Thursday, September 11, 2014

Mark Driscoll and Ken Ham are digging their own graves.

Mars Hill Church is a cult ministry which at this time is experiencing a huge downfall due to the horrific allegations made against its founder Mark Driscoll who's notorious for making abhorrent remarks about women and people abandoning his church, plagiarizing other people's materials, slandering, threatening, and swearing his employees, insinuating himself into getting one of his books into the #1 slot on The New York Times Bestselling list, every arrogant, offensive move and remark that I think is causing him to dig his own grave he cannot get out of no matter how much he heaps out one threat after another against those who are exposing his criminal actions via the internet. Driscoll has no one to blame but himself for all the foul deeds he's done and spewed out of his mouth.

That said, a similar experience is happening right now at the infamous Answers in Genesis ministry where Dumb Idiot Ken Ham is under fire for hiring and discriminating against people who don't fit their views of Christianity to build their ill-fated for-profit Ark Park for their non-for-profit AiG ministries and lying to the public about it. That fact is being exposed wide open on the internet and is being used against him like what Driscoll and his vile Mars Hill Church is going through. Even the infamous debate with Bill Nye can do nothing to deter anyone away from the fact that Ham is lying when he claims he's not hiring anyone to build his Ark Encounter park while the exact opposite is happening. Thus, it is completely wrong for the Kentucky government to reward tax incentives of 18 million dollars to AiG and Dumb Idiot Ham who's finding himself digging his own grave he cannot get out of, taking his own empire with it like what Driscoll is doing to his church right now.             

Thursday, August 28, 2014

No, TodHunter. Plants DO Die!

This should be among the top 5 most stupidest young earth creationism claims of all time. Any person knows that leaves do die when Autumn comes and the leaves change color when the days became shorter, the nights longer, and the earth's northern axis faces away from the sun, depleting the leaves of all of the photosynthesis needed for the leaves to maintain their green chlorophyll color. A short time later, the leaves will fall off the trees, lay on the ground, and just decompose to provide food and nutrients for ground growing plants to feed on. Tell that to any religious nut and you will get a much more stupider response. Get this -- creationists claims plants don't die. That's nonsense! How can they not die while they do? Does this mean a wilted plant just come back to life after it has water dumped on it? Get real! Plants do die! They whither, die, and decompose, never to come back to life. Plain and simple. Even the Bible tells us about death among plants as well as animals and humans. If plants don't die, then how did the plant actually die in Jonah 4:7 other than being attacked by a worm? Withering is a form of dying, you know.

However in this pathetically, stupid article from Ken Ham's dumb idiot site, Creationist Michael Todhunter, who claims to be an expert in forest genetics (Seriously, how can he be a major in forest genetics when he doesn't know a dog gone thing he's talking about here?!), claims falsely that plants don't die by starting this article off with,
"Fall in America and throughout much of the Northern Hemisphere is a beautiful time of year. Bright reds, oranges, and yellows rustle in the trees and then blanket the ground as warm weather gives way to winter cold. Many are awed at God’s handiwork as the leaves float to the ground like Heaven’s confetti. But fall may also make us wonder, “Did Adam and Eve ever see such brilliant colors in the Garden of Eden?” Realizing that these plants wither at the end of the growing season may also raise the question, “Did plants die before the Fall of mankind?”

Plants do die! When they're eaten, they die. When they are given too much water, they die. When they dry up due to lack of water, they die (Note how Todhunter is taken Psalms 37:2 out of context to help justify this pathetic plant nonsense. When put in full context, the verse is actually part of 37th Psalm where David tells the readers never to fret over wicked men because they will all whither and die the same way plants whither and die.) When they're given no sunlight, they die-- seeds and all. Like all living beings, all plants have a breath of life in them. They take in carbon dioxide and give out oxygen for animals and people to breathe in. Like all living beings, plants do have blood. Other than sap, some plants has a special type of blood called leghemoglobin which is a type of blood protein found in leguminous plants such as soybeans and lentils. Like all living beings, plants die! Even toddlers, preschoolers and kindergarteners know that! This is one of the dumbest cases of creationists not knowing what they are talking about. Especially concerning how plants live, how they are structured, how they breathe, eat (Plants are in fact natural food factories. They make sugar and starch foods they eat from sunlight, rain, and carbon dioxide.), drink (from the roots), reproduce, and die.

This article also claims stupidly that the deaths of plants is much different than the deaths of animals and people, never mind the plants' ability to have the same traits people and animals have concerning breathing, feeding, drinking, reproduction, death, and decay.

This article claims that plants are not what creationists claim to be Nephesh chayyah (Hebrew word for 'soulish creatures with the ability to afflict pain') in them. Neither is fish, invertebrates, reptiles, and insects "Nephesh chayyah". In fact plants are nephesh creatures in which some are Nephesh chayyah such as the picture plant and the Venus FlyTrap! Let me explain.

The word nephesh according to Strong's Hebrew Dictionary literally means "a breathing creature." Even plants breathe although they don't breath the same way humans and animals breathe. Instead of lungs or gills, plants breathe through stomata, tiny holes underneath the leaves that takes in carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen as well as absorb light during the process of photosynthesis which occurs during the daylight hours. They also do the opposite during the process of respiration which occurs both day and night. During respiration, the plant takes in oxygen and give out carbon dioxide. Both process is done through the stomata, the "nose" of the plant. So, you might say that plants were the first nephesh creatures God has ever made before He created 5 more nephesh creatures, fish, birds, wild and tame animals, and man. All organisms are nephesh creatures because they all breathe the air through lungs, gills, or stomata.

The word nephesh also means "a spirit", too which only humans have in them. Nearly every part of the Bible that has the word nephesh in them refers only to humans-- spiritual beings created by God who gave mankind a soul. Creationists asserts that plants are not alive in a sense because they don't have a spirit or a nephesh in them. Neither do animals have a "nephesh" in them, but do the creationists care? Nope. They rather ignore the fact that throughout the Bible the word nephesh is used to describe only humans, who are the only beings that possess nephesh in them. This is something that was given exclusively to them by God. Neither animals, nor plants have nepheshim (plural) in them. Obviously this is all imagined up to compromise pagan beliefs that says animals have what the webmaster calls "a spirit, consciousness or soul" and to ignore the fact that most Christians believe that only humans have souls in them, not animals and definitely not plants.

According to one crank explanation, the reason why some animals are "non-living" is because they don't have red blood cells in them (!). Proof that this must be among The Top 5 Creationist Idiocies around.

First, creationists say that there was no death before the Fall, yet turn around and say that sharks, whales, lions, T.rex, Velociraptor, and other carnivorous creatures probably can get away with eating only "non-living" animals with no red hemoglobin blood cells in them? Ooh, the irony…

Just because an animal has blue blood doesn't mean they're "not alive." Everyone of those blue-blooded creatures are all living beings just like those with red blood in them. They breathe, they eat, they drink, they grow, they reproduce, and they die. It doesn't matter what kind of blood type they have.

To be frank, Nephesh chayyah is literally used to describe animals that eat meat (that's why the phrase literally mean "soulish creatures that inflict pain") such as wolves and lions. If God created such creatures, then He must have meant for these animals, along with all other carnivores past and present, to kill and eat meat to begin with. After all, how do creationists and religious vegans explain passages in the Bible where God ordained and instigated carnivory to punish man for his sins? Why are there passages in the Bible where God ordained wild animals to kill and devour men and vice versa? God has put carnivorous animals on this Earth for a reason. They mainly kill animals that eat plants to prevent them from overgrazing the land, to prevent diseases from spreading about, and to maintain a very healthy ecosystem by keeping the population of herbivores under control and give plants a chance to grow and thrive. There is no evil in carnivory. Especially when its clearly established by God.

Nephesh chayyah also describes animals that show feelings, emotions, even pain like dogs, dolphins, monkeys, and above all humans. That word in every part of the Bible is used to only describe humans. Humans are soulish creatures that indeed have the ability to inflict pain. According to Christian beliefs, animals don't have souls. That trait is given only by God exclusively to the human race, thus making Mankind into a far different animal than the rest of the animal kingdom. Thus, when creationists use such words to further their dogma, they are only compromising themselves with the pagan beliefs that depicts animals to have souls like humans do.

Misusing such words is just an attempt for creationists to work around the problems associated with the no-death-before-the-Fall fallacy. Still, the fallacy is highly riddled with problems.

In the segment entitled A “Very Good” Biological Cycle, Todhunter claims,
"When plants wither or shed leaves, various organisms, including bacteria and fungi, play an active part in recycling plant matter and thus in providing food for man and animals."

That's funny. You usually treat bacteria and fungi as part of The Curse of Sin.

"These decay agents do not appear to be nephesh chayyah and would also have a life cycle as nutrients are reclaimed through this “very good” biological cycle. As the plant withers, it may produce vibrant colors because, as a leaf ceases to function, the chlorophyll degrades, revealing the colors of previously hidden pigments. Since decay involves the breakdown of complex sugars and carbohydrates into simpler nutrients, we see evidence for the Second Law of Thermodynamics before the Fall of mankind. But in the pre-Fall world this process would have been a perfect system, which God described as 'very good.'".

That means there WAS death and decay before the Fall after all -- a perfect form of it! In that case, so much for the no-death-and-decay-before-the-Fall fallacy. So much for the God-would-never-regard-death-and-suffering-as-very-good. So much for the no-Second-Law-of-Thermodynamics-before-the-fall fallacy. So much for the How-can-a-"loving God"-allow-such-death-and-decay fallacy. So much for everything creationists have taught over the years.. *roll eyes*

To help survive as a whole, plants reproduce, sending off their seed offspring into the world through wind currents. When plants whither, they die and then decompose, providing their seed offspring with food, along with good soil, water, and sunlight, to help them grow into new generations of plants that in many cases will be consumed by plant-eating animals who will be consumed by meat-eating animals who will then drop feces on the ground. The feces will then decompose, providing seeds with food to help them grow into a new generation of plants and the whole cycle will start all over again. This is what is called the life cycle, the cycle where plants and animals recycle their nutrients to help sustain all life on earth.

The last part of the article is nothing more than an empty appeal to emotion when Todhunter claims,
"It is conceivable that God withdrew some of His sustaining (restraining) power at the Fall when He said, “Cursed is the ground” (Genesis 3:17), and the augmented Second Law of Thermodynamics resulted in a creation that groans and suffers (Romans 8:22). Furthermore, because of this sin, all of creation, including nephesh chayyah, suffers (Romans 8:19–23)."
Two things: those verses are taken out of context. When put into full context, Genesis 3:17 refers to God cursing Adam to sweat and toil in the fields instead of enjoying easy labor and free meals in the Garden of Eden. It has nothing to do with the entire globe, let alone the entire universe. Also, when put into full context, all the verses from Romans 8 refers to the unsaved, people who never knew or have yet to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It has nothing to do with plants, animals, and other forms of non-soulish animals that can't think, reason, have any ideas who or what God is, and can only rely on instinct to survive, unlike the real Nephesh Chayyah who can think, reason, have an idea who God is, and have morals and consciences to survive -- humans.

At the conclusion of his article, Todhunter preaches the Gospel of Christ and how one can be reclaimed from death through Christ's death and resurrection just as nutrients from a plant can be recycled into new life. Yet by saying that plants don't die, creationists like Todhunter, is greatly denying the fact that in order for plants to recycle nutrients, they must die. If plants don't die, there will be no recycling of nutrients, no creating new generations of plants, and no renewal of life whatsoever. The same goes double for all other living things. In order to have new life, old organisms must die so that their bodies, along with skin and feces, will decompose to provide nutrients in the soil for seeds to germinate and grow into plants that will serve as food for new generations of organisms who are the offspring of their parents. No death, no food, no renewal -- no life.

Monday, June 2, 2014

PaleoFairy Tales Exposed!

Notice anything different about the title? It's no longer "Stupid Dinosaur Lies" the title reads, but "PaleoFairy Tales Exposed". It's a brand new title I made up to give this site a new kick and attract more people who hate creation lies and the dumb idiocies of Ken Ham and John Moronic Morris to this site, which theme will remain exactly the same just like before - to show to everyone that there is no such thing as a world where dinosaurs (of non-avian types) and humans once lived together at one time on a 6,000 year old earth in a 6,000 year old universe no matter what those young earth idiots claim. That particular scenario is entirely the invention of Hollywood and science fiction authors.    
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, May 26, 2014

What Really Happened 4,300 years ago.

There are a lot of historical data dated to the time of the alleged year of the Noah's Flood that contains not a single trace of evidence or recollection of the fabled biblical worldwide catastrophic Flood as described in The Book of Genesis, which first 11 chapters became distorted and took creative liberties upon by creationists, including that Dumb Idiot Ken Ham who stupidly declares the Allosaurus fossil, which he obtained by a member of a Dumbmerican hate group, proof that the worldwide Flood did occurred 4,300 years ago. The Flood according to Ham is said to have allegedly occurred in approximately 2350 BCE which is in the 24th century BCE timeline. A lot of events happened at that time, but not one of them tells of the Worldwide Flood event.

To reveal just how false and mythical the Worldwide Flood of Noah truly is, here's a small list of what's really happening in the year 2350 BCE.
Reigning in Egypt in the alleged year of the Flood is King Unas, the last ruler of the 5th Dynasty of the Old Kingdom of Egypt. He reigned from 2375 to 2345 BCE. Throughout his reign, he ordered a pyramid to be built for himself. It was small. Not as great as the Great pyramid of Giza, but nonetheless breathtaking and fascinating especially to the archeologists who came to study the Unas' tomb in the pyramid which contains the Oldest of the Pyramid Texts inscribed on the walls of the tomb which tells of the journey the departed king's soul will make as he journeys into the afterlife to join Ra the god of the sun as he sails into eternity. If the alleged Flood did occurred, the pyramid, the texts, the people, and other treasures of Ancient Egypt would've never stand a chance.

The City of Mari in Syria experience its first destruction in the so-called year of the Flood, but the flood itself had nothing to do with it. After a time of prosperity, an invading army came and level the city to rubble, reducing the city to a small village In all of the city's historical data dated to 2350 BCE, no such account and evidences of a massive wall of water coming along and consuming the city along with all of its inhabitants has ever been found.

The Akkadian Empire was a large Mesopotamian Empire that existed during the alleged year of the Flood-- and existed afterwords with no records or recollections made of any large size wall of water coming their way. At this time the empire was ruled by a powerful king known as King Sargon of Akkad who spent years conquering many city states and suppressing any rebellious army that came up against him. When he died, his sons took his place and continued to struggle keeping the Akkadian Empire intact before it finally crumbled at the feet of the Gutian army and the force of climate change years later.

These are just a few examples of historical accounts dated to approximately 2350 BCE that reveals absolutely nothing about a Worldwide Flood Event that covered the entire world destroying almost every life on earth accept for those inside the ark. When you look into the real archaeological past like what I mentioned in the list above, you'll come to know and accept the fact that what that Dumb Idiot Ham and his cronies claim about dinosaurs like "Ebenezer" perishing in a worldwide catastrophic flood in 2350 BCE is entirely false and all a lie.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, May 25, 2014

Answers in Genesis -- A DumbMerican Hate Group No different than the one that donated the Allosaurus skeleton to the Crackhouse.

In yesterdays' post, I reveal that a Dumbmerican Politician associated with a hate group donated an Allosaurus fossil to Dumb Idiot Ham's Crackhouse in Kentucky, which is funny because according to The Panda's Thumb, Ham and his cronies are said to be anti-racist and anti-prejudice. They blame evolution and Charles Darwin for all the racism and prejudice in the world and promote this kind of propaganda through books such as Darwin's Plantation and One Blood; The Biblical Answer to Racism. And yet, turn around and associate themselves with all-white confederate supremacists who are heavily racists and donated an actual real Allosaurus fossil to Ham's Idiot crackhouse which also displays a plaque below that claims that all Africans are descendants of Ham, one of the sons of Noah, that allegedly migrated from the Middle East to Africa after the Flood. This claim over centuries, though debunked and discredited multiple times, have been used by Christian fundamentalists to justify slavery, racism, segregation, and prejudice against blacks who was rounded up and sent to slavery against their will by Christians who regard blacks and native Americans as inferior. 
From a now defunct blog I used to read one time -- "The worst thing that [the author] saw was a display that suggests that black people are cursed.  Notice this illustration of post-Babel dispersion:

Look where the decedents of Ham, who are cursed for seeing Noah's nakedness, are going:

Guess who lives in Africa? Black people. Therefore: black people carry the curse of Ham in their pigmentation. This, of course, was used as a biblical rationalization for chattel slavery of black Africans for generations, and the Creation Museum, right across town from the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, continues to perpetuate this unsubstantiated, non-biblical and racist heritage. .... And you have the balls to sell "Darwin's Plantation" in the bookstore? You are beneath contempt, you nauseating hypocrite."

Answers in Genesis is a Dumbmerican hate group just like the Dumbmerican hate group that donated the fossil to the crackhouse. They're against Jews, Muslims, evolutionists, Christians that oppose young earthism, homosexuals, the list goes on and on of who to hate and be regarded as God's Enemy. They can't say they are against racism and prejudice when they oppose homosexuals, Jews, atheists, evolutionists, Christians and other religious groups that oppose young earthism, Muslims, and others.

If Ham and his cronies are opposed to prejudice and racism, then why did they associate with this particular hate group that donated the Allosaurus fossil to the crackhouse? And why do they display a plaque that displays a scenario that's used to justify such things Ham and his cronies are said to opposed to and blame Darwin for? If that's not hypocrisy ham and his cronies are displaying, then I don't know what it is.    
Enhanced by Zemanta