...and the architect resides right here...

Ahh, there he is.

Comments Off

The Surrender of Intellectual Liberty

Posted by Brandon | Filed under Articles

The truth, of which we can barely ascertain under fair conditions, has been obscured – the people have lost all independent thought except that which has been garnered from political pundits and those we elect to pedestals of undeserved adulation.

Methodically, like an insidious pathogen taking years to incubate, we have allowed the responsibility of self preservation to be unduly left in the hands of those whose only pervasive desire is the same: self-preservation and justification of their own existence. Though in fairness, can we not claim the same philosophy in our every waking motivations?

Absolving personal responsibility only allows for subjugation and intellectual slavery. This is apparent through every medium, from the political process to countless shallow television program we carnally indulge in; and yes, allowed – have no compunctions as to the reality of how the infectious properties of force-fed programming came to existence. It was fueled by the quite understandable notion of selfishness, naturally, but the economic laws of supply and demand can be further extrapolated to the entertainment sector, of which we, Americans and the like, determine it’s course and duration. Parallels can be drawn from the aforementioned dichotomy to the recent spread of organic products and the industry’s response to our moral sensibilities.

Taking to literal arms is the simplest of battles to win; an instinctual response to tangible dangers and made such by millions of years of evolution. Yet the most important battles, those of memes and ideology are far more pernicious in their avenues of causal influence. They, above even violence and retribution have written the course of human history.

Complacency will always lead to the rotting of liberty and personal freedoms. I will end this with one of the most important religious proselyting ever uttered:

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men. Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all. Then accept it and live up to it.” – Buddha

Comments Off

A Stark Encounter

Posted by Brandon | Filed under Articles

Awhile ago I had written a brief article on Kentucky’s Creationist Museum; a “historical museum” where children can visualize young earth creationism and even ride a triceratops (saddle included) and discover the planet was created six thousand years ago.

Well Ken Ham is at it again with the Ark Encounter. This time it’s a park that includes “…full-scale, all-wood ark based on the dimensions provided in the Bible (Genesis 6), using the long cubit, and in accordance with sound established nautical engineering practices of the era.” Yes, sound nautical engineering sans the fact that in no way imaginable could a ship like this survive for over a year at sea. But we all know we aren’t dealing with facts here, so let us continue.

This $150 million park of ignorance will also include a walled city, the tower of babel and of course the aforementioned ark. Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear will assist this endeavor in the form of $37 million dollars in tax incentives.

“Bringing new jobs to Kentucky is my top priority, and with the estimated 900 jobs this project will create, I am happy about the economic impact this project will have on the Northern Kentucky region,” he said in a prepared statement. I don’t even want to get into the separation of church and state, though that’s a worthwhile discussion, but rather focus on the implications of the situation.

Let us sit back a moment and truly contemplate what we are actually building in this country. This is not Disneyland posturing itself as a world of fiction where you and the kids can get away from the world for a weekend but rather a historical perspective of the biblical interpretation of the world.

Directly from the ark encounter site says as much: “The Ark Encounter will be an immersive, historically themed experience for the whole family focused on having fun while learning about history. It is not an amusement park. It will feature a number of daily live performances, as well as live special events. It will also include “edu-tainment” aspects–educational and entertaining experiences within each attraction.”

So what are we building in this country? A nation of ignorance.

Comments Off

Apocalypse Now or Later

Posted by Brandon | Filed under News


Apocalypse Now or Later Darwin Fish

How many judgement days have you survived? Check out Apocalypse Now (or later), specializing in products that let you flaunt to the world about the world not ending.

Comments Off

Creationist’s Toolbox #2 – Evolution is only a theory

Posted by Brandon | Filed under Creationist's Toolbox

If you are an advocate of creationism you may have argued, as to try and discredit evolution, that “Evolution is only a theory.” Unfortunately, what you are implying reveals a dire misunderstanding of the word ‘theory’.

Let me illuminate by showing you a few definitions of the word:

1) the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2) abstract thought : speculation

If you are using the second definition, the colloquial sense, then you are not understanding it’s definition from the perspective of science. Here’s another definition that might shed some light on the matter:

5) a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena

What you are implying is that the theory of evolution is a hypothesis (“a tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences”). So if scientists referred to evolution as The hypothesis of evolution, there would be a point to be had.

I’ll put this a little more plainly as to avoid anymore confusion on the matter. The theory of evolution and evolution itself are two completely different principles of thought. Evolution, the fact that all living things develop genetic mutations whereupon natural selection favors certain traits in accordance to the population’s ecosystem is under no debate. The fact that we have a common ancestor with chimpanzee’s is, as well, under no debate. The theory of evolution and the specifics of how these facts relate to each other will undoubtedly change and advance as this natural phenomenon is studied further and refined by the scientific method. The fact that all creatures evolve will never be disputed. It is akin to denying gravity, or that the earth revolves around the sun.

To put it even more plainly, a theory is a set of observable facts (you drop an apple, it falls to the ground) that form a coherent and testable understanding of how these facts relate to each other. So when you say that “evolution is only a theory” you’re really not saying anything and only proving to your opponent that you have no understanding of the meaning. Hopefully this cleared that up and you will avoid this common pitfall I have witnessed in far too many debates.

Comments Off

Sunday Satire #1 – Deuteronomy 22:28-29

Posted by Brandon | Filed under Sunday Satire

Welcome to yet another new category for WIYG. I call this one “Sunday Satire”. Every Sunday I will be posting a moral, non-contradictory bible quote to inspire the peoples and help bring us all a little closer together.

We are going to play out a potential scenario that a Christian must agree with if he is to believe in the infallibility of the bible.

John Smith sleeps soundly, dreaming of crosses and atheists burning in hell when he wakes abruptly to sounds of screams. He bolts out of bed, panic strangling his heart, and follows the muffled cries into his daughter’s bedroom.

There she lay, being taken advantage of by a surly brute of a man who had broken through her window. Smith is enraged beyond description. “You son of a bitch!” he says. “You are going to fucking pay!”

The man looks up mortified, knowing he is caught. “Yes sir, you are correct.” He reaches into his pocket, pulling out a wallet and hands Smith $50.

John Smith counts the money and then nods his head. “Not only that you are also going to be married,” he pauses then adds “And never get divorced, you understand me?”

The daughter looks up to her attacker “Looks like we got you!”

The man’s faces slowly turns defeated and he makes a deliberate slow nod. The jig is up.

This is a despicable and completely immoral fiction. Where did I get my inspiration for it then? I remember now…

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

“If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”

In no way do I condone violence or rape of any kind but I purposely left out describing the setting because this could easily be a scenario in the bible (also didn’t convert the Shekel to Dollar very well, but really, does it matter?). Furthermore, you’re going to ban Harry Potter and then point to the bible as a source of morality? Shame on all of you. Read your holy book and self-flagellate.

Comments Off

Creationist’s Toolbox #1 – “Descendent’s From Apes”

Posted by Brandon | Filed under Creationist's Toolbox

I have added a new category to my posts that will alleviate some of the common tensions during religious debate. I name it the “Creationist’s Toolbox”. These will be short articles that are an olive branch from me to the fundamentalist community to save them from embarrassment when they are debating. These are in no way meant to be conceited but simply give Christians (and other theologies) a fighting chance since reason and debate are at the core of the human experience. I know that plenty of theists know these things but these “toolboxes” are not for you. They are for those whose only source of information is from their church or community and have warped ideas that end up embarrassing them in public and ruining any further credibility they had. Let us begin with number 1:

It’s a heated debate, the atheist is throwing everything they have at you. Evolution, radiometric dating, continental drift, natural selection! Shit! You’re getting flustered; how will you cope? In a moment of self-preservation you say with desperation “If we came from chimpanzee’s, why are there still chimps around?” Oh no, the atheist has his head in his hands and is mocking you. Now nothing you say will be taken seriously, even if it has a legitimate point.

You must not fall into this ever so common trap of scientific fallacy. Also, don’t you think all these scientists would have pondered this issue by now? That’s beside the point though. Evolution in no way implies that we “come from chimps” or that we “come from apes”. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution. What the evidence for evolution reveals is a common ancestor. That is, there is a common ancestor between chimpanzee’s and humans that split off during natural selection; one becoming modern day chimps and the other homo sapiens. Everything in nature has a cousin in the hierarchical evolutionary tree. The video at the bottom of this article is from evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins explaining this exact point visually and concisely.

That completes toolbox #1. Good luck with your debates!

Comments Off

Circular reasoning is no reason at all

Posted by Brandon | Filed under Philosophy

I was bored today so I decided to come up with some interesting thought experiments that would disprove the existence of a Judeo-Christian-Islamic God (any god that makes scientific claims really). One of these ideas dealt with using the bible’s own circular logic against it. The circular logic I’m referring to is “God wrote the bible; Because the bible claims it; Therefore the bible is infallible.”

If we are going to use this premise then it would be safe to say that if any part of the bible could be proven false beyond question then this fundamentalist reasoning would collapse.

Well, this is quite easy as you will see. There are many topics in the bible that can be disproved. The easiest one is the claim that the earth is 6,000 years old. This statement is absolutely and unequivocally not true. If you think that every scientist from so many different branches of science (astronomy, biology, chemistry, geology, paleontology and physics) are wrong then you are plainly deluding yourself and are willfully ignorant to truth. I’m not going to get into the precise details of exactly how we know the age of the earth simply because there are too many to list. Ok, I give in, here’s a few: Radiometric dating, fossils, distant starlight, coral, continental drift, erosion. That’s only the proverbial tip of the iceberg. I will devote an entire article to precisely how scientists (and indeed anyone who has taken a single science course) know this but for now you can look it up on your own as this article is more philosophical in nature.

The age of the earth is not even the only item in the bible that can be disproved; it is simply the most obvious and common sense example. Other examples are as follows: a world wide flood, inbreeding and Adam and Eve (then again for Noah’s family) and Noah’s Ark to just name a few.

Now that we have, without doubt, shown that several statements in the bible are false how will you, as a theist, reconcile the fact that it is purportedly written by God? I’d love to hear your answers.

Comments Off

Born Again

Posted by Brandon | Filed under News

Well, I’m back and I have completely changed the look of the site. I wasn’t happy with the quality of the articles and I wanted to give it another attempt. Most of the previous articles I had written have been deleted; minus posts that were made by friends or an article that was a link of some sort. I will revisit these topics again however and hopefully take this site down a better path than it was previously.

Comments Off

Introducing Plasma Cosmology

Posted by spitlermike | Filed under Articles

Hello, for my first post I have chosen to introduce an alternative cosmology.

(Let me preface this by mentioning that I am not the most knowledgeable person when it comes to cosmology and physics; I just happen to have read about this theory and found it interesting. I welcome anyone who is more knowledgeable about the subject to comment on it.)

In short, plasma cosmology argues that electromagnetism is the main force shaping the universe rather than gravity. The reason for this is that most of the universe that we know of consists of plasma, rather than regular matter. The stars are plasmas, auroras are plasmas, nebulas are plasmas, and on and on.

One of the most baffling things about the universe is its filamentary structure. However, novelty plasma globes also exhibit this type of behavior. When electrons flow through a plasma, magnetic fields form around it and compress it more closely together, resulting in filaments of plasma forming.

Another interesting fact is that electromagnetic force is much more powerful when acting on plasmas than gravity is. While the force of gravity is the inverse of the square of the distance between two objects, electromagnetism is only inverse to the distance. Therefore gravity tapers off far sooner than magnetic force does, meaning that at the macro-cosmic scale electromagnetism should be dominant rather than gravity.

Among some of the interesting implications of this theory is that the Sun is actually powered from external electrical currents rather than from within. As the theory goes, the filaments of plasma that streak the universe act as conductors for massive flows of electrons that cause the stars to burn, rather than internal nuclear reactions.

Oh, and it also holds that the universe has no beginning or end.

Here are some relevant links on the subject:

http://www.plasmacosmology.net/index.html

http://bigbangneverhappened.org/

Plasma Cosmology videos

So, what do you guys think?

Comments Off

A Shot in the Dark

Posted by Ryan | Filed under Philosophy

There’s something that’s always bugged me about religious arguments; the absolute certainty of both sides. On one hand you have the standard theist who says ‘Without a doubt, my god exists and is the singular correct god.’ Obviously that’s ridiculous, but isn’t it equally ridiculous to say, ‘Well I don’t know what the answer is, but it sure as hell isn’t that.”

What is faith, really? Believing something without question, right? A while ago I was speaking with someone who was very much an atheist and, as they were ranting about how stupid religious people are, I realized that they were as fervent and adamant in their belief about the non-existence of god as the very people they were insulting. I got to thinking, isn’t it the very same faith? On one hand you have unbacked, unsupported belief that one thing is true. On the other, you’re making a claim that has some circumstantial evidence but no direct proof and believing that is true, often without a doubt. And often with an awful lot of contempt.

I consider myself an agnostic, and unlike most atheists I don’t consider it “fence sitting” or “being a pansy”. Being agnostic to me is simply saying “It is impossible to know whether or not God exists.” Now, I’m not talking about religion mind you. Religions can be disproved because they make claims centered in our world. The earth was created 6,000 years ago, for example. This claim, regardless of the efforts of radical Christians across America, has been proven false. All of that aside, the central claim that there is a divine entity that created the universe and governs it with its almighty will can not reasonably be proven to be false.

There’s plenty of arguments against this and all are logical fallacies. The bottom line is that the argument makes claims that are outside the bounds of our universe, and thus outside of our capacity for perception. “Haha, but Ryan,” you might say with a broad, condescending smirk, “Does that mean you believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Or what about Santa Claus and fairies?” Of course not, but what are you claiming? That a magical fat man flies house to house and drops presents into fireplaces? You can disprove that by finding the parents receipt. That is not the same as claiming that god created and runs the universe, a claim that cannot be either proven or disproved.

I believe that any reasonable minded person will have to admit to both possibilities, that god may or may not exist. To say with scientific certainty that God, without a doubt, does not exist means that you must have some evidence to prove that statement. And when it all comes down to it in the end, science simply is not at a point that it can provide that. When confronted with this argument, most reasonable scientists will agree (much like Dawkins), but reply with “Well, I’m 99.999999% certain god doesn’t exist.” This allows for the possibility, technically, while saying that they’re almost certainly right. That is also incorrect, or at least not logically viable. How can you come to a figure of 99%? The definition of probability is: “the relative possibility that an event will occur, as expressed by the ratio of the number of actual occurrences to the total number of possible occurrences.” When coming to a figure of objective probability, you need some factual data to quantify that figure. What possible data can contribute to this assessment? Whether religions have been proven false? That some other Gods have been proven to not exist?

Probability doesn’t have a memory, my friends. It doesn’t care that no gods live at the peak of Mt. Olympus, or that the sun does not orbit the Earth. Does the Judeo-Christian God exist as the divine creator of our universe? It’s a shot in the dark folks, 50%. Yes or no.