the continental Europe, but even the nationalistic collision at the World War I. It was Charles Darwin himself, who praised and raised the monstrous German Ernst Haeckel with his still recycled embryo drawing frauds etc. in the spotlight as the greatest authority in the field of human evolution, even in the preface to his Descent of man in 1871. If Thomas Henry Huxley with his concept of 'agnostism' was Darwins bulldog in England, Haeckel was his Rotweiler in Germany.

'Kampf' was a direct translation of 'struggle' from On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1859). Seinen Kampf. His application.

Catch 22: Haeckel's 140 years old fake embryo drawings have been mindlessly recycled for the 'public understanding of science' (PUS) in most biology text books until this millennium. Despite factum est that Haeckel's crackpot raging Recapitulation/Biogenetic Law and functioning gill slits of human embryos have been at the ethical tangent race hygiene/eugenics/genocide, infanticide, and Freudian psychoanalysis (subconscious atavisms). Dawkins is the Oxford professor for PUS - and should gather the courage of Stephen Jay Gould who could feel ashamed about it.

Some edited quotes from my conference posters and articles defended and published in the field of bioethics and history of biology (and underline/edit them a 'bit'):
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Asian_Bioethics.pdf
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Haeckelianlegacy_ABC5.pdf

The marriage laws were once erected not only in the Nazi Germany but also in the multicultural states of America upon the speculation that the mulatto was a relatively sterile and shortlived hybrid. The absence of blood transfusion between "white" and "colored races" was self evident (Hailer 1963, p. 52).

The first law on sterilization in US had been established in 1907 in Indiana, and 23 similar laws had been passed in 15 States and sterilization was practiced in 124 institutions in 1921 (Mattila 1996; Hietala 1985 p. 133; these were the times of IQ-tests under Gould's scrutiny in his Mismeasure of Man 1981). By 1931 thirty states had passed sterization laws in the US (Reilly 1991, p. 87). Typically, the operations hit blacks the most in the US, poor women in the Europe, and often the victims were never even told they had been sterilized.

Mendelism outweighed recapitulation (embryos climbing up their evolutionary tree through fish-, amphibian- and reptilian stages), but that merely smoothened the way for the brutal 1930’s biolegislation - that quickly penetrated practically all Western countries. The laws were copied from country to country. The A-B-O blood groups, haemophilia, eye colours etc. were found to be inherited in a Mendelian fashion by 1910. So also the complex traits and social (mis)behaviour such as alcoholism, schizophrenia, manic depression, criminality, rebelliousness, artistic sense, pauperism, racial differences, inherited scholarship (and its converse, feeble-mindedness) were all thought to be determined by one or two genes. Mendelism was "experimental" and quantitative, and its exaggeration outweighed the more cautious biometry operating on smaller variations, not discontinuous leaps. Its advocates boldly claimed that these problems could be done away within a few generations through selection, persisted (although most biologists must have known that defective genes could not be eliminated, even with the most intense forced sterilizations and marriage restrictions due to recessive genes and synergism. Nevertheless, these laws were held until 1970's and were typically changed only when the abortion legislation were released (1973).

So the American laws were pioneering endeavours. In Europe Denmark passed the first sterilization legislation in Europe (1929). Denmark was followed by Switzerland, Germany that had felt to the hands of Hitler and Gobineu, and other Nordic countries: Norway (1934), Sweden (1935), Finland (1935), and Iceland (1938 ) (Haller 1963, pp 21-57; 135-9; Proctor 1988, p. 97; Reilly 1991, p. 109). Seldom is it mentioned in the popular media, that the first outright race biological institution in the world was not established in Germany but in 1921 in Uppsala, Sweden (Hietala 1985, pp. 109). (I am not aware of the ethymology of the 'Up' of the ancient city from Plinius' Ultima Thule, however.) In 1907 the Society for Racial Hygiene in Germany had changed its name to the Internationale Gesellschaft für Rassenhygiene, and in 1910 Swedish Society for Eugenics (Sällskap för Rashygien) had become its first foreign affiliate (Proctor 1988, p. 17). Today, Swedish state church is definitely the most liberal in the face of the world.

Hitler's formulation of the differences between the human races was affected by the brilliant sky-blue eyed Ernst Haeckel (Gasman 1971, p. xxii), praised and raised by Darwin. At the top of the unilinear progression were usually the "Nordics", a tall race of blue-eyed blonds. Haeckel's position on the 'Judenfrage' was assimilation and Expelled-command from their university chairs, not yet an open elimination. But was it different only in degree, rather than kind?

In 1917 the immigration of "defective" groups was forbidden even in the United States by a law. In 1921 the European immigration was diminished to 3% based on the 1910 census. Eventually, in the strategical year of 1924 the finest hour of eugenics had come and the fatal law was passed by Congress. It diminished immigration to 2% of the foreign-born from each country based on the 1890 census in order to preserve the "nordic" balance in population, and was hold through World War II until 1965 (Hietala 1985, p. 132).

Richard Lewontin writes:“The leading American idealogue of the innate mental inferiority of the working class was, however, H.H. Goddard, a pioneer of the mental testing movement, the discoverer of the Kallikak family,
and the administrant of IQ-tests to immigrants that found 83 % of the Jews, 80% of the Hungarians, 79% of the Italians, and 87% of the the Russians to be feebleminded.” (1977, p. 13.) Regarding us Finns, Finnish emmigrants put the cross on the box reserved for the "yellow" group (Kemiläinen 1993, p. 1930), until 1965.

Germany was the most scientifically and culturally advanced nation of the world upon opening the riddles at the close of the nineteenth century. And she went Full Monty.

Today, developmental biologists are anticipating legislation of laws that would define the do’s and dont’s. In England, they are fertilizing human embryos for research purposes and pipetting chimera embryos of humans and monkeys, 'legally'. The legislation should not distract individual researchers from their personal awareness of responsibility. A permissive law merely defines the ethical minimum. The lesson is that a law is no substitute for morals and that dissidents should not be intimidated.

I am suspicious over the burial of the Kampf (Struggle). The idea of competition is innate in the modern society. It is the the opposite view in a 180 degree angle to the Judaeo-Christian ideal of agapee (contra epithumia, eros, filia & storge) (ahava in Hebrew), that I personally cheriss. The latter sees free giving, altruism, benevolence and self sacrificing love as the beginning, motivation, and sustainer of the reality.

pauli.ojala@gmail.com
Biochemist, drop-out (Master of Sciing)
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Expelled-ID.htm

 
At 1/5/08 7:29 AM, Blogger BigHeathenMike said...

Jaakonpoika: Thanks for reading and everything, but why not get a blog of your own so you can just pop here and say, "Hey, go read my post about x". Then I can choose to read what you've written or not and you're not taking up space here with questionable arguments.

 
At 3/5/08 11:11 AM, Blogger Jaakonpoika said...

There are pro's and con's on blogging. When you argue something, you also have to defend it. As for me, here's the statistics on my pages:
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Tilastot.htm

Evolutionism was politically and religiously driven. (By religion, I mean the old worship of nature akin naturalism.) Evolutionism was a revolution, and revolutions are violent. It is anachronism to mehasize the idea of selection since evolutionism was sold by much harder claims, especially constant spontaneous generation of life from mud (moneras), inheritance of acquired characteristics, mutationism in leaps (hopeful monsters), linear model of human races - and especially recapitulation.

I mean, fertilizing human embryos for research purposes? Pipetting chimera embryos of humans and monkeys?!? Go, U Kingdom, go! Also the last round of eugenics started by cheapening the embryos.

 
At 28/7/08 4:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It’s a Mind blowing post. I really like this post.
________________________
Eric
Wide Circles

 

Post a Comment

<< Home